Re: Xen vs VMware

["Freddie Cash" <fcash-ml@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, October 22, 2006 9:41 am, Andreas Hauser wrote:
> wa1ter wrote @ Sat, 21 Oct 2006 10:25:31 -0700:
>> Andreas Hauser wrote:
>>> dillon wrote @ Wed, 18 Oct 2006 11:34:02 -0700 (PDT):
>>> Unless you use a current processor (Intel or Amd e.g.) which come
>>> with hardware virtualization...
>>
>> Can you point out which processors have this hardware -- are they
>> the 64-bit models only?  My instincts tell me that the 64-bit
>> hardware could virtualize a 32-bit machine -- but that's a pure
>> guess on my part.
>
> No, it has nothing to do with 32-bit or 64-bit.
> Amd calls it Pacifica and Intel Vanderpool or VT.
> Newer Athlon 64 (AM2), Opteron, Core 2, All Intel from Apple etc.
> have it. AFAIR the non Apple mobile Core don't have it.

The codenames for the hardware virtualisation projects are Pacifica
for AMD and Vanderpool for Intel.  The official release names are
AMD-V and Intel-VT.  From research I've been doing online, it seems
that (again) the AMD implementation is much better, virtualising a lot
more of the CPU and providing better support for virtual I/O.

The Xen wiki has a nice list of CPU model numbers that have AMD-V and
Intel-VT support:
    http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/HVM_Compatible_Processors

----
Freddie Cash, LPIC-2 CCNT CCLP        Helpdesk / Network Support Tech.
School District 73                    (250) 377-HELP [377-4357]
fcash-ml@xxxxxxxxxx