Which for virtualization?
airbornflght
Houston, TX Icrontian
If I was to pick a processor for virtualizing would the Q6600 or E6850 be a better pick? And would it be better to run windows as the host and linux/unix virtualized or the other way around?
0
Comments
I have no advice for you concerning host vs. virtualized installations.
I'm thinking of getting a Q6600 and hoping of hitting 3.2
As for which way to do it. It depends on what abilities you want to run on your core system. If you have windows as your core OS then you have a fully functioning windows, with all the graphic abilities (ie DX) working. So if you want to be able to play games, then you want windows as your core OS. If you want to be running several virtual machines at once then you want your core OS to be as lean as possible in that case you want linux to be your primary OS since you can run a stripped down version of linux as your core and then give more over to the virtual machines.
So with all that in mind, I would imagine in your state you probably want to run windows as your primary OS and linux as your virtual machine. That way you can dabble in linux and linux in a virtual machine runs pretty good and you don't have to worry about the limited graphic abilities of vmware for linux.
host is debain.
Guests are XP, 2003, debain, ubuntu, and Fedora.
having gobs of ram is also important.
I would post a pic right now but need to hit 5 first.
VMware server scales pretty well across cores. and then it would come down to what apps are running on the guests and how well they scale. sure the biggest bang comes from moving from 1 core to 2. moving from 2 to 4 sometimes is a point of diminishing returns for some people.
I still vote for the q6600, unless the host is also going to be a gaming box in which case clock speed becomes a more important factor. (few games scale *that* well, but they are getting there)... even so if you are willing to OC, hitting 3ghz on a q6600 is not uncommon.
they both have VT support, which helps out a bit