Virtualization Review posted the results of a performance shootout between Microsoft Hyper-V, VMware ESX, and Citrix XenServer…  The launched three tests against the various platforms.  First was a small number of heavy workload systems,  one database server running a midsize database and six VMs with heavy workload of CPU and memory.  Second - was a large number of heavy workload systems, with one database server running a midsize database and twelve VMs with heavy workload of CPU, memory and disk IO.  Third – was a large number of light workload systems, with one database server running a midsize database and twelve VMs running a light CPU, memory and disk IO.

Take a look at the full article – it has a bunch of raw performance data and is definitely worth at least a quick read.  Full Article: http://virtualizationreview.com/features/article.aspx?editorialsid=2641

Quotes:
Hyper-V was the first product compared, and it performed quite differently from expectations. Hyper-V has been a focus of Microsoft dev efforts, and it shows. Overall, Hyper-V did well in this comparison and proved itself a worthy product.”

“In our tests, Hyper-V did well in all categories-it's a real, viable competitor for the competition. Table 2 shows Hyper-V's comparative performance.”

“After doing these comparisons of ESX to Hyper-V and XenServer, it's clear that at the hypervisor level, ESX is optimized for a large number of less-intensive workload VMs. For intensive workloads that may not be optimized for memory overcommit apps, Hyper-V and XenServer should definitely be considered-even if that means adding another hypervisor into the data center.

 

Taylor Brown
Hyper-V Integration Test Lead
http://blogs.msdn.com/taylorb

clip_image001