Deployment Model Comparison Guide

Purpose of This Guide

Choosing between container, modular building, and building + skid deployment models is one of the most consequential decisions in a data center program. It affects timeline, cost structure, site requirements, scalability, and long-term operational characteristics. This guide provides a structured framework for making that decision based on objective project parameters rather than vendor preference or institutional inertia.

The Three Deployment Models

Container-Based

Self-contained infrastructure zones in standardized containers. Highest deployment speed and simplest site requirements. Best for edge deployments, distributed capacity, and programs requiring rapid replication across multiple sites. Typical capacity range: 100kW to 2MW per zone.

Modular Building

Prefabricated building modules that combine to form a complete facility. Balances speed and configurability with the ability to create larger, more traditional-feeling facilities. Best for mid-scale programs requiring phased growth. Typical capacity range: 1MW to 20MW.

Building + Skid

Purpose-built building envelopes with factory-assembled skid-based infrastructure inside. Maximizes scale, customization, and long-horizon growth potential. Best for large campus programs and hyperscale deployments. Typical capacity range: 10MW to 100MW+.

Decision Criteria Matrix

The following criteria should be evaluated when selecting a deployment model. Each criterion is scored relative to project requirements, and the model with the best overall alignment is recommended.

• Target Capacity: What is the initial IT load, and what is the ultimate build-out target? Container solutions are most efficient at smaller scales; building + skid excels at larger programs.
• Speed to Deployment: How quickly must the first increment of capacity be operational? Container deployments can typically be online in 12-16 weeks from order.
• Site Constraints: What are the available land area, utility capacity, zoning restrictions, and access limitations? Container solutions have the smallest civil footprint.
• Expansion Horizon: How many phases of growth are planned, and over what timeframe? Building + skid provides the most robust long-term expansion framework.
• Rack Density: What is the target power density per rack? High-density AI/ML workloads may require liquid cooling, which is most readily accommodated in building + skid configurations.
• Budget Structure: Is the project funded as a single capital commitment or phased operational expenditure? Container and modular solutions align better with incremental capital deployment.
• Regulatory Environment: What building codes, environmental regulations, and permitting requirements apply? Container solutions may face different code treatment than permanent buildings.
• Operational Model: Will the facility be owner-operated or managed by a third party? Multi-tenant colocation models typically favor building + skid for tenant flexibility.

Site Condition Mapping

Beyond the decision criteria, specific site conditions often favor one model over another. Remote locations with limited construction labor favor container and modular solutions due to their higher factory content. Urban infill sites with strict noise and height restrictions may favor container zones placed within existing structures. Greenfield campus sites with ample land and utility access are ideal for building + skid programs.

Next Steps

After identifying the best-fit deployment model, the next step is to define the zone architecture using the GridCore platform. The Zone-Based Planning Workbook provides the structured input template for this process, and the relevant Reference Architecture provides the design baseline.