From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Chmielewski Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] kvm-guest-drivers-windows-2 Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 23:09:48 +0200 Message-ID: <482B551C.2010808@wpkg.org> References: <482AEE8D.7000608@wpkg.org> <1210777782.24261.829.camel@localhost.localdomain> <482B09EE.20903@wpkg.org> <1210781968.24261.841.camel@localhost.localdomain> <482B2649.2090006@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: In-Reply-To: <482B2649.2090006@codemonkey.ws> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Anthony Liguori schrieb: (...) >>> So, a PV network driver can do about 700Mb/s, and an emulated NIC can >>> do about 600 Mb/s, Windows guest to host? >>> >>> That would be about 20% improvement? >>> > > FWIW, virtio-net is much better with my patches applied. The difference > between the e1000 and virtio-net is that e1000 consumes almost twice as > much CPU as virtio-net so in my testing, the performance improvement > with virtio-net is about 2x. We were loosing about 20-30% throughput > because of the delays in handling incoming packets. Do you by chance have any recent numbers on disk performance (i.e., Windows guest vs Linux host)? -- Tomasz Chmielewski http://wpkg.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/