Customers Still Want to Refresh Their Infrastructure

The computing landscape is in flux; as AI adoption continues across the enterprise market, its impact is already clear: higher prices and component scarcity. As memory and storage costs remain elevated, customers are reassessing their IT and AI strategy, and with pricing not expected to ease until at least 2027,1 many are evaluating whether an infrastructure refresh is even possible.

Customer budgets are being squeezed as they look ahead, so the answer you’re probably already hearing is, “Never mind, we’ll just wait it out.”

However, there is a cost of doing nothing.

Delaying the replacement of legacy infrastructure introduces its own risks:

  • High operational costs
  • Low energy efficiency
  • Rising maintenance costs
  • Inability to support modern AI workloads
  • Security/compliance exposure
  • Warranty/support expiration

Facing these issues, customers will look to partners like you to guide them. Use the insights below to support them through new hardware investments, helping them make smart purchasing decisions.

On Track: Providing the Right Guidance

Step 1: Audit the Environment

Historically, it’s been common for customers to overprovision server memory to accommodate maximum needs and add a layer of flexibility to their workloads. Basically, they provision many servers with the maximum resources only needed by a few applications so they can re-locate workloads if needed. As such, many environments are provisioned based on a theoretical peak demand rather than observed utilization.

With memory scarce and costly, this is a luxury fewer businesses can afford. Now is the time to work with your customers to audit their on-premises and cloud environments to determine what resources (CPU, GPU and memory) they’re using and to project realistic, data-driven assessments of needs as workloads or the addition of AI compute grows. 

AI Workloads Require Balanced Infrastructure Planning

As customers explore the adoption of AI, it’s vital to understand how new workloads may impact requirements. While GPUs often receive the most attention for AI initiatives, memory and CPUs are critical to efficient deployment and long-term scalability.

AI workloads place increased pressure on system memory and storage infrastructure. Overprovisioning memory across every server may not be cost effective, but underprovisioning can create bottlenecks that limit utilization or reduce workload performance, which is equally unacceptable.

Work with customers to identify where AI workloads are expected to scale, how data will move through the environment, and which systems genuinely require higher memory capacity. Balancing CPU, GPU and memory investment appropriately can help organizations support AI adoption without unnecessarily increasing costs or compromising performance and responsiveness.

Step 2: Identify Non-Memory-Sensitive Workloads

Once baseline memory requirements are met, some workloads often see diminishing returns from additional memory capacity. For CPU-bound, I/O-bound or latency-sensitive workloads, additional memory capacity can often deliver limited performance improvements relative to cost.

Help customers explore lower memory configurations that reduce unnecessary costs without materially impacting workload performance.

Step 3: Right-Size Memory Provisioning

Memory is at a premium, which makes it vital for customers to correctly size the amount of memory they require. Work with your customers to explore where memory investment delivers the greatest value and where they can safely reduce memory needs.

Mission-critical and high-priority workloads should receive a healthy buffer for any spikes in utilization or future growth. For workloads with lower memory requirements, consider providing smaller capacity DIMMs or leaving memory slots open (AMD EPYC™ server CPUs support a variety of memory configurations, including open slots).

AMD Can Help

Once customers understand where memory utilization can be optimized, they can begin evaluating platforms that are designed to deliver stronger performance efficiency, such as with systems enabled by AMD EPYC server CPUs.

It’s worth reminding customers looking to refresh their existing infrastructure that AMD EPYC server CPUs can offer great performance with less memory and a compelling upgrade path from aging hardware. Moving from competitor legacy hardware to the latest AMD EPYC server CPUs can achieve up to 29% lower TCO, averaging a payback for systems and software of around 2.5 years.2

For example, representative compute-bound workloads running on the AMD EPYC 9355P server CPUs with 50% reduced memory capacity results in just a 1% performance reduction.3

Compute Bound

Geomean of NGINX, Memcached, FFMpeg, Python
1P 32C AMD EPYC 9355P

1
0.99
24GB / Core
12GB / Core
50% Memory Reduction -1% Performance

Memory-capacity-sensitive workloads can scale flexibly with memory constraints; a server running on AMD EPYC 9655 CPUs can operate with just 75% of memory capacity with a minor 6% performance reduction.4

Memory Capacity Bound

SQL Server
OLAP1P 96C AMD EPYC 9655

1.00
0.94
0.73
100% Capacity
75% Capacity
50% Capacity
25% Memory Reduction ➜ -6% Performance
50% Memory Reduction ➜ -27% Performance

Infrastructure modernization also creates an opportunity for consolidation and higher virtualization density. By reducing server count and improving efficiency, your customers can also reduce software licensing, power, cooling and operational costs alongside optimizing their memory usage. Being able to purchase far fewer, higher-performance systems means less of the IT budget will be spent on memory.

For organizations facing space, power or cooling limitations, infrastructure efficiency improvements help extend existing datacenter capacity without requiring immediate expansion. As AI workloads continue to increase demands on infrastructure, these operational efficiencies will continue to become increasingly important alongside raw performance.

Providing Tools for Customer Success

AMD offers a range of tools that can help you support your customers navigating a challenging market. To help right-size memory budgets, use the following tools to estimate memory requirements for both on-prem and cloud environments:

For cloud infrastructure, utilize the AMD EPYC™ Cloud Instance Advisor.

Run a TCO analysis using the AMD EPYC™ TCO Advisory Tool, a web-based tool that lets you work with customers to analyze different TCO scenarios based on current, but also customizable memory prices.

AMD will continue to support partners and their customers, delivering leadership performance and optimized infrastructure. Using hardware platforms like AMD EPYC server CPUs and tools like those listed above help balance performance, scalability and memory efficiency during challenging market cycles. 

While memory pricing pressures continue to impact infrastructure planning, delaying modernization can introduce long-term operational inefficiencies and rising costs. By auditing workloads, right-sizing memory investments and identifying opportunities for consolidation, partners can help customers modernize strategically.

To learn more, speak to your AMD representative.

AMD Arena


Build expertise with training on AMD AI solutions, AMD EPYC™ server CPUs, AMD Instinct™ GPUs and more across the AMD portfolio.

Related Articles

Related Training Courses

Related Webinars

Footnotes
  1. Gartner, Emerging Issue: Managing Memflation Through 2027, Joseph Unsworth, 27 Feb 2026
    GARTNER is a trademark of Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates.
  2. 9xx5TCO-025 This scenario contains many assumptions and estimates and, while based on AMD internal research and best approximations, should be considered an example for information purposes only, and not used as a basis for decision making over actual testing. The AMD Server & Greenhouse Gas Emissions TCO (total cost of ownership) Estimator Tool - version 1.56, compares the selected AMD EPYC™ and Intel® Xeon® CPU based server solutions required to deliver a TOTAL_PERFORMANCE of ~44,600 units of SPECrate2017_int_base performance as of Mar 12, 2026. This analysis compares a 2P AMD 64 core EPYC 9535 powered server with a SPECrate2017_int_base score of 1640 
  3. https://spec.org/cpu2017/results/res2025q3/cpu2017-20250728-49231.pdf  compared to a legacy 2P Intel Gold 32core 6338 based server with a SPECrate2017_int_base score of 446, https://spec.org/cpu2017/results/res2023q2/cpu2017-20230423-35994.pdf

    The published EPYC 9535 SPEC score has been adjusted to estimate the performance impact of reducing memory population from the max count of 24 x 64GB RDIMMs to 16 x 64GB RDIMMs or approximately 3/4 memory bandwidth. Derate calculations are based on internal lab testing performed on SPECrate®2017_int_base benchmark to deliver an estimated SPECrate®2017_int_base score.

    Workload performance with reduced memory bandwidth depends on workload characteristics and memory sensitivity. Results shown are limited to the specific workloads shown and should not be generalized to other workloads.

    https://www.carbondi.com/#electricity-factors/https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator. For additional details, see https://www.amd.com/en/legal/claims/epyc.html#q=9xx5TCO-025.

  4. 9xx5-281: Geometric Mean of 4 select non-memory bound Phoronix workload results based on Phoronix Test Suite paid testing as of 04/01/2026.   
  5. Workload Configs: Memcached - Set To Get Ratio: 1:10 (Ops/sec), nginx - Connections: 500 (Reqs/sec), Timed FFmpeg Compilation - Time To Compile (sec), Timed CPython Compilation - Build Configuration: Released Build, PGO + LTO Optimized (sec)

    1P 32C AMD EPYC 9355P-powered production system, BIOS 3.8, 2 x 3841GB SAMSUNG MZWLO3T8HCLS-00A07, 2 x Broadcom NetXtreme BCM5720 PCIe, Ubuntu 26.04 6.19.0-9-generic (x86_64), GCC 15.2.0, SMT=on, Memory Configurations: 12x64GB DDR5-6400 (at 6000 MT/s), 6x64GB DDR5-6400 (at 6000 MT/s) Workload 50% Memory 100% Memory Relative Normalized (HIB) memcached 5581297.57 5601003.16 0.996 nginx 348480.18 347401.43 1.003

    ffmpeg 22.912 22.679 0.99

    python 203.185 202.906 0.999      

    Geomean 0.997

  6. 9xx5-282: MySQL TPC-H derivative workload (SQL Server OLTP Brokerage) estimate based on internal AMD measurements as of 04/01/2026. The MySQL TPC-H workload is derived from TPC-Benchmark™ Standard, and as such is not comparable to published TPC-H™ results, as the results do not comply with the TPC-H Benchmark Standard. 
  7. Workload configs: MySQL 8.0.39, SF3000 

    1P AMD EPYC 9655 powered reference system (96 total cores), Ubuntu 24.04.2 LTS (Linux 6.8.0-60-generic), BIOS RVC100DB, SMT=on, Mitigations=off, Power Determinism, Memory Configurations: 12x128GB DDR5-6400 (100% capacity), 12x96GB DDR5-6400 (~75% capacity), 

    12x64GB DDR5-6400 (~50% capacity)   

     DIMM Score Relative

    128 2065198.0 1.00

    96 1949138.6 0.95

    64 1500947.6 0.73

    Workload performance with reduced memory capacity depends on workload characteristics and memory sensitivity. Results shown are limited to the specific workloads tested and should not be generalized to other workloads. Variables effecting these specific results include but are not limited to system configurations, software versions and BIOS settings. TPC, TPC Benchmark, and TPC-H are trademarks of the Transaction Processing Performance Council