Hello,
I'm trying to compare multi-CPU virtual machines with physical ones.
The problem is that the virtual machines get so bad numbers that I'm starting to doubt that PerformanceTest works properly on them.
It's mostly the CPU mark that seems odd.
Examples:
Physical Core 2 Duo 2,4GHz dual core: 1484
Physical Xeon 5110 1,6GHz dual core: 1890
Physical Xeon 5130 2,0GHz quad core: 2374
Physical Xeon 5420 2,5GHz quad core: 3202
Virtual Xeon 5440 2,8GHz dual core: 800
Virtual Xeon 5520 2,5GHz quad core: 902
As you can see, the virtual machines get abysmal results, compared to their reported specification.
I'm certainly expecting a performance drop for VM's, but not this much. Obviously. I'm doing something wrong here (or is it that PassMark is not suited for virtual machines?).
Best regards,
/Tomas
I'm trying to compare multi-CPU virtual machines with physical ones.
The problem is that the virtual machines get so bad numbers that I'm starting to doubt that PerformanceTest works properly on them.
It's mostly the CPU mark that seems odd.
Examples:
Physical Core 2 Duo 2,4GHz dual core: 1484
Physical Xeon 5110 1,6GHz dual core: 1890
Physical Xeon 5130 2,0GHz quad core: 2374
Physical Xeon 5420 2,5GHz quad core: 3202
Virtual Xeon 5440 2,8GHz dual core: 800
Virtual Xeon 5520 2,5GHz quad core: 902
As you can see, the virtual machines get abysmal results, compared to their reported specification.
I'm certainly expecting a performance drop for VM's, but not this much. Obviously. I'm doing something wrong here (or is it that PassMark is not suited for virtual machines?).
Best regards,
/Tomas
Comment