PCoIP vs ICA vs RDP

[vDeepak]

I just started using vmware view and its working fine but citrix admin claiming that ICA is better option in order of performnance of Desktops.

Will you please let me know that architectural diff between above mentioned protocols and also the hairline difference that makes anyone of them ahead of others.

Cheers

[vDeepak]

Any updates...

[Linjo]

Maybe this blogpost will help:

http://blogs.vmware.com/view-point/2009/10/why-pcoip-is-the-best-protocol-for-virtual-desktops.html

Best regards,

Linjo

If you find this information useful, please award points for "correct" or "helpful".

[vDeepak]

That post is really interesting and i get bit idea that why PCoIP is imp.

But still i am looking for some architectural difference between above mentioned protocols. Reason being that i have speak out to Citrix guys over some valuable reason to use VDI.

Please help.

Thanks

[regnak]

Hi,

I've tested RDP/PCoIP/ICA quite a bit in the last few weeks have a few observations:

PCoIP: PIR very evident even at bandwidths of 2 meg and low latency. Very Evident in Office 2007 & Abobe Reader 9.0 that it doesn't detect text correctly. Same Doc opened in Wordpad or Bull PDF viewer and text is detected and works fine (rendered first and toolbars are done later). I still see it as heavy on bandwidth on WANs which in countries where this is expensive to obtain, a negative factor. I ran a workload simulator against each protocol with 20 desktops and found PCoIP used CPU on the Host around the 25% mark and RDP/ICA around the 15% mark on average. I can't get density with these results. I see PCoIP as a strong LAN protocol but inadequate WAN protocol. I'm hoping performance will improve over time as ICA in particular has had over 10 years of development so there is room to catch up!

RDP: Nice protocol, light on the network. RDP 6 & 7 deliver most of the feature I need and when combined with Wyse terminals give me a good feature set that will improve as time goes on (for softphones etc). RemoteFX means there may be an end to this development cycle however. RDP really needs TCX or similar extensions (an older version of which VMware OEM'd in the View Agent). It also benefits greatly from any sort of WAN accelerator and brings it's in line with ICA on a bandwidth level anyway.

ICA: Still the protocol to beat. Office 2007 just works, no slow down, very lean on bandwidth with native compression and very responsive. I'm wondering how much more Citrix can extend this protocol and when in terms of its architecture it will start to "creak". HDX extensions are out but still no mention of Local Text Echo for PortICA which is suprising...!

Personally I'd like ICA with View Management and a vSphere backend as my ideal setup, not going to happen however! I'd lean to RDP if I could afford the additional items that help it shine (TCX / WAN Acceleration) and PCoIP for only those users that need it for specific applications.

I'm open to correction as this is based on only one POC Lab I've built but thought it might prove useful....

Mike

[vDeepak]

Thanks Mike for your valuable suggestions!

I suppose that this debate is now more warmed up , this is so because as per your notes its find out that PCoIP can be used only for specific applications and its perform well in over LAN. Will you please put reason why its not being used over WAN as good performer. But as i think so that PCoIP works over UDP protocol and its fast and reliable.

As per your notes if i am not wrong ICA can be claimed as still better that PCoIP?

[regnak]

Hi,

Well, these are just my own observations but put ICA and PCoIP side by side and PIR is really a killer for us. It is quickly picked up by users who will complain etc. Now you can control it with ADM GPOs but at the expense of screen responsiveness. PCoIP always uses more bandwidth than ICA and could not handle severe drops of bandwidth for any reason (i.e. it was the first protocol to dump the test sessions). This was when we went to 1 meg bandwidth and below. Now VMware will never test PCoIP at under 2 meg, ideally 2.5 meg minimum as it needs to spike but there are conditions where a drop in bandwidth could happen (Printing, Multimedia etc).

Besides the PIR issue (again maybe it was just our environment, I don't know), it's the user density that got me. 25% less users per host is significant and although I've seen statements that declare there should be no difference to the host CPU for running PCoIP vs RDP, my testing showed otherwise.

I would recommend to do your own Proof of Concept and put it to the test yourself and if you see no such difference, great!

I'm still in the VMware camp and plan to enhance RDP until the point where PCoIP matures and becomes more attractive on the WAN. Again I work in places where bandwidth is expensive, not University Campuses or mainland locations so this is a particularly important issue for me, it may not be for others. There are good deals to be had on server hardware in these economic times!

In the meantime I'd give ICA it's due, it's damn good and deserves respect. I can pick holes in the other elements of XenDesktop but the user experience is after all the most important thing in a VDI deployment - ignore at your peril!

One more note - all the WAN accelerators I've tested from Cisco Waas to Wyse VDA turn the TCP stream into UDP to get performance. PCoIP are taking advantage of this mechanism already, they just need to refine it. I for one are looking forward to when they do, but right now it's not there.

Mike