The CPU performance of your VMs?

Lanz

Lanz

Lanz

Soldato
Joined
26 Nov 2002
Posts
6,852
Location
Romford
Hi,

I've used Hyper Pi as a basic CPU test for years now, just to see how much raw CPU performance increase I get with each new esxi cluster compared to the previous gen.

At the moment, our newest clusters are using E5-2680 v3 @ 2.5ghz
The test takes 12 seconds to complete (1M, Normal, 1 Processor)
This is pretty much identical to the last gen from 4 years ago (original E5-2680 @ 2.7Ghz)

We still have a really old cluster that runs AMD 6136, and they are dreadful and it takes 33 seconds to complete.

I'd be interested to see some more results from others?
 
hyperpi.png


I7 5960X running 12 VM's
 
My 6136's take 29.344s, I got two quad cpu Dell R815's here.
Mine are used as hyper-v hosts and have plenty of RAM and IO so they are still really useful for dev boxes.
 
11.46 on my work desktop.

13.5 on our most heavily used e5-2430v2 & a paltry 29.8 on an ancient AMD 4180

19.4 on a bottom dollar azure vm, single cpu e5-2673v3.
 
Azure is interesting, what sort of price difference is there from that 20 sec VM to a 12 sec one you think?

I would say anything under 20 is fine for 90% of workloads.
 
Last edited:
10.63 on my home VM, Hyper-V on a i7 4770T. Remember to set HV hosts and VMs as high performance under power settings (on the host is a must, windows often leaves the cpu in a low state).
 
Ricimer said:
10.63 on my home VM, Hyper-V on a i7 4770T. Remember to set HV hosts and VMs as high performance under power settings (on the host is a must, windows often leaves the cpu in a low state).
Click to expand...

This, check the host is not in stupid power saving mode or balanced. VM's will sit at low cpu usage when doing heavy tasks.
 
Lanz said:
Azure is interesting, what sort of price difference is there from that 20 sec VM to a 12 sec one you think?

I would say anything under 20 is fine for 90% of workloads.
Click to expand...

Next time we spin up a decent machine I'll do a test :)

24sec on my home desktop AMD 8320, safe to say that AMD's suck at pi benchmarks.
(the bigger picture is there pretty meaningless with real world cpu utilization anyhow so I dont feel bad)
 
I wouldn't say meaningless, activities that require encryption or compression run really slow on our AMD hosts - Large file backups takes 3 times as long, compared to Xeon when client-side compression is enabled, also our dev's are always complaining the java app performance on AMD. Be good to finally retire them off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom