How Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V compares against VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus
by Shijaz Abdulla on 02.06.2012 at 12:43Windows Server 2012 Release Candidate (RC) marks a major milestone in Microsoft’s foray into the virtualization world. While Microsoft have always been leaders in management technologies, an area where VMware was weak, Microsoft now have the hypervisor which exceeds VMware capabilities.
Facts and Figures: Hyper-V vs. vSphere 5
Thought I’d share some interesting information from the recently released Competitive Advantages document.
| System | Resource | Windows Server 2012 RC Hyper-V | VMware ESXi 5.0 | VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus |
| Host | Logical Processors |
320 |
160 |
160 |
| Physical Memory |
4 TB |
32 GB |
2 TB |
|
| Virtual CPUs per host |
2048 |
2048 |
2048 |
|
| VM | Virtual CPUs per VM |
64 |
8 |
32 |
| Memory per VM |
1 TB |
32 GB |
1 TB |
|
| Active VMs per host |
1024 |
512 |
512 |
|
| Guest NUMA |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
| Cluster | Maximum nodes |
64 |
N/A |
32 |
| Maximum VMs |
4000 |
N/A |
3000 |
|
| Storage | Virtual Fiber Channel |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
| MPIO |
Yes |
No |
Yes (VAMP) |
|
| Native 4-KB disk support |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
| Maximum Virtual Disk Size |
64 TB VHDX |
2 TB VMDK |
2 TB VMDK |
|
| Maximum pass through disk size |
Varies |
64 TB |
64 TB |
|
| Offloaded Data Transfer |
Yes |
No |
Yes (VAAI) |
|
| VDI* | Hardware GPU to vGPU support |
Yes |
No |
No |
| Software GPU support |
Yes |
Basic |
Basic |
|
| Remote Touch Support |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
| User Profile & Data Mgmt |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
|
Extensible Switch/Multi-tenancy |
Extensible Network Switch |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
|
Confirmed Partner Extenstions |
4 |
None |
2 |
|
|
PVLAN |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
|
|
ARP/ND Spoofing Protection |
Yes |
No |
vShield App/Partner |
|
|
DHCP snooping/DHCP guard |
Yes |
No |
vShield App/Partner |
|
|
Virtual Port ACLs |
Yes |
No |
vShield App/Partner |
|
|
Trunk Mode to Virtual Machines |
Yes |
No |
No |
|
|
Port Monitoring |
Yes |
Per Port Group |
Yes |
|
|
Port Mirroring |
Yes |
Per Port Group |
Yes |
Mind-blowing, isn’t it?
*VDI comparisons were made taking VMware View into account.
How Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V compares against VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus http://t.co/bhaqnN3B
microsoftNOW : How Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V compares against VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus – http://t.co/8fTCXThL
I’m not sure if its relevant to compare a RC that might be released this year with a product that has been proven in the marketplace for over a year… Another point, on the “User Profile & Data Mgmt”, VMware View have persona management and User Data Disks to support this so you should probably update that one.
Now that the product is RTM and in production on thousands of servers worldwide, take a look at the new compartives document – http://download.microsoft.com/download/E/8/E/E8ECBD78-F07A-4A6F-9401-AA1760ED6985/Competitive-Advantages-of-Windows-Server-Hyper-V-over-VMware-vSphere.pdf
How Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V compares against VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise PlusmicrosoftNOW http://t.co/YklY9Oq7 by @ivanildogalvao
How Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V compares against VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise PlusmicrosoftNOW http://t.co/YklY9Oq7 by @ivanildogalvao
Problem with Microsoft is that they dig their hands in everything which ends up not having a properly completed product. In virtualization, VMware is far superior than Microsoft. Recently i was having to restore some backups from an Exchange 2003 env to an Exchange 2010. Its quite impossible to do this because of the product architectures. This is just one of the few examples. Honestly VMware is the market leader in virtualization and perhaps its better Microsoft sticks to what it is always does..Windows.
You were trying to restore an Exchange 2003 backup into Exchange 2010?! Seriously?
And because of that Microsoft shouldn’t make hypervisors?
Interesting. 🙂
Also a comparison
http://up2v.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/full-overview-vsphere5-versus-hyper-v3-0.jpg
Thanks for sharing. Although the comparison you posted is positive for Hyper-V for the most part, it is from March and is outdated, probably based on Beta. There are a lot of inaccuracies in the comparison you posted – (example: distributed virtualized switch, and network partners – in addition to Cisco we have 5nine, Broadcom, inMon and NEC and more soon)
Comparison posted here is the latest based on the latest Release Candidate. Please have a look and try to download the RC for a firsthand evaluation.
Fasten your seatbelts for RTM! 🙂
Pingback: June 2012 Gartner Quadrant on Server Virtualization
http://t.co/ZzfEr0gj Windows Server 2012 should be more powerful solution for V-T than VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus!
http://t.co/ZzfEr0gj Windows Server 2012 should be more powerful solution for V-T than VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus!
http://t.co/FLje4aav Windows Server 2012 should be more powerful solution for V-T than VMware vSphere 5.0 Enterprise Plus!
At lower cost!
Pingback: Microsoft Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V vs VMware – Part 1 « 1cloudroad.com - An online community discussing the advantages of leveraging Cloud Computing
Correction…
VSphere/ESX has supported supported “Trunk Mode to Virtual Machines” with their built-in virtual switches for years. You set the VM Guest’s VLAN to 4095 (see Vmware knowledge base article KB 1004252 for details).
I thought I should set the record straight.
Thanks for sharing, Toby. What we’re referring to here is slightly different.
With the Hyper-V Extensible Switch trunk mode, traffic from multiple VLANs can now be directed to a single network adapter in a virtual machine that could previously receive traffic from only one VLAN. As a result, traffic from different VLANs is consolidated, and a virtual machine can listen in on multiple VLANs. This feature can help the IT Admin shape network traffic and enforce multitenant security in the data center. Unfortunately, this feature isn’t available in vSphere Hypervisor or in vSphere 5.1 today, with VLAN Tagging taking place at the Port Group level, with each individual virtual network adaptor supporting a single VLAN ID.
Hope this clarifies.