Different Network Adapter Settings

[CarlosinFL]

I assumed this would be a FAQ but I checked and searching the forum didn't tell me anything so I apologize if this has been previously asked before. I would like to know what the difference is and how do I know which network adapter setting to select when configuring my guest OS. I show:

Intel PRO/1000 MT Desktop
Intel PRO/1000 T Server
Intel PRO/1000 MT Server

This is going to be a virtual email server running on Debian Linux and would need to make sure that the virtual network adapter running in 'bridged' mode is not being choked. Can anyone explain to me the differences between the three adapters above and what I should select or how I make a proper decision?

[Sasquatch]

There is no difference other than the identification of the adapter. This only matters when you need drivers. Linux already has all of these adapter drivers build in the kernel. It only matters when you are going to use Windows with them. E.g. XP only has the driver for the 1000T Server build in, not the MT Desktop. Other versions, like 2003, Vista and up might have other adapter drivers build in.

So, other than the name, there is no difference.

[CarlosinFL]

I found a big difference in changing the driver stack on a Linux host when creating a 1 GB file:

Code: Select all

real	0m22.364s
user	0m0.000s
sys	0m1.150s

-vs-

Code: Select all

real	0m35.681s
user	0m0.000s
sys	0m0.660s

[AndersKOlsson]

Hi CarlosinFL,

Can you give a bit more detail on your findings? Which adapter gave which result? When you say "creating a 1GB file", do you mean doing an SCP copy or something that goes over the network? Can you replicate the results when doing a statistically relevant amount of repetitions?

BR,

Anders

[mpack]

It sounds unlikely to me. Regardless of what NIC hardware is simulated in the guest, the actual work is done by the same code in VBox, and ultimately passed to the same host NIC drivers. The only possible difference between guest adapters would be the complexity of the virtualized interface - and I doubt complexity between virtual NICs varies significantly.