AI Meets The Mainframe: Inside IBM's Bold Z17 Bet
IBM z17 Mainframe
IBM recently introduced the z17, its latest generation enterprise mainframe system, powered by the new Telum II processor. The z17 offers significant performance gains over previous generations and integrates artificial intelligence with traditional mainframe capabilities.
At the core of the z17 is IBM's Telum II processor, a second-generation chip that features eight 5.5 GHz cores and 360MB of on-chip cache and an embedded AI accelerator. The new processor enables the system to perform more than 450 billion AI inferencing operations per day, achieving latency as low as one millisecond.
According to IBM, the z17 delivers 50% more AI inference capacity than its predecessor, the z16, while preserving the performance, security, and reliability for which the mainframe is known.
Beyond its traditional mainframe attributes, the z17's ability to run generative AI workloads directly on the mainframe sets it apart. The Spyre Accelerator, expected to be available in Q4 2025, will make this possible.
The Spyre Accelerator is a PCIe-based card that enables native support for large language models and other advanced AI applications. This eliminates reliance on external GPUs or cloud services.
Both the Tellum II processor and Spyre accelerator were first detailed at the 2024 Hot Chips conference.
IBM Tellum II (left) and Spyre (right) Processors
By keeping AI workloads on-premises, businesses gain greater control over sensitive data, reduce architectural complexity, and achieve faster, more secure processing. This approach is particularly valuable in industries with strict regulatory requirements and high-security standards, such as banking, healthcare, and government.
The z17 is also deeply integrated with IBM's watsonx platform, including tools like watsonx Code Assistant for Z and watsonx Assistant for Z. These AI-driven tools support the modernization of legacy COBOL applications by simplifying code maintenance, accelerating refactoring efforts, and lowering the learning curve for new developers. This increases development speed and improves consistency across enterprise systems.
Beyond its AI capabilities, the z17 maintains the fundamental qualities that have defined the mainframe for decades. It offers built-in high availability through fault-tolerant design and advanced error detection, ensuring uninterrupted operations. Security remains a cornerstone of the platform, with end-to-end encryption and support for confidential computing that protects data while it is being used, not just during storage or transit.
To complement the z17, IBM introduced z/OS 3.2, its AI-optimized operating system that supports hybrid cloud integration, NoSQL databases, and hardware-accelerated AI processing. Operational management is enhanced through IBM Z Operations Unite, which uses OpenTelemetry to unify and streamline observability and incident response.
Security also sees a major upgrade with IBM Vault, based on HashiCorp's secrets management technology, now offering unified identity-based security for secrets, certificates, and tokens across both mainframe and hybrid environments. IBM's acquisition of HashiCorp was completed earlier this year.
IBM backs the launch with expanded lifecycle support services and new AI-powered customer service tools like IBM Agent Assist, helping clients manage critical workloads with maximum uptime and resilience.
Mainframes continue to serve as the backbone of industries where uptime, throughput, and security are non-negotiable. Sectors like financial services, healthcare, insurance, and public infrastructure still rely heavily on mainframe systems for their most critical workloads.
In today's environment—characterized by rising cloud costs, heightened privacy concerns, and increasing interest in AI-enabled decision-making—many enterprises are reconsidering the value of maintaining secure, on-premises infrastructure. A recent IBM-sponsored survey found that 78% of global IT executives consider the mainframe central to their digital transformation strategies, while 88% consider application modernization a key priority.
The z17 arrives when enterprises are under growing pressure to derive more value from existing data assets while improving security posture and managing talent shortages. IBM's positioning of the z17 as an AI-native mainframe—not a relic of the past but a platform for future innovation—aligns with these emerging business needs.
By enabling AI directly on the platform, IBM reduces the need to offload sensitive data to external environments for analysis. This reduces security risks and latency, while also sidestepping the increasing difficulty of sourcing GPU capacity for enterprise AI workloads.
While companies like Nvidia dominate the GPU market and cloud providers such as AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud lead the AI services space, IBM is carving out a different path. With the z17, IBM offers an on-premises, vertically integrated solution tailored for industries that demand regulatory compliance, data control, and uninterrupted operations. This strategy gives IBM a unique position in the evolving AI infrastructure landscape.
Despite lingering perceptions of the mainframe as outdated or complex, IBM is actively working to change that narrative. New AI-powered tools, along with low-code development environments and modern IDEs, are helping reduce complexity and make the platform more accessible to a new generation of developers.
The z17 is also central to IBM's hybrid cloud vision. Though not cloud-native in the strictest sense, it integrates with Red Hat OpenShift and supports modern DevOps pipelines. Combined with advanced observability tools and AI-assisted development environments, the z17 complements, rather than competes with, cloud-native infrastructure.
For organizations that require scalable, secure, and resilient infrastructure, the mainframe remains relevant and essential.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
2 hours ago
- Forbes
Serving Not Selling: Why Management Consultants Shouldn't 'Sell'
Management Consultants Earn Opportunities for Serving Clients, Selling Creates Problems In 1997, I got into an elevator on the thirtieth floor of an office building in Chicago. I was in my second month at a large firm of management consultants, known for its strong organizational culture. A passer-by walks past a strong design of the front entrance of a retail shop in London. (Photo by ... More Richard Baker/In Pictures Ltd./Corbis via Getty Images) In my first week, I began working with David, a newly elected partner, on a proposal to a company in Columbus, IN. Our mission was to build the company's strategy for innovation and growth. I was more excited by the proposal than anyone else on the team. It fueled a career-long fascination with building new businesses in established organizations, has led me from this consulting firm to IBM, and later to Change Logic. When I entered the elevator, there was David. I immediately asked him, 'Hi, did we win the business?' He looked at me gravely and replied, 'No, but we do have the opportunity to serve.' Management Consultants Should be Serving Not Selling I've told this story many times over the years to illustrate how norms get passed on in strong organizational cultures. However, it makes some audiences laugh loudly. One sales leader told me: 'You are getting paid to do a job; of course, you are selling something!' It sounds like a management consultant's deceit, like saying 'synergies,' when you mean 'layoffs.' Others respond with a witty wink, 'Yes, I'll try to remember to say that next time!' However, to me, this is neither a deceit nor just a choice of words; it is one of my values. A value is something that we believe to be good and true. In most human societies, cheating and lying are considered wrong and it is a breach of values to lie or cheat. Of course, there is still plenty of both going on, but we are discrete enough to hide or camouflage these behaviors because they are socially unacceptable. This, in turn, creates social pressure that suppresses the incidence of lying and cheating. The same is true when we are talking about selling a project at my consulting firm, Change Logic. If a member of my team says that they want to 'sell' a project to client, for me that is the same as saying, 'I want to lie or cheat.' It is a breach of our values. We use the language of serving not selling as a representation of our fundamental beliefs. It is not a deceit or an optional choice of words; it is a value. Selling Assumes Management Consultants Have the Answers The value of disapproving lying and cheating is self-interested. We know that human society would struggle to operate without trust. We are still concerned about cheats, but we know that the consequences of offending the social norms are unacceptable to most people. The same is true for the value of service over selling. It serves a purpose in my business. I have the privilege of advising CEOs and senior teams in many firms on how to manage significant issues related to the future of their organizations. My colleagues and I can play this role only because the client trusts that we are motivated by a desire to see them succeed. They do not have to second guess our advice by wondering: 'Is this advice about selling me another project?' Several years ago, I received an acquisition approach from a firm that builds technology products for other companies to take to market. They knew of our work on innovation strategy and saw an opportunity to move 'upstream.' The next day I had breakfast with a client CEO. We had helped his insurance firm to build a new healthcare unit. I asked him what he thought of us expanding our capabilities so that we could offer more of a 'turnkey' solution. He was firmly against this idea. 'Andy, then you couldn't be objective in your advice. What they do is available from lots of firms, what you do is rare, and I don't want to lose it.' Trust is hard to earn. Senior executives are battle hardened. They know that professional services firms are designed to build a 'book of business' at client accounts. They use tactics like the 'diagnostic' to find all the things that are wrong with a client's organization that they can fix. Unsurprisingly, the problems identified during this 'analysis' are often much greater than the client ever imagined. This softens up the client and convinces them to pay just a fraction of the value in consultant fees. Once they have secured the new account, it is a matter of 'land and expand.' Building relationships across the organization to secure new 'mandates' and position the firm for long-term incumbency. Key to this strategy is a relentless focus on what the client cannot do, why they need help to achieve their goals. These selling oriented practices erode trust. The consultant is on a self-oriented agenda of generating revenue. Selling and Serving are Not the Same Of course, I want more revenue for my company. I think my team does amazing work that benefits a wide range of clients seeking to ignite innovation to generate growth. However, if my relationship with my clients is motivated by selling a project, then my work becomes about driving my own success. If I put that objective ahead of my client's interests, then I risk violating their trust in me and undermine my ability to do the work. A counterpoint to this logic could be this: we make sure we sell the right things and so our interests are always aligned with those of our clients. The argument goes on, 'You may not like the word selling, Andy, but it doesn't really matter as long as I do not sell the client something that they do not want.' This is a self-serving argument that betrays a lack of humility. It assumes you start with an answer to sell. That from the beginning of a relationship, a consultant already knows what the client needs, and just has to get them to 'buy' it. It changes and distorts your choices as a consultant to have a ready-made solution to sell, because you are only listening to match the client's needs with what you've got to sell. The argument that selling and serving are the same is the conceit. Serving Requires Management Consultants to be Humble I try to start with the assumption that my clients are smarter than me, know their business better, and are fully capable of achieving good outcomes. I can help them go faster, do better, and be more motivated to succeed, but that doesn't mean I know more. This opens up rich possibilities for co-creation with clients, where they are owning the work from the beginning, shaping and designing solutions to important challenges. It also means that from the start of the relationship, you assume that one day it will end. Your clients will be more capable and not need an outside firm to support them. This focuses consultants on client impact - how are we leaving them more able to achieve the results they are seeking - rather than on how we can engineer situations to extend our mandate. This sounds non-commercial logic. In fact, it is deeply commercial. I truly believe that the reason my firm is still in business after almost 20 it was founded is because of its values and how they inform behaviors. The value of serving, not selling, allows us to build long-term, trustful relationships with our clients that would be the envy of many much larger firms. Of course, we want to be commercially successful, but if we let that be our driver then we will lose our values and with it our license to serve. It is easy to check my LinkedIn profile and see that I used to work for McKinsey. They have been embroiled in a series of ethical controversies. They articulated strong values, but it proved to be incredibly hard to sustain these at scale across a global organization. There is a difference between your espoused values (what you say) and your values-in-use (what you do). You only know if you are living your espoused values when they come under pressure and there is a risk of you breaching them. If management consultants always think they are living their values, then it is likely they are not. An unexamined value is of no value at all.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
BofA outlines the bull and bear arguments surrounding IBM shares
- Shares in International Business Machines (NYSE:IBM) has surged so far this year, spurred on by hopes around the software group's artificial intelligence ambitions. IBM has said that it now has a "book of business" for its ChatGPT-like generative AI that is worth $6 billion, while CEO Arvind Krishna has said that customer interest in utilizing different AI models would likely fuel demand in the future. The company has also been specializing in developing tools that allow clients to build out their own AI-enhanced agents. Speaking to Reuters in May, Krishna suggested that, using IBM's Granite suite of AI models, along with alternatives from Mistral and Facebook-owner Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META), these agents could be constructed in mere minutes. These capabilities will lead to an acceleration of the rate of growth of its AI operations, Krishna said at the time. The comments came after IBM announced in April that it would invest some $150 billion in the United States, where it has long had a presence as a manufacturer of mainframe computers. Krishna noted that quantum computers -- a new type of computer that harnesses quantum mechanics to carry out tasks -- will also be made in the country. "There's going to be a very healthy market that behooves us to invest and lean in," Krisna told Reuters. Yet, even as optimism surrounds IBM's AI ambitions, a murky economic outlook clouded its most recent earnings. Faced with the looming threat of sweeping U.S. tariffs, analysts have warned that many companies may be reining in spending, potentially weighing on IBM's key consulting arm. A push by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration to slash government spending has also led to the shelving of 15 federal contracts at IBM that accounted for $100 million in business. Revenue from the consulting segment slipped in the most recent quarter by 2%, although IBM backed its 2025 target for top-line growth on a constant currency basis of at least 5%. Writing in a note to clients, analysts at BofA led by Wamsi Mohan said that IBM shares, despite trading at all-time highs, are "interesting due to the transformational initiatives undertaken by management." "IBM underwent a significant transformation over the last five years by shifting their software segment towards strategic M&A investments, shedding lower growth/high cost businesses, and rebalancing their portfolio towards cloud and AI trends," the brokerage wrote. However, they flagged that less rosy assessments of the stock have highlighted that IBM is "structurally under-owned and underweight." "This disconnect stems from the underperformance from 2010-2019 as revenues, margins and free cash flow were under pressure. While the turnaround [from 2020-2025] is acknowledged by bears, the valuation relative to growth profile remains a hurdle for many," the analysts said. Weighing these arguments, the BofA strategists lifted their price target for the stock to $320 from $290 and reiterated their "buy" rating of the stock. Related articles BofA outlines the bull and bear arguments surrounding IBM shares UBS identifies key thematic opportunities for stock market investors This sector is uniquely positioned to capture infrastructure spend growth: analyst Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Bosses want you to know AI is coming for your job
SAN FRANCISCO - Top executives at some of the largest American companies have a warning for their workers: Artificial intelligence is a threat to your job. CEOs from Amazon to IBM, Salesforce and JPMorgan Chase are telling their employees to prepare for disruption as AI either transforms or eliminates their jobs in the future. Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post. AI will 'improve inventory placement, demand forecasting and the efficiency of our robots,' Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said in a Tuesday public memo that predicted his company's corporate workforce will shrink 'in the next few years.' He joins a string of other top executives that have recently sounded the alarm about AI's impact in the workplace. Economists say there aren't yet strong signs that AI is driving widespread layoffs across industries. But there is evidence that workers across the United States are increasingly using AI in their jobs and the technology is starting to transform some roles such as computer programming, marketing and customer service. At the same time, CEOs are under pressure to show they are embracing new technology and getting results - incentivizing attention-grabbing predictions that can create additional uncertainty for workers. 'It's a message to shareholders and board members as much as it is to employees,' Molly Kinder, a Brookings Institution fellow who studies the impact of AI, said of the CEO announcements, noting that when one company makes a bold AI statement, others typically follow. 'You're projecting that you're out in the future, that you're embracing and adopting this so much that the footprint [of your company] will look different.' Some CEOs fear they could be ousted from their job within two years if they don't deliver measurable AI-driven business gains, a Harris Poll survey conducted for software company Dataiku showed. Tech leaders have sounded some of the loudest warnings - in line with their interest in promoting AI's power. At the same time, the industry has been shedding workers the last few years after big hiring sprees during the height of the coronavirus pandemic and interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve. At Amazon, Jassy told the company's workers that AI would in 'the next few years' reduce some corporate roles like customer service representatives and software developers, but also change work for those in the company's warehouses. IBM, which recently announced job cuts, said it replaced a couple hundred human resource workers with AI 'agents' for repetitive tasks such as onboarding and scheduling interviews. In January, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg suggested on Joe Rogan's podcast that the company is building AI that might be able to do what some human workers do by the end of the year. 'We, at Meta as well as the other companies working on this, are going to have an AI that can effectively be sort of a mid-level engineer at your company,' Zuckerberg said. 'Over time we'll get to the point where a lot of the code in our apps … is actually going to be built by AI engineers instead of people engineers.' Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, maker of the chatbot Claude, boldly predicted last month that half of all white-collar entry-level jobs may be eliminated by AI within five years. Leaders in other sectors have also chimed in. Marianne Lake, JPMorgan's CEO of consumer and community banking, told an investor meeting last month that AI could help the bank cut headcount in operations and account services by 10 percent. The CEO of BT Group Allison Kirkby suggested that advances in AI would mean deeper cuts at the British telecom company. Even CEOs who reject the idea of AI replacing humans on a massive scale are warning workers to prepare for disruption. Jensen Huang, CEO of AI chip designer Nvidia said last month, 'You're not going to lose your job to an AI, but you're going to lose your job to someone who uses AI.' Google CEO Sundar Pichai said at Bloomberg's tech conference this month that AI will help engineers be more productive but that his company would still add more human engineers to its team. Meanwhile, Microsoft is planning more layoffs amid heavy investment in AI, Bloomberg reported this week. Other tech leaders at Shopify, Duolingo and Box have told workers they are now required to use AI at their jobs, and some will monitor usage as part of performance reviews. Some companies have indicated that AI could slow hiring. Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff recently called Amodei's prognosis 'alarmist' on an earnings call, but on the same call chief operating and financial officer Robin Washington said that an AI agent has helped to reduce hiring needs and bring $50 million in savings. Despite corporate leaders' warnings, economists don't yet see broad signs that AI is driving humans out of work. 'We have little evidence of layoffs so far,' said Columbia Business School professor Laura Veldkamp, whose research explores how companies' use of AI affects the economy. 'What I'd look for are new entrants with an AI-intensive business model, entering and putting the existing firms out of business.' Some researchers suggest there is evidence AI is playing a role in the drop in openings for some specific jobs, like computer programming, where AI tools that generate code have become standard. Google's Pichai said last year that more than a quarter of new code at the company was initially suggested by AI. Many other workers are increasingly turning to AI tools, for everything from creating marketing campaigns to helping with research - with or without company guidance. The percentage of American employees who use AI daily has doubled in the last year to 8 percent, according to a Gallup poll released this week. Those using it at least a few times a week jumped from 12 percent to 19 percent. Some AI researchers say the poll may not actually reflect the total number of workers using AI as many may use it without disclosing it. 'I would suspect the numbers are actually higher,' said Ethan Mollick, co-director of Wharton School of Business' generative AI Labs, because some workers avoid disclosing AI usage, worried they would be seen as less capable or breaching corporate policy. Only 30 percent of respondents to the Gallup survey said that their company had general guidelines or formal policies for using AI. OpenAI's ChatGPT, one of the most popular chatbots, has more than 500 million weekly users around the globe, the company has said. It is still unclear what benefits companies are reaping from employees' use of AI, said Arvind Karunakaran, a faculty member of Stanford University's Center for Work, Technology, and Organization. 'Usage does not necessarily translate into value,' he said. 'Is it just increasing productivity in terms of people doing the same task quicker or are people now doing more high value tasks as a result?' Lynda Gratton, a professor at London Business School, said predictions of huge productivity gains from AI remain unproven. 'Right now, the technology companies are predicting there will be a 30% productivity gain. We haven't yet experienced that, and it's not clear if that gain would come from cost reduction … or because humans are more productive.' The pace of AI adoption is expected to accelerate even further if more companies use advanced tools such as AI agents and they deliver on their promise of automating work, Mollick said. AI labs are hoping to prove their agents are reliable within the next year or so, which will be a bigger disrupter to jobs, he said. While the debate continues over whether AI will eliminate or create jobs, Mollick said 'the truth is probably somewhere in between.' 'A wave of disruption is going to happen,' he said. Related Content 3-pound puppy left in trash is rescued, now thriving How to meet street cats around the world 'Jaws' made people fear sharks. 50 years later, can it help save them?
