I think this was understood by the original poster, however don't be so quick to discount Binary Translation. If you have an older processor with the early versions of the VT extensions, they're unlikely to get used as they perform worse than Binary Translation on a platform that advanced it well (e.g. VMware). Even on the newest processors, Binary Translation is used to handle some scenarios as the VT extensions can't support them. The biggest gains from VT extensions have been in the context switching arena and those gains are further increased on the vSphere platform. If you keep the number of VMs and vCPUs minimal in proportion to the number of physical CPUs, you shouldn't see too much of a performance impact as the frequency of context switching should minimized (still quite a lot, but normal) as a result. On 1/21/2011 8:32 AM, Patrick "Finn" Robins wrote: > I have to second that. Virtualization on a CPU without the VT > extensions is a big performance hit. > > > -Patrick "Finn" Robins > > -- > Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't > matter and those who matter don't mind. > - Dr. Seuss > > > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > http://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20110121/d4ad2ef3/attachment.htm