this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Homelab

371 readers
3 users here now

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] UltimateBachson@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, testing iperf from those VMs to another LAN machine machine unsurprisingly never exceeds 1Gbps (my other LAN machine doesn't support 2.5), but VMWare is still slower. Maybe it's due to Workstation using the 13700k e-cores, as someone else commented.

The thing is since my Win11 PC is hosting those 2 VMs I'd expect VM-HOST/HOST-VM network transfers to be faster, even using NAT instead of bridged, yes, it does improve the transfer speeds. but VMWare is still behind Vbox, even with vmxnet3 instead of e1000.

Anyway, thanks for the reply, it might as well come down to being a "Windows thing", I never had these inconsistencies on a proxmox host, for example.

[–] cbugk@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok a bit of trivia out of my chest first [source][1]:

  • Para-virtualization is guest being aware to call high level command to hypervisor, rather than calling hardware commands.
  • Hardware assisted virtualization: Silicon having instructions to fasten virtualization.

I thought those two were inseperable for some time, turns out they were not.

This seems irrelevant, but VMXNET3 could be paravirtualized but not hardware assisted by virtue (emulated E1000)

While [PVRDMA][2] (allowing shared memory between VMs which have PVRDMA) does similar to what Ilinux bridges does by defauit (IPTABLES forwarding without emulation). Hardware assisted para-virtualization by virtue :D

This has the potential to run above 1Gbit, could you try?

1 2

[–] baithammer@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Linux bridges use ebtables, not iptables as it operates at layer 2 and not layer 3.

[–] cbugk@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago