Is Citrix XenServer cheaper than VMware ESX Server?
February 26th, 2008 | 
Author: A Few Thoughts on Xen posted on blog.scottlowe.org got me thinking about the pricing differences between Citrix XenServer and VMware ESX Server. It is a general assumption that Xen Server is more affordable than ESX. I decided to figure out exactly what the products cost and how they compare to each other. I am not factoring in the cost of Sales and Support in this post because I would want that regardless of which vendor I choose.
I found Citrix XenServer list pricing from a Citrix presentation slide deck that was presented to me via a webinar several weeks ago. Click on the image to see a larger version.
My first thoughts looking at the Citrix pricing was about the free version, Xen Express, and the free VMware Server. Xen Express has a limit of 4 running VMs and 4 GB of physical RAM. Does that mean that the $999 Xen Server edition is really the equivalent in features to the free VMware Server product? VMware Server is a hosted (installed on top of Windows or Linux) platform but Xen Server installs it’s own OS on the server bare metal. If I were looking to implement a free virtualization solution with more than 4 VMs I’d have to use VMware Server.
My real intent is to focus on the Citrix Xen Enterprise product at list price $2999. That is the edition that is enterprise ready for production server loads and is the competitive product on the market.
So , what do I get for $3000 from VMware? Here are the VMware Infrastructure offerings from http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/buy.html.
|
|
ESX Server 3i2 |
VMware |
VMware |
VMware |
|
|
Single Server Partitioning |
(Previously Starter)Virtualization for Small Business or Branch office |
High Availability Infrastructure Virtualization Suite for Any Workload |
Enterprise-class Infrastructure Virtualization Suite for the |
|
|
Available later this year. |
|||
|
List Price |
$495 |
$9953 |
$29953 |
$57503 |
|
ESX Server 3 or
|
|
|
|
|
|
VirtualCenter Agent |
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Backup1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update Manager1 |
|
|
|
|
|
VMware HA1 |
|
|
|
|
|
VMotion1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Storage VMotion1 |
|
|
|
|
|
VMware DRS1 |
|
|
|
|
|
VirtualCenter Server |
|
|||
1 These products require VirtualCenter Server (previously VirtualCenter Management Server).
2 ESX Server 3i cannot be managed with VirtualCenter Server when purchased as a stand-alone product. Managing ESX Server 3i with VirtualCenter Server requires purchase of VMware Infrastructure 3 Foundation, Standard, or
3 Support and Subscription (SnS) is required to be purchased with these editions.
There are a couple of VMware editions available for $3000 or less – VMware Infrastructure Foundation for $995 and VMware Infrastructure Standard for $2995. Comparing the features of the virtualization hosts I would have to lean towards Citrix XenServer because VMware does not include Virtual Center in these editions while all Citrix Xen editions include XenCenter. XenMotion, or live migration of VMs between hosts, is also included in all Citrix Xen editions. I do not get VMotion licences in the Foundation or Standard versions of VMware ESX.
However, VMware has some compelling SMB bundles that make me think twice. VMware’s Infrastructure Acceleration Kits for SMB present an option to purchase Virtual Center and three ESX Foundation servers for $2995.
For the same $3000 I am able to scale to three virtualization hosts and manage those hosts with Virtual Center. Although I still do not have licenses for VMotion, I am now getting management, monitoring, and administration features. VMware also includes Consolidated Backup and Update Manager in the SMB kit. I checked with my local VMware Sales Engineer to see if I could purchase add-on licenses to the Foundation SMB package for just VMotion, but found out it would cost several thousand dollars more. So the difference on paper between the two companies is the live VM migration feature and it’s cost versus Update Manager and VCB.
I want to point out that this is the pricing TODAY. Citrix XenServer 4.1 is in beta and has numerous enhancements. Virtually speaking: Citrix lays a foundation is an article from serverwatch.com explains:
“Citrix XenServer 4.1 is currently available as a public beta from the Citrix Web site. It’s expected to be generally available in March. Citrix XenServer Platinum Edition is slated for a second-quarter release. Pricing will start at $900 for the Standard edition, $3,000 for Enterprise Edition and $5,000 for Platinum Edition (assuming 2 CPU socket systems in all cases).”
In less then 2 weeks this cost analysis will have to be re-thought.
Today, after putting on my “vendor neutral hat”, I have to admit it’s a tough choice when just looking at the cost of purchasing licenses. I’ll admit it’s hard to keep that same hat on past this point. To be fair I haven’t implemented or supported Citrix XenServer so I will hold my opinions until a time in the future when I have worked with both products. Besides, you do not have to look too hard to find smarter engineers then me having the “technical discussions” that ultimately determine the best choice for my $3000.
Related Posts
Posted in XenServer, esx, esx, feature comparison, vmetc.com | 
Tags: backup, blog.scottlowe.org, citrix, consolidated backup, esx, highavailability, licensing, linux, SAN, vcb, virtualcenter, vmware, windows, Xen, XenServer
Don’t forget that VMware allows you to overcommit memory through page sharing and balloon memory, so you can achieve higher consolidation ratios. That changes the math considerably and VMware can actually be cheaper.
Citrix released 4.1 with a slightly different pricing model–for the $3,000 price, you get Enterprise Edition and support for up to 4 CPU sockets (VMware only gives you a license for 2 CPU socksts). That has a huge effect on the cost per VM. XenServer also includes, as you mentioned, the XenMotion functionality and XenCenter management applications.
It is difficult to compare the two products: They’re both great.
The ESX has been out there longer and is very feature rich.It has the advantage that you can run it old servers (even a PIII although it wouldn’t be practical). The down side is the price, you need to buy Virtual Center if you want to centrally manage a group of ESX’s. ESX uses binary virtualization which means that any communication between a VM and the system hardware needs to be translated via the VMKernel (time consuming). Yes, ESX can overcommit memory, but is this a good thing? Perhaps in some cases, but in other cases it could lower performance drastically.
XEN is cheaper but still has a lot of nice features. It uses Paravirtualization which means that the VM’s are allowed to talk directly with the system hardware except in case of instructions that could conflict with other VM’s. Only at that point the VMKernel takes over. This means a performance increase compared to the ESX.
XEN only runs on systems with VT-equipped CPU (if you want to run Windows VM’s) but supports SATA (ESX doesn’t).
XEN Server 5.0 has added many new features.
Again; both products are great but it doesn’t end with the product. How is the customer care/support:I have had very bad experience with VMWare’s mentality towards their customers.
I was a couple of days too late in paying the support renewal because VMWare,themselves, had forgotten to send a reminder that it was coming up for renewal. When I conacted them, their answer was that it was too late and if I wanted to get support, I’d just have to buy a new ESX license. NICE!!
Similarly a colleague in the UK, had fogotten to renew the Citrix Subscription Advantage. He was six month over due. I called our Citrix dealer and after an hour he came back to me and said that we only needed to pay a small reinstatement fee to reactivate the support contract. Major difference in customer care don’t you aree ?
Marc,
ESX/ESXi supports a limited list of SATA/SAS controllers as of ver 3.5. Check out page 25 of http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vi35_io_guide.pdf
As far as paravirtualization, if I am not mistaken ESX 3.5 also supports this feature. But let’s not forget that paravirtualization requires a modified kernel of the guest VM. This is more feasible for Linux VMs where the kernel can be flexible, but for Windows servers it’s not an option. If you are talking about hosting production services and applications you can’t ignore the dominance of MS in the Enterprise and paravirtualization becomes a neutral option. Besides, modern hardware assisted virtualization like Intel-VT and AMD-V is the best option anyways.
The versions and the limitations of both the VMware and Xen hypervisors have also changed since I first wrote this post.
I can’t speak to your bad support experience from VMware, but I can tell you personally I do not know of any clients, nor have I myself experienced what you describe. Let’s be honest. It really boils down to your relationship with your sales rep and the VMware partner.
Marc,
I forgot to mention that to manage multiple Xen 5.0 servers you have to purchase Xen Standard edition for each host. If you want the live migration feature you have to purchase Xen Enterprise Edition on each host.
If you want dynamic provisioning in Xen you need Platinum edition. It really makes the purchase of VirtualCenter, or the various editions of VI Enterprise, more reasonable when you wave away the Citrix Marketing smoke.
http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/subfeature.asp?contentID=1680964
You’re of course right about Paravirtualization, my mistake for using that term . In fact I meant Hardware assisted Virtualization.
Even though VC includes provisioning,the fact remains any version of ESX is about double the price of a comparable XEN version. + VC adds another 6000€.
If you buy 2 ESX 3.5 Enterprise licenses and a VC 2.5 you pay +/- 15000€, whereas you pay about 7000€ for 2 XEN Platinum licenses with XEN-Center for free.
VC is of course more powerful than XEN Center, but still we’re talking about major price difference here. The more ESX’s you buy, the less the the VC license will weigh through, but the ESX licenses remain more expensive. I would say that it all boils down to what you need.
If you need Storage motion, scheduled/automatic resource management or have pre-VT-CPU systems , ESX is the only way to go, but if are satisfied with manual Motion (for now), HA and provisioning, XEN Platinum is an equally good choice as an ESX system.
Marc,
Purchasing ESX components individually does add up, but the point of this post is that the VMware Standard and SMB bundles get you down to XEN pricing with a few more features. Check the tables above again – 2 ESX hosts and VC for under $7k.
If you want full VI3 Enterprise in all it’s glory then yes, it’s going to cost $15k.
Marc,
Once again I decided to add more:
The $15k for the VI3 Enterprise SMB bundle is for 3 ESX hosts and VC. That’s priced for 3 hosts with 2 physical CPU sockets each, so you can still use dual or quad core cpus in this bundle.
Xenserver is now free
Xenrocks,
Even though XenServer is free I'm not sure the HA feature is included
in the no cost version, but to your point, both free ESXi and free
XenServer change the costs of this post's scenarios.
It is. XenMotion and HA is included in the free version. http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/feat...
Free ESXi is essentially “just” the Hypervisor. XenServer is the full product except StorageLink and Dynamic Provisioning. Storagelink, although excellent if you have a NetApp or Equallogic SAN/filer isn't really neccessary. iSCSI, Fibre Channel, and NFS are all still supported on the free XenServer.
pedershk
I checked your link and the current table of free XenServer features does not include HA. In fact, if you go to the Citrix Essentials page at http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/feat... you'll see the high availability features there. You have to pay for Citrix Essentials. BTW, Citrix includes dynamic load balancing (VMware's DRS equal) in with their HA features too.
Anyway , Citrix Xen is still cheaper and with a lot more features than ESXi. In addition, you have to remember that Vmware VC requires an additional Windows Server (HW or VM with Licenses cost) while Citrix Xen management is distributed in all the nodes (pretty cool..right).
Interesting comments. I have been trying to compare the free Xen offering from Citrix and the latest SMB bundle that actually includes the VMware management server license as well. With smaller staff, support is a big concern for me. Incident based support from Citrix can become expensive compared to annual subscription based support from VMware! As much as I am convinced that Xen may be a better choice, the 'support' factor makes me lean towards VMware. I welcome any feedback. Thanks.
Be careful with XENSERVER i use it! Very stable, but no supported consolidated backup solution available, snapshot functionality is useless and citrix recently released updates with terrible bugs. I would definitely say tco is cheaper though!
Be careful with XENSERVER i use it! Very stable, but no supported consolidated backup solution available, snapshot functionality is useless and citrix recently released updates with terrible bugs. I would definitely say tco is cheaper though!