This is just an overview; I am including several links with more detail on Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 networking. You can take this as far as you like; it is a very deep rabbit hole.
For simplicity I am going to compare Windows XP and Windows Vista. Please remember that Windows Server 2008 contains the updated networking stack that was introduced in Windows Vista so the comparison is still valid.
We have had a few support calls in Networking Support lately where people are comparing network performance between operating systems and they want to know two things:
Actually, the second question is usually asked more along the line of "why is my Windows XP computer broken and what can I do to "fix" it?" but I think you get the point.
Let me start by saying that there is nothing "wrong" with Windows XP. It is not "broken" and does not need to be "fixed".
To answer question 2 first, you will never get Windows XP to perform exactly like Windows Vista from a networking perspective; the network stack is very different between the two. There are some changes that can be made to Windows XP that may affect performance. Notice that I said "changes". This is because in some of these changes there are potential tradeoffs to resources on the local system that could negatively impact overall system performance and could change the behavior of TCP in a way that may actually decrease performance on the network. In some instances making these changes on a large scale to several clients could even negatively impact the overall performance of your entire network.
I recently had a call from a customer who was seeing up to a 7 times performance improvement when transferring files between two systems running Windows Vista, compared to transferring the same files between two Windows XP systems. I found this fairly impressive since in the testing and studies I have read about the expected improvement was generally about 3.5 times. So I agreed to investigate to ensure that there was in fact not a problem with Windows XP. After reviewing much data and testing some changes on the Windows XP system we concluded that he was in fact seeing that much better performance across the wire for his Windows Vista systems.
To answer question one, what changed that could explain such a difference in performance? Well, a lot. Starting with Windows Vista we have a new network stack. The Cable Guy, aka Joe Davies (you may have noticed his name on the cover of some of the MS Press books), has written some good overviews of the new network stack, you can find them at the following links.
Next Generation TCP/IP Stack in Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878108.aspx Performance Enhancements in the Next Generation TCP/IP Stack http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878127.aspx
Some of the really cool stuff that has been added to the new network stack is:
I hope everyone reading this can appreciate how huge this is. More aggressive send and receive and more intelligent congestion avoidance! If you’re a network admin and you didn't already know about this and your still in your chair, check your pulse, you should be dancing about and people should be looking at you like you have lost your mind. This is part of the "magic" that will allow for more throughput while also avoiding congestion so fewer retransmitted packets. Yay!
But then you have to sit down and realize that these are changes to the very core of the networking stack and these changes which involve large amounts of code changes can never be made to Windows XP, the new stack is just too different.
So besides the network stack there is another improvement. This is more at an application layer but very important for things like file copies.
Let me point out again that the better performance we saw was doing a file copy between Windows Vista or Windows Server 2008 connecting to another Windows Vista or Windows 2008 system. One reason this is significant is something called SMB2. SMB2 is only available starting with Windows Vista so even if you are on a Windows Vista client, if you connect to a Windows XP or Windows Server 2003 system you will not be able to take advantage of the improvements made in SMB2.
A good quick overview of SMB2 is actually on the Performance Team blog. http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2008/05/30/two-minute-drill-overview-of-smb-2-0.aspx
Some of the changes made in SMB2 include;
So this also translates to a much improved user experience for anything using SMB 2, such as file copies.
As I mentioned this was just an overview but I wanted to make sure everyone understands why they may be seeing some difference in the performance of legacy systems and Windows Vista and Windows server 2008 and also help explain why these changes won't be back ported to the legacy systems.
For a comparison of Windows XP and Windows Vista networking performance, see the results of the the analysis done by The Tolly Group. This can be downloaded from the following link. http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=04cad8b9-9f9f-453a-893a-458d22dbb3c5&DisplayLang=en Mark Russinovich's blog "Inside Vista SP1 File Copy Improvements." http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/archive/2008/02/04/2826167.aspx Next Generation TCP/IP Stack in Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878108.aspx Performance Enhancements in the Next Generation TCP/IP Stack http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878127.aspx SMB2 Two Minute Drill on the Performance Team blog. http://blogs.technet.com/askperf/archive/2008/05/30/two-minute-drill-overview-of-smb-2-0.aspx
- Clark Satter