Hyderabad 01 is Sify’s Financial District building in Gachibowli: 14.4 MW of IT power across 2,400 racks, operational since 2019, on 33 kV dual dedicated feeders with N+N UPS, N+1 generators, 48 hours of fuel storage and TIA-942-B Rated 3 certification. It is also, on the published record, the least efficient large building in this registry. The factsheet declares a power usage effectiveness of 1.5 for full deployment and 1.7 for shared floors. Every other declared figure in 225 pages is 1.6 or better. The gap between 1.5 and 1.7 across 14.4 MW is 2.88 MW of constant waste — about ₹20 crore a year at industrial tariffs, which is more than most Indian data centres spend on their entire fit-out. At 14.4 MW the building is 4.2% of Telangana’s 341.3 MW counted capacity.
1At a glance
2The highest declared PUE in the registry
| Site | Declared | Basis and note |
|---|---|---|
| AirTrunk India | 1.40 | Design target across the Indian platform |
| Colt DCS Navi Mumbai | 1.45 | Operating campus, 22 MW live |
| Yotta NM1 | 1.50 | Design, a 52 MW building |
| Sify Hyderabad 01, full | 1.50 | Full deployment, operator factsheet |
| Yotta G1 GIFT City | 1.60 | Design, a 1 MW build with district cooling |
| Sify Hyderabad 01, shared | 1.70 | Shared floor, operator factsheet |
Six declarations across 225 records. That is the first thing to notice: almost no Indian operator publishes a power usage effectiveness figure at all, and the ones who do are publishing design targets rather than measured performance.
Sify is unusual in publishing two numbers for the same building, split by tenancy mode. That honesty is what makes the record useful. 1.5 is the number a buyer is shown; 1.7 is the number a smaller tenant actually gets, because a shared hall cannot be optimised for one customer’s load profile.
Cooling, UPS and generator plant are sized for a design load. When a hall is fully let to a single tenant, the plant runs near its design point and the PUE approaches the design figure. When it is split across several tenants, part-loaded plant, mixed airflow and over-cooling for the lowest-density customer all push consumption up.
A 0.2 penalty for shared tenancy is normal in the industry and almost never published. Sify publishing it is a genuine disclosure advantage for a buyer comparing sites.
The practical consequence: a quote that specifies megawatts without specifying tenancy mode is not comparable between operators. Twelve megawatts on a shared floor and 12 MW on a dedicated floor are not the same product, and the difference is worth roughly 15% of the electricity bill.
3What 1.7 costs, in rupees
| Item | Value | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| IT power | 14.4 MW | Operator |
| Total draw at PUE 1.5 | 21.6 MW | Arithmetic |
| Total draw at PUE 1.7 | 24.48 MW | Arithmetic |
| Difference in continuous draw | 2.88 MW | The cost of shared tenancy, at full load |
| Energy per year | 25,229 MWh | 2.88 MW for 8,760 hours |
| Annual cost at ₹8 per unit | ₹20.2 crore | Grid tariff, estimate |
| Same figure at ₹6.50 per unit | ₹16.4 crore | Lower band of industrial tariffs |
Twenty crore rupees a year is not a rounding item. It is roughly the cost of powering a further 2,900 enterprise racks, or about 0.36 MW of greenfield capacity at the replacement band — spent on nothing but the difference between two numbers the operator has published about its own building.
Two qualifications, both material. The gap is calculated at full load; a partly filled building wastes less in absolute terms but the same proportion. And the tariff is an assumption — ₹8 a unit is a plausible industrial rate for Telangana, not a disclosed figure. At ₹6.50 the number is ₹16.4 crore.
What the arithmetic establishes regardless of tariff is the ratio: running the same 14.4 MW of IT load at 1.7 rather than 1.5 burns 13.3% more electricity for exactly the same compute. For a tenant paying a power pass-through, that is a 13.3% surcharge on the largest line item in the contract.
Every hyperscale tenant in India negotiates on power. Almost none of them ask which tenancy mode they will be measured in.
A site that quotes 12 MW at 1.5 and delivers 12 MW at 1.7 is not lying. It is quoting a design figure and delivering a shared-floor figure, and it has published both.
Ask for the measured PUE of the specific hall before signing, and make the power pass-through subject to it. On a 10 MW tenancy that clause is worth roughly ₹12 crore a year in the worst case.
4Fourteen megawatts on twenty-four hundred racks
| Capacity | Racks | kW per rack |
|---|---|---|
| At 14.4 MW | 2,400 | 6.0 |
| At 14 MW, as one directory states | 2,400 | 5.8 |
| At Sify’s own 150 to 300 W per sq ft design | 2,400 | The enterprise band of 2019 |
| At 10 kW per rack | 1,440 | A modern enterprise hall |
| At 130 kW per rack | 111 | The AI product Sify sells elsewhere |
6.0 kW a cabinet places Hyderabad 01 squarely in the enterprise colocation market, alongside Bangalore 01 after its re-power and well above Vashi or Kolkata. It is a 2019 building designed for the workloads of 2019, and it has been filled on that basis.
The detail worth keeping is the floor geometry: 6,000 mm clear on levels 1 and 2, dropping to 4,200 mm on levels 3 to 6, with raised floor at 900 mm at the bottom and 700 mm above. That is a building engineered so the heaviest, best-cooled halls are low down — the standard practice, and the reason high-density re-fits start at the bottom of a building rather than the top.
Which sets the limit on any upgrade story. A 2019 shell with 4,200 mm on four of its six halls cannot be pushed to AI densities above the second floor without structural and cooling work. Anybody told this site can be re-powered to 130 kW a rack should ask which floors.
5Hyderabad 02 and the 250 MW next door
The reason to be interested in Hyderabad 01 is what sits around it. Sify’s second Hyderabad campus, in Fab City, is published at wildly different scales.
| Source | Figure | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Sify portfolio page | up to 250+ MW | IT capacity, with 20,000+ racks |
| Sify US page | up to 250+ MW | With 25,000+ racks |
| Sify brochure | 78 MW | Operational 2023 onwards, 13,000+ racks |
| DataCenterMap | 36 MW | Two further towers in planning |
| Contract date | 2023 onwards | Phased campus |
Seventy-eight megawatts, 250 megawatts and 36 megawatts describe the same Fab City campus. The 250 is a site ceiling, the 78 is a built phase and the 36 is an expansion increment — three scopes, published without ever being labelled as such.
For this record the consequence is simple. Hyderabad 01 at 14.4 MW is 4.2% of Telangana’s counted capacity today, in a state where one operator has published a 250 MW campus plan. If even the 78 MW phase is built, Sify’s Hyderabad footprint grows more than fivefold without a single new market being entered.
That is the shape of the whole Indian market in one state: the existing buildings are small, the announced campuses are enormous, and the gap between them is the investment thesis. Telangana’s 341.3 MW is already the third-largest state total in this registry, and 128 MW of AirTrunk’s HYD1 sits inside it.
6Procurement
7Limits and open questions
- Capacity is consistent across sources — 14.4 MW everywhere, with 14 MW on one directory. The registry counts 14.4 MW.
- The PUE figures are design declarations, not measurements. The factsheet states them as design values for full and shared deployment.
- The energy cost uses an assumed tariff of ₹8 per unit, with ₹6.50 shown as the lower bound. Neither is disclosed by Sify.
- Current occupancy is not published for this building, so the real wasted-energy figure is unknown.
- Hyderabad 02 has four published capacities — 36, 78 and 250+ MW and a rack count that moves between 13,000, 20,000 and 25,000. None is counted here.
- The two towers of Hyderabad 02 are not separate records in this registry and are noted only as context.
- What would close it. A measured PUE, a per-hall tenancy split, and a dated capacity for Fab City.
8Sources
Sources: the Sify Hyderabad data centre page; the Sify data centre portfolio page; Sify Infinit Spaces Hyderabad page; the Sify Hyderabad factsheet of 2022 with the 14.4 MW, 2,400 rack, 33 kV and 1.5/1.7 PUE specification; the Sify DC brochure; the Sify Europe and US Hyderabad pages; DataCenterMap, DataCenters.com and Baxtel specifications; and the TIA-942 listing.