Essential Guide

Demystifying desktop virtualization technology

A comprehensive collection of articles, videos and more, hand-picked by our editors

Comparing remote display protocols: RemoteFX vs. HDX vs. PCoIP

Are you puzzled by protocols? This comparison reviews top remote display protocols from major vendors so you'll know what each has to offer.

When it comes to virtual desktop infrastructure, administrators have a lot of choices. You may have wondered about the differences between VDI software options, remote display protocols or all the licenses out there. In this series, we tackle some of the biggest head-scratchers facing VDI admins to help you get things straight.

In VDI environments, the remote display protocol has a big responsibility: to transmit data from a data-center-hosted desktop to the endpoint.

Popular remote display protocols offer high-resolution sessions, multimedia stream remoting, multi-monitor support, dynamic object compression, USB redirection, drive mapping and more. Microsoft's Remote Desktop Protocol (RDP), VMware's PC-over-IP (PCoIP) and Citrix's HDX are the most commonly used, but there are other protocols from companies such as Ericom and Hewlett-Packard.

Each remote display protocol works differently depending on the network and which applications are being delivered, so you need to know how the major protocols diverge. Let's get this straight.

What's under the hood of a remote display protocol?

RemoteFX, HDX and PCoIP are Layer 7 protocols that are based on two Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) stack Layer 4 protocols: the User Datagram Protocol (UDP) and Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). TCP divides data into packets and reassembles them at the endpoint, while UDP does not sequence the packets.

TCP is more reliable because it makes sure that a connection is maintained until all the data is delivered. Plus, if an error occurs, TCP sends the affected data again. UDP does not confirm that all packets are received at the endpoint, but that means it's faster for delivering media-heavy messages such as video.

Remote display protocols have their limitations, especially when it comes to delivering graphics-intensive applications. Great performance requires a lot of bandwidth, which can clog the network. Plus, if you want low CPU use, your protocol will hog bandwidth and weaken end user performance. As desktop virtualization expert Brian Madden says, you can have "low bandwidth, good experience, low CPU … pick any two."

Microsoft RDP/RemoteFX

RemoteFX, an enhancement to Microsoft's Remote Desktop Protocol, was released with Windows Server 2008 R2 to boost high-definition graphics rendering. RemoteFX works on Hyper-V only, although Citrix Systems Inc. does support the protocol for use in XenDesktop environments. Windows Server 2012 RemoteFX allows Remote Desktop Services to use UDP when necessary, while previous versions could only use TCP.

RemoteFX and Windows Server 2012
RDP was initially for LAN-only delivery, but the latest version adds WAN optimization. RemoteFX in Windows Server 2012 also comes with multitouch support and Adaptive Graphics, a feature that does visual element-rendering on the host rather than the client.

More on remote desktop protocols

Are you using RemoteFX?

Video: Comparing the major remote display protocols

RDP and RemoteFX in Windows 8

Keep in mind that you'll have to upgrade to Windows 8 to get some of these enhancements. However, Microsoft also added RDP 8.0 support for client access devices running Windows 7 SP1 and Windows Server 2008 R2 (although not all new RemoteFX capabilities are included).

Microsoft RemoteFX vs. Citrix HDX
The differences between RemoteFX and HDX were more apparent before some of the changes to RemoteFX in Windows Server 2012. But HDX is still better known for performance over the WAN. Plus, Citrix historically provides more clients for HDX. While Microsoft provides RDP clients for Windows and Mac, Citrix provides HDX clients for Windows, Mac, Linux, Blackberry, iOS, Android, Sun and more.

Citrix HDX

Citrix's remote display protocol was originally called ICA, but the company evolved the offering into the HDX suite in 2009 with the release of XenDesktop 3.0. HDX refers to all the technologies Citrix offers that deliver the end-user experience, including multimedia redirection, browser acceleration, bandwidth control and other components. It's based on the TCP but can use UDP in certain situations.

Citrix also offers HDX 3D Pro for high-end graphics application delivery.

Improved WAN acceleration in XenDesktop 5.5
WAN connections tend to have high latency and low bandwidth, making it difficult for remote display protocols to deliver apps promptly. XenDesktop 5.5 added built-in WAN acceleration technology that accelerates HDX traffic through packet compression and decompression.

HDX MediaStream and RichGraphics step it up
XenDesktop 5.5 updated HDX MediaStream with better Flash redirection and a new end-to-end flow control and frame-dropping capability. Version 5.6 improved mobile application access with XenApp and boosted protocol support in Citrix Receiver.

VMware PCoIP

VMware's remote display protocol PCoIP, developed by Teradici Corp., works with the vendor's View desktop virtualization product. While RemoteFX requires remote hosts to use a graphic processing unit for bitmap encoding, PCoIP uses the regular server CPU. PCoIP differs from the other protocols in that it's based mainly on the UDP.

PCoIP improvements in VMware View 5
WAN performance tends to be better with Citrix HDX than with VMware's remote display protocol. Still, VMware View 5 improved PCoIP by increasing network user density and reducing bandwidth consumption over the LAN and WAN. It also added more cache control settings.

PCoIP support for Microsoft RDS
PCoIP has traditionally been confined to VMware View VDI, but Teradici added support for PCoIP in Remote Desktop Services environments. That could allow View shops to eliminate XenApp for remote desktop delivery. Still, Teradici's Arch -- its session-hosted remote desktop offering -- comes with some limitations, one being that it doesn't run on Windows Server 2012.

This was last published in February 2013

PRO+

Content

Find more PRO+ content and other member only offers, here.

Join the conversation

15 comments

Send me notifications when other members comment.

By submitting you agree to receive email from TechTarget and its partners. If you reside outside of the United States, you consent to having your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States. Privacy

Please create a username to comment.

What's the most important feature of a remote display protocol?
Cancel
User experience
Cancel
Without Wan optimization RDP is useless
Cancel
the ability to mimic both the end point for the user (function, OS specifics) as well as access to apps needed to be provisioned
Cancel
WAN perfomance is critical.
Cancel
usability of cad/acm over remote desktop
Cancel
Graphics intensive games over LAN or the tech might as well not exist.
Cancel
Multimedia, Bandwidth, USB mapping, Mic Support. All are important!
Cancel
WAN performance is most important
Cancel
If Other options are constant to compare between the solutions then Ability to deliver is the main factor to chose the best.
Cancel
Useful article. It would be helpful to see ALP, AIP and low-bandwidth X added, in a future version.
Cancel
trying to find the best protocol for wan, doing remote web browser sessions
Cancel
Hi, very good article. One quick question: does RemoteFX work with Hyper-V? does that mean that if Windows Server 2012 is installed has native OS, any remote desktop session won´t use RemoteFX?
Cancel
I must say nothing impresses me about PCOIP and their fat expensive protocol. It doesn't handle MMR on their over expensive thin clients and has no touch capability.. They rely instead on slick marketing what was VMWare and AWS thinking? True user density also relies on there offload card as the server has to work sooo hard with 100% server render. VMWare should drop PCOIP and run with framehawk for some serious WAN and user consolidation!
Cancel
I have been using Linux/KVM/Spice for VDI needs now for nearly two years. I really like SPICE. It is very fast and provides an extemely productive VDI experience. TLS security is available. USB forwarding, Auto resizing, Accelerated video, audio. It connects directly to hypervisor to provide access to the VM guest desktop, so needs no connection agent running in the VM guest. It can easily be added to a CentOS virtualization stack. Clients available for Windows and Linux. OSx client still needs a little work. There is also an embedded client for Firefox. Free to use and scale as you wish. ...Why use anything else?
Cancel

-ADS BY GOOGLE

SearchEnterpriseDesktop

SearchServerVirtualization

SearchCloudComputing

SearchConsumerization

SearchVMware

Close