Virtualisation - Performance
1 hour ago, Christ1992 said:Do you think this difference in performance could be purely due to the CPU?
Yes you are comparing a much older architecture CPU to a much newer one then equally or more importantly the Xeon Gold 6142 has a higher power allowance and a lot more CPU cores so should be much faster. The Xeon Gold 6142 is also nearly twice as expensive as the Xeon E5-2643v2 and is not a direct replacement for it, all be it like 4 generations newer Xeon.
Xeon E5-2643 v2:
- ~$1550 MSRP
- 6 Cores / 12 Threads
- 3.5 GHz Base (more important than boost typically) / 3.8GHz Boost
- 130 TDP
Xeon Gold 6142:
- ~$2950 MSRP
- 16 Cores / 32 Threads
- 2.6GHz Base / 3.7GHz Boost
- 150W TDP
Not considering any other VMs running on the host the 6 vCPU VM running on the Xeon Gold 6142 will sustain a higher average frequency across the 6 allocated cores, top that off with a much more performant architecture and the VM on this host should perform significantly better.
Then you also have to consider any other VMs running on each host, if you are sharing physical cores, typically the case, a CPU with a higher core count has better ability to schedule CPU time to a VM and achieve higher effective performance. You need to look at VM CPU metrics like CPU %wait times and CPU Ready times, these will tell you if the host has too many VMs demanding CPU time and thus cannot service the VMs adequately.
Also when you say VMware are you running ESXi or VMware Workstation on Windows? Hyper-V is actually very good and should not give any performance difference between it and ESXi, personally I choose ESXi but Hyper-V is great too.
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now