MSDN says:
swapshould be used in preference toiter_swap, which was included in the C++ Standard for backward compatibility
This seems to be one of those scenarios in which the internet produces a host of conflicting information.
cplusplus.com says that iter_swap is identical to swap and, by that logic, MSDN would be correct in saying that one ought to simply stick to swap.
cppreference.com tells us that calling swap is merely a possible implementation for iter_swap, opening the door for possible optimisations in iter_swap for certain specialisations, as long as the function's constant complexity guarantee is upheld.
The standard, under [C++11: 25.3.3/5], says only that iter_swap(a,b) has the result swap(*a,*b) (and requires that "a and b shall be dereferenceable", and that "*a shall be swappable with *b") which would at first glance correlate with MSDN's interpretation.
However, I believe Microsoft have neglected to consider the as-if rule, which should allow an implementation to make iter_swap faster than swap in certain cases (e.g. elements of a linked list).
I would therefore trust that the comp.std.c++ quote is the more technically accurate of the two.
That being said, there is a fairly strict limit on the optimisation that may be performed. Consider, for example, an implementation of iter_swap over linked list elements that simply re-links nodes rather than physically swapping the element values — this is not a valid implementation, because the requirement that iter_swap's observable behaviour match swap's is violated.
I would therefore suggest that in practice there can be little if any benefit to preferring iter_swap over swap, and I'd recommend sticking to the latter for simplicity and consistency. C++11 move semantics ought to make swap a cinch in many cases anyway.