Many Windows applications and drivers still are not bit compatible. This is the future of where Windows is going, but it's not necessary for most users, especially under virtualization. That said, we wanted to give you a look at what performance looked like for both of these for both IO and virtual machine performance. As you can see, while there's some difference, you have to judge if it's enough to be worthwhile.
For most, bit XP is likely adequate. In the end, your decision as to which product you should take into account what's most important to you: speed, footprint, graphics capabilities, features, user interface, OS you want to run, and more all come into play.
While the Windows Vista "penalty" that we saw in prior tests is now mostly gone presumably because both Windows 7 made improvements as well as both of these virtualization products , we would advise that you stick with Windows XP given that it runs slightly better overall not to mention how much less annoying it is. When it comes to whether you should use multiple processors or bit virtual machines that depends on your use. If you have a real need for either, and can articulate a reason for it, than use them.
They do work well. That said, if you don't have a specific need, then don't bother, it's not worth it; just stick with bit Windows XP or Windows 7 on a single virtual processor. Many people have the feeling of "more is better," but when it comes to RAM in the virtual machine, that is not necessarily the case. More RAM means longer virtual machine launch times, suspends and resumes.
Use more than that only if you really know you need it. And, the difference is even more apparent when looking at graphics. If gaming, graphics, and 3D are your thing, you have no choice. Parallels Desktop 5 has so much better graphics support, and is so much faster in most of the comparisons, there's simply no contest.
One thing is clear: virtualization for the Mac works well. Really well—even for casual gamers. Even with that, given the track record, I expect we'll see it keep getting better and better. Neil has been in the Mac industry since , has developed software, written documentation, and been heading up the magazine since When Neil does a benchmark article, he likes to test the features that people will use in real-life scenario and then write about that experience from the user point of view.
Drop him a line at publisher mactech. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group. Create a free Team What is Teams? Learn more. Ask Question. Asked 10 years, 11 months ago. Active 5 years, 6 months ago. Viewed 10k times. Improve this question. Hennes Armen Armen 1 1 gold badge 1 1 silver badge 5 5 bronze badges.
Add a comment. Active Oldest Votes. Improve this answer. Paul Paul 4, 26 26 silver badges 40 40 bronze badges. I've allocated 4 cores out of 8 virtual cores and 4gb of ram to the VM, and it performs very very well. I started out using a dedicated hard drive partition, but now use a VMWare virtual partition.
I feel like the whole machine performs better with the virtual partition. Good stuff! Thank you for letting others know what you're running and how that is working out for you.
This is a FAST laptop; so perhaps i am configured suboptimally, but i can't really feel it given the horse power here. Sid - agreed, good catch.
My mistake was to add "for the Virtual Machine," whereas it should say "for the host computer. I'll edit to ensure that reflects correctly. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google. Sign up using Facebook. Sign up using Email and Password. Post as a guest Name.
0コメント