Home > Communication Service Provider Solutions > Enabling Telecom Transformation > RAN Pooling - The case for RAN pooling with Cloud/Virtualized RAN > CapEx TCO advantages of pooling
Server cost is a major factor contributing to CapEx. If the SMG is accepted to be a factor of two (as shown in Figure 4, through a fully Centralized RAN pool), server and equipment CapEx costs could be reduced by up to 50%. This gain is obtained through pooling of servers in a manner that allows dynamic workload allocation (vDU and vCU NFs) to cell sites or specific RUs to meet fluctuating traffic loads. Additionally, COTS servers are less expensive compared to purpose-built ASIC.
Server hardware installation costs would be lower for pooled C-RAN deployments as compared to traditional D-RAN, due to reduced equipment requirements at remote sites, reduced time and labor costs for planning and installation, and reduced truck roll costs (fewer truck rolls are needed with equipment co-location and pooling).
A centralized pooled RAN has lower software installation and configuration costs compared to traditional D-RAN, especially the associated engineering labor costs. Gains would be more pronounced for pre-engineered, pre-integrated, and pre-validated servers and cloud infrastructure software, such as Dell's Wind River solution and Bare Metal Orchestration. This is because fewer engineering hours need to be spent on onsite testing and validating infrastructure software, allowing validation efforts to focus on actual use cases and network requirements. Pre-engineered, pre-integrated, and pre-validated solutions reduce post-deployment end-to-end testing effort and cost, allowing the focus to be on RAN and Network tests rather than infrastructure testing.
Although CapEx cost factors for C-RAN remain the same, they are weighted differently, depending on considerations such as: Is it a greenfield or brownfield deployment? Is it an indoor, outdoor, or mixed deployment? Is it a small cell, macro cell, or mixed deployment? Is it a dense urban, urban, suburban, or rural topology deployment? Is fiber fronthaul an option to deploy a less-demanding fronthaul for an appropriate LLS such as 7.2? And so on. If new fiber must be laid for fronthaul to enable BBU pooling, then that cost will have much more impact on CapEx than the overall server cost gains due to pooling, for example.