惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
有赞技术团队
有赞技术团队
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
月光博客
月光博客
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
阮一峰的网络日志
阮一峰的网络日志
小众软件
小众软件
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
大猫的无限游戏
大猫的无限游戏
S
SegmentFault 最新的问题
罗磊的独立博客
Jina AI
Jina AI
酷 壳 – CoolShell
酷 壳 – CoolShell
宝玉的分享
宝玉的分享
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
让小产品的独立变现更简单 - ezindie.com
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
奇客Solidot–传递最新科技情报
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
量子位
雷峰网
雷峰网
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
美团技术团队
博客园 - 聂微东
V
V2EX

IT Jungle

Finally: Some Pricing Information On The Power S1112 Entry Server - IT Jungle Rocket Automates Manual IBM i Tasks With AI - IT Jungle Guru: Where’s The Table? - IT Jungle LaserVault Goes iSCSI With Virtual Tape Library - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 31 - IT Jungle Thinking About Moving IBM i To The Cloud? Don't Start With The Quote - IT Jungle Precisely To Add Ransomware Protection In MIMIX 11 - IT Jungle It’s D-Day For Cybersecurity, AI Firms Warn - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 30 - IT Jungle Oracle Dips A Toe Into IBM’s EBCDIC World - IT Jungle When Your Small IBM i Team Is Really A Team Of One - IT Jungle Guru: Putting Failure Handling In Its Place - IT Jungle Inside The Security Enhancements In ACS - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 28: A Crazy Number of Security Vulnerability Patches - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 29 - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 28: A Crazy Number of Security Vulnerability Patches - IT Jungle Inside The Encryption Key Management Changes In IBM i 7.6 - IT Jungle FalconStor Moved To The Blue Lagoon, And Is Poised For Growth Because Of It - IT Jungle Guru: Claude’s SQL Tip - IT Jungle Astera Makes Extracting Legacy Report Data an AI Specialty - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 27 - IT Jungle Welcoming The New IBM i Chief Architect And Other New Top Brass - IT Jungle A Deep Dive Into That Power S1112 Entry Power11 Server - IT Jungle Guru: Beyond Three-Part Naming – Running SQL Across Remote IBM i Systems - IT Jungle How IBM Bolstered IBM i Resilience In The Summer Tech Refreshes - IT Jungle IBM i PTF Guide, Volume 28, Number 26 - IT Jungle Power Systems Has A Great Quarter; System Z, Not So Much - IT Jungle Does AI Mark The End Of The ERP Era? - IT Jungle Guru: Deterministic Application Development With AI - IT Jungle What IBM’s Got Cooking In Db2 For i In The Summer TRs - IT Jungle
Will Power Chips Get A Converged Arm Instruction Set Like...
Timothy Prickett Morgan · 2026-08-31 · via IT Jungle

August 31, 2026

One a decade for the past six decades, Big Blue launches an effort to converge its diverse system architectures. It almost never works, with the exception of the launch of the System/360 mainframes in April 1964 and the AS/400 minicomputers in June 1988. And to be fair, the AS/400 was itself based in part on technologies created in a failed convergence effort.

Back in 1986, the “Fort Knox” project sought to converge the System/4300 air-cooled, entry mainframe lines with the System/38 (from 1978) and the System/36 (from 1983), and it failed. But in the failure, the Rochester Labs took some of the bits of Fort Knox, dusted them off, and created the “Silverlake” project, delivering the truly innovative Application System/400. This machine had all the benefits of the System/38 – single level storage, integrated relational database as a file system as well as a database, asymmetric multiprocessing architecture, and advanced CISC processor, memory, and disk designs all integrated. And, it cost about half as much per unit of relational database work than an IBM mainframe of the time.

Back in 1995, through the PowerPC consortium set up between IBM, Motorola, and Apple, which sought to span computing devices from embedded systems to game consoles to PCs to datacenter servers in 1991, Big Blue and Motorola tag teamed on a converged processor called the Power 615, which not only included a Power core with an added X86 decode unit, allowing operating systems to context shift between the two, supporting applications running on the same platform at the same time. IBM had an X86 license from Intel at the time, and in fact was one of the manufacturers of X86 chips for a time, and other than AMD is still the only other company that has such a license that we know of. Interestingly the Power 615 chip plugged directly into the Intel Pentium sockets of the time The Power 615 never saw the light of day, of course, and that was apparently because the context switching between the Power decoders and the X86 decoders was painfully slow. But the Power 615 did prove a point, and one that is now relevant, that one can make a dual ISA processor.

You will also no doubt remember that IBM tried to converge the mainframe and minicomputer lines with Project ECLipz with the Power6 processor in the mid-2000s. The ECLipz plan – the ipz is for System i, System p, and System z – was apparently to emulate mainframe microcode on the Power6 RISC processor and have a single family of proprietary servers from Big Blue for the first time in its history since the System/360 was launched. That didn’t pan out, and instead ECLipz was positioned to the outside world as IBM sharing chip design components and methodologies between the z CPUs in mainframes and the Power CPUs in Power Systems. The ambition was larger, and yet unfulfilled.

Which brings us all the way forward to April of this year, when IBM and Arm made this vague announcement that had me scratching my head a little. The first sentence of the release tells you exactly what IBM is up to, but everyone, including me, read this as some sort of virtualization announcement, not a dual ISA chip announcement. And that is because IBM and Arm were being deliberately vague. Anyway, the release said the two companies were engaged in “a strategic collaboration with Arm to develop new dual‑architecture hardware that helps enterprises run future AI and data intensive workloads with greater flexibility, reliability, and security.” Again, we all read two chips in the system, not two ISAs in a chip. And that set me off down a road of thinking about Arm-based IOPs in both Power and z machines and what that might mean. But I was also in the hospital that week and had other intense things on my mind and forgot to return to this idea and chase down what the heck was going on.

Well, at Hot Chips last week, Christian Zoellin, a distinguished engineer who worked on the Power11 processor and who was previously the chief architect of the Z CPUs for the past four years, let the cat out of the bag that the future Z processor, which we presume is called “Telum III,” would support both Z and Arm instruction sets at the same time. Apparently, the context switching now happens in nanoseconds, so this dual ISA idea finally works. And what this means is that the eleven-core Telum III running at a stunning 5.7 GHz peak clock speed will not only be the world’s fastest mainframe processor, but also the world’s fastest Arm v9.3 architecture processor.

The current z17 “Telum II” chip was implemented in Samsung’s 5 nanometer processes and packed eight z17 cores, an integrated DPU, and a baby version of the Spyre matrix math accelerator (rated at 24 teraops) onto a single die. Telum II ran at 5.5 GHz, and had 36 MB of L2 cache per core plus two spares, which could be ganged up to a 360 MB virtual L3 cache.

Here’s how the Tellum III looks:

The Tellum III core has separate Z and Arm decoders, just like the Power 615 had separate Power and X86 decoders. Arm instructions are not being emulated, but explicitly run. In fact, the Tellum III core includes 2,792 AArch64 instructions and 239 AArch64 registers. The Telum III core has the full Arm v9.3 specification supported, including the SVE and SVE2 vector math units. It is not clear if there is a single vector unit that can be run in z vector or Arm SVE2 mode or if there are two unique vector engines. I strongly suspect that the SVE2 vectors are being mapped onto the 128-bit Z vector units. The implementation has the little endian Arm execution running within the CISC big endian microarchitecture of the Z cores.

Here are the architecture changes that were made to the Z core to have that second Arm ISA running side-by-side:

Zoellin did not provide that overall transistor count of the Telum III processor, and did not provide the overhead of adding the Arm v9.3 ISA to the cores, and said he needed to go count them up and added that “it’s a little bit here, and a little bit there.” He said that the decoders were most of it, which is what you would expect.

The z18 processor, as this will no doubt be called, has a pair of on-chip Spyre accelerator matrix units as well as the single DPU from the Telum II processor. The Arm ISA can access both of these units, and they can access the Linux applications running natively on the Arm part of the chip.

Logically, here is how the application stacks run on top of the Telum III z18 chip:

There is nothing surprising about the layers of hardware and software virtualization and runtimes shown above.

With that all said, let’s bring this all home to the Power Systems base and the IBM i and AIX platforms that drive that business. First of all, Power12 had damned well better have this sale Arm v9.3 architecture fusion. If running the Arm Linux stack naively is good for the Z mainframes, then it is also equally good for Power Systems – and absolutely technically not a stretch.

Moreover, if the Spyre matrix unit is the future, then the Power12 core had better use it on the chip package like the Telum processors have. The Power cores can keep their vectors and map SVE2 vectors on top of them to provide vector and tensor math for native AI applications on a future Power12 chip. But it is time to get the Z and P parts of the system house pulling in the same direction.

For the Power13 and z19 chip generations, I would argue that maybe full convergence is in order. IBM can add three decoders to a converged chip and sell one platform. . . . thereby saving a ton of money on hardware development. This might be tricky, but if Arm can be moved onto Z, then Power can as well. And frankly, this should have been done more than a decade ago.

RELATED STORIES

Big Blue Is Still Talking About Future Power Processors, Which Is Good

The Power11 Transistor Count Discrepancies Explained – Sort Of

With Power11, Power Systems “Go To Eleven”

IBM Raises The Curtain A Little On Future Power Processors

IBM Shows Off Next-Gen AI Acceleration, On Chip DPU For Big Iron (The Next Platform)

IBM’s AI Accelerator: This Had Better Not Be Just A Science Project (The Next Platform)

Time To Design – And Deliver – The Application System/360

Historical, Functional, And Relevant

Drilling Down Into The Power10 Chip Architecture

Power To The Tenth Power

The Cognitive Systems/500 2018 Edition

The Road Ahead For Power Is Paved With Bandwidth

The AS/400 Lessons Come Back Around With Power9 Systems