@t.lamprecht Your initial response here seemed somewhat dismissive and focused on the old hardware that was in use, understandable at first given the claimed impact, but this has been demonstrated on the latest Intel desktop-class processors as well now and by a number of different users.
Could you please review the information that’s been gathered here since the initial post and provide an updated recommendation for users? Right now the available presets leave us with a choice between working nested virtualization (“host”) and useable performance (“x86_64-v*”), with the next available option seeming to be each user going through the process of creating a custom CPU type that is a close match for “host” while working around this issue.
I suspect that you and the Proxmox team would prefer to support a simpler best practice than any user with a Windows guest needing to fiddle with custom CPU types.
Could you please review the information that’s been gathered here since the initial post and provide an updated recommendation for users? Right now the available presets leave us with a choice between working nested virtualization (“host”) and useable performance (“x86_64-v*”), with the next available option seeming to be each user going through the process of creating a custom CPU type that is a close match for “host” while working around this issue.
I suspect that you and the Proxmox team would prefer to support a simpler best practice than any user with a Windows guest needing to fiddle with custom CPU types.
Last edited: