The server is running much slower than the working machine

Question

.NET

In our project, we use memcached (implementation from Couchbase) and the official .NET client for it.
We recently bought new servers for production, and this very client is catastrophically slow on them.
I wrote a simple load program to compare client performance on different machines.
Just getting the key in an infinite loop:

        _client = new CouchbaseClient();

        _client.Store(StoreMode.Set, _key, _value);
        while (true) {
            _client.Get(_key);
        }

On my work machine, this code gives a load of 35k requests per second to the local memcached server.
On the new server, he only gives 4k per second. That is 9 times slower!

The difference is simply huge, and we have already racked our brains trying to understand the reasons.
Here are the configurations of the above machines:

Work machine:

Windows 7 Professional x64
Core i7-2600 3.4GHz
8Gb RAM

Server:

Windows 2008 R2 Enterprise x64
2x Xeon E5645 2.4GHz
48Gb RAM

Server and client versions are the same - latest.

Help, please, to understand the reason for such a difference in performance.

Answer 1

As a result, the matter turned out to be in the gland. The hoster changed the motherboard and processors - the problem disappeared.

Answer 2

Perfmon (Windows Performance Monitor) and see what happens, no one will tell you more specifically

Answer 3

A friend of mine had a similar performance problem on a project (locally the project worked faster than on a heaped server). The solution turned out to be on the Windows server to change the settings for energy consumption from medium to the most productive.

Answer 4

Perhaps it will help:
We had such an experience - the ARJ archiver was launched on the server in the background. The service worked on a virtual machine (Windows 2003) for about 4 years. We decided to increase the capacity of the servers - we introduced a new physical host and migrated this machine to it. The service began to slow down. It turned out that ARJ is slow. After consultations, we were advised to update the ARJ version - they said that it might be a matter of different series of processors on physical hosts. The update helped.