The Hidden Cost of Per-Core Licensing

How Infrastructure Software Vendors Are Holding Back Sustainability

In today’s world, where environmental concerns are at the forefront of decision-making, it’s frustrating to see many infrastructure software vendors cling to outdated, per-core licensing models that are at odds with the idea of sustainability. These licensing schemes raise costs for businesses and push companies into inefficient hardware practices, leading to increased energy consumption, higher cooling requirements, and the need for larger data centers.

Let’s be clear: these vendors may claim to support sustainability initiatives, but their actions tell a different story.

The Problem with Per-Core Licensing

Licensing software based on the number of cores is logical—after all, more cores should mean more computational power. But in practice, it’s a profoundly flawed approach. As businesses strive to be more efficient, many are drawn to quad-processor servers with hundreds of cores that offer higher performance with fewer machines. The logic is simple: fewer machines mean lower power consumption, reduced cooling demands, and less data center space needed. Sounds great, right?

Yet, many software vendors penalize companies for using these powerful servers. Their per-core pricing model forces businesses to pay more for software when they adopt quad-processor servers. The more cores you use, the more you pay. In most cases, the software ends up being twice the price of the hardware. As a result, businesses are left scrambling to avoid these costs by sticking with dual-processor servers, even though this means more servers.

And what happens when you need more servers? Your power consumption goes up—and your cooling costs increase. Your data center space fills up faster.

How Per-Core Licensing Pushes Companies Toward Less Efficient Hardware

Imagine this scenario: You could upgrade your infrastructure with eight quad-processor servers, but thanks to per-core licensing, the software cost would balloon beyond what your budget can handle. Instead of upgrading, you purchase twelve or sixteen dual-processor servers to spread out the software cost.

It might seem like a reasonable compromise on paper, but it’s anything but. You now have more servers to manage, higher energy consumption, and additional space requirements. Over time, this inefficient approach could even force you to expand your data center footprint—and we all know how expensive and resource-intensive building or expanding data centers can be.

Where’s the logic in this? It’s bad for businesses, the environment, and the budget.

The Hypocrisy of Claiming to Support Sustainability

Many of these same vendors are quick to align themselves with sustainability initiatives, touting their efforts to be “green” or “energy efficient.” But here’s the frustrating truth: they’re not backing it up with policy. How can a software vendor claim to support sustainability while maintaining licensing models that actively discourage the adoption of more energy-efficient hardware?

By sticking to per-core pricing, these vendors perpetuate outdated business models that are out of sync with today’s reality. If they cared about reducing the environmental impact of IT infrastructure, they would embrace licensing models that encourage the use of powerful, efficient servers instead of financially punishing customers for trying to reduce their server count.

This isn’t a minor oversight—it’s a fundamental contradiction. You can’t claim to support sustainability while simultaneously forcing customers to build out more sprawling data centers than they need.

It’s Time for Change

If software vendors care about sustainability, they must rethink their licensing models and stop penalizing customers for using high-performance, energy-efficient hardware. The move to server-based licensing—where customers pay based on the number of servers, not the number of cores—is a step in the right direction. It allows companies to invest in better hardware without being punished for doing.

By enabling businesses to stop buying dual-processor servers and adopt quad-processor servers and other modern infrastructure solutions, vendors can help reduce the number of machines required, thus lowering energy consumption, cooling needs, and the demand for new data centers. That’s the natural way to support sustainability in the tech world—not through empty slogans but through practical policy changes that align with the needs of both businesses and the environment.

Conclusion

The per-core licensing mode is a relic of a bygone era. It’s holding companies back from making the most of their hardware, driving up operational costs, and contributing to the growing environmental impact of data centers.

It’s time for infrastructure software vendors to stop hiding behind sustainability claims and support the change that will lead to a more efficient and eco-friendly IT landscape. Until that happens, these vendors’ sustainability rhetoric will remain just that—rhetoric.

An example of the right approach is VergeIO. We adopted a server-based licensing model and focused on hardware efficiency with its ioOptimize feature, VergeIO enables organizations to use more powerful hardware without being penalized. Our solution helps extend hardware lifecycles, reduce energy consumption, and support sustainability goals—backed by impactful policy.

Even industry veteran analyst Marc Staimer has recognized the issue. “Too many software vendors hamper sustainability efforts with their per-core and per-capacity licensing models,” he stated. “VergeIO’s per-server licensing model is a rare exception, enabling customers to shrink their data center footprint and reduce power and cooling expenses.”

To learn more about how VergeIO is supporting sustainability and efficiency in IT infrastructure, visit the ioOptimize landing page: https://www.verge.io/iooptimize/