From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: Virtualization Performance: Intel vs. AMD Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:12:19 +0200 Message-ID: <4B012583.9060706@redhat.com> References: <2BC775E87C984777BC077C4C436B851E@neilhp> <200911151655.07947.thomas@scripty.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Neil Aggarwal , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Treutner Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45974 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751677AbZKPKMU (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Nov 2009 05:12:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200911151655.07947.thomas@scripty.at> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/15/2009 05:55 PM, Thomas Treutner wrote: > On Sunday 15 November 2009 14:05:52 Neil Aggarwal wrote: > >> I prefer AMD CPUs, they give you a better bang for the buck. >> Besides that, I don't think they would be any technical >> differences, they are supposed to be completely compatible. >> I have seen no evidence to the contrary. >> > Isn't AMD the only one who has hardware support for nested virtualization? Or > isn't that true any longer? No, the Core i7 has ept which is the Intel equivalent. > Anyways, I'm just curious, as this feature is > primarily interesting for development, IMHO. > No, it's primarily interesting for performance. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function