dead.letter

A technical blog focusing on Linux, FreeBSD, DNS, security and virtualization.

2005-10-10

VMware benchmarks pulled

Due to a recent discovery that VMware censors their customers' freedom of speech, I have pulled my benchmarks showing Xen vs. ESX comparitive analysis. I do not like to be sued.

If you must know, Xen beat ESX hands down in performance. I have the data to prove it.

See Xen's official performance analysis for a legally-safe alternative. They were able to publish only because they used an older version of VMware (Workstation 3.2). The quote that tipped me off was "the latest version of any VMware product which allows the publication of comparative benchmarks".

The VMware ESX license agreement can be found here. The license states "you may not disclose the results of any benchmark test of the Software to any third party without VMware's prior written approval".

Sounds like they don't want the public to know their product might be inferior - at least in terms of performance.

Labels:

4 Comments:

At 8:41 AM PDT , Blogger mergatroid said...

I should amend this post by saying that performance in ESX can be boosted significantly by using the LSI Logic (SCSI) and vmxnet (NIC) drivers. This is possible by installing the vmware-tools and running vmware-config-tools.pl. This is the recommended approach given by VMware.

 
At 8:09 PM PST , Anonymous Anonymous said...

VMware is in fact censoring many, at least one blog about VMware has been told to shutup.

 
At 2:49 PM PST , Anonymous Dean said...

Hi Mark,
I think you should be able to post the comparative results (in percentages). You are not allowed to post the specific numbers of the benchmark but you are free to publish the comparison between the two technologies.
At least that?s what XEN did ? I think I?ve seen these results on XEN?s CTO blog.

Regards,
Dean
http://www.netometer.com

 
At 5:36 AM PST , Anonymous Anonymous said...

In recent tests with Xen 4.1 and VMWare VI3.5 we got twice the workload on Xen versus VMWare (about 100 concurrent sessions versus 50) before response times dropped below our threshold. We were running on a v1624 Hardware Virtualization Appliance.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home