Hyper-V vs. VMware network world magazine article--Irony included

[williambishop]

So, I'm reading an article title Vmware edges Microsoft in performance test(pg 42).(network world magazine)

I've seen ton's of spewage lately stating that microsoft's hyper-v is comparable, etc....

I get to page 45. Disk I/O. Oddly enough, almost 2 to 1 performance increase ESX running windows vm's vs. Hyper V. So much for "we build windows, so we'll be able to hook in better and give better performance".

The article is pretty funny overall, statements like " When over-subscribed(why virtualize else?) Hyper-V SAGS while ESX tries to maintain availability. This pretty much falls in line with our testing where you pass a certain load, esx slows down a bit, Hyper-V....well....it vomits upon itself.

Earlier, the test was 3 vm's per host...Hyper V gave 90% of native speed, while ESX provided almost 98%. Of course, strangely, Hyper-v worked better with SLES than windows, hell it was even better than ESX with SLES. Freaky, but true.

Anyway, a laugh for me, maybe one for you.

W

[TomHowarth]

Yes, That made me giggle as well, I have included a link to the article, the comments are even funnier than the article to be fair, I would love to do a trace on the IP addresses that posted them, I think they may have Washington state and Utah State locations

http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2008/090108-test-virtualization.html

If you found this or any other answer useful please consider the use of the Helpful or correct buttons to award points

Tom Howarth

VMware Communities User Moderator

[khughes]

Interesting article but I'm sure everyone knew the outcome of it before it was even done. My favorite parts were the other competitors were out because they were back to the drawing boards for new revisions. I agree with Tom, the comments are rather funny.

• Kyle