No doubt about it, hardware virtualization is a hot topic. Adding fuel to the fire on this hot topic is the comparison of the hardware virtualization vendors - mainly VMware, Citrix, and Microsoft. I think it goes without saying that VMware has the most robust set of features, but what about performance? Which hypervisor performs the best? Is VMware worth the price since Hyper-V and XenServer are free (OK, Hyper-V is technically $28.00 USD if you do not have a Microsoft Agreement)? That question is hot too! A great resource to answer this question is Project Virtual Reality Check. But, there is a new study by Virtualization Review that attempts to answer this question as well. Virtualization Review “… put the three challengers through a battery of tests to find out how they perform a variety of virtualization functions.” Their tests includes test objectives, descriptions of the test environments, comparison parameters, and results.

Be sure to read the entire article because it is pretty insightful. But, the conclusion in their words is “There was no overall winner here…but some general conclusions can be drawn. For CPU- and memory-intensive applications, XenServer and Hyper-V are attractive and have proven their mettle. For a large number of light to moderate workloads-or if you decide that memory overcommit, for example, is important-ESX may be the answer. What is entirely clear, however, is that all three hypervisors are legitimate virtualization platforms, and that no single company has a monopoly on virtualization any longer.”

Continue at source…

Technorati : Citrix, ESX, Microsoft, VMware, hypervisor, performance
Del.icio.us : Citrix, ESX, Microsoft, VMware, hypervisor, performance