Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

  1. #1
    google01103 NNTP User

    Default VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    I'm a Vmplayer user with one virtual os, WinXP and am wondering if anyone
    has done or seen any benchmarking between these 2 products?

    My experience using my VMplayer WindowsXP .vmx with V-Box (needed a couple
    of tweaks because of the apg driver) is that VMplayer when loaded and just
    sitting in the background uses much (very much) less resources but I don't
    know if that's because WinXP was not originally created in V-Box and before
    I do a complete new install I'd like to know if it would be worth my
    bother.

    some simple numbers using V-box 1.6.2 x64 and VMplayer 2.04
    (my hw 2gb ram on an AMD 64 3800+ x2 under Suse 11.0 64bit)

    time to reload "saved state" XP:
    VMplayer +/- 1.5 minute
    V-box +/- 15 seconds
    cpu%'s when XP is idle:
    VMplayer varies between 6 -> 11%
    V-box in the 60% range (XP is 98% idle)



    thanks,
    --
    Suse 11.0 x64, Kde 3.5.9, Opera 9.x weekly

  2. #2
    Will Honea NNTP User

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    google01103 wrote:

    > some simple numbers using V-box 1.6.2 x64 and VMplayer 2.04
    > (my hw 2gb ram on an AMD 64 3800+ x2 under Suse 11.0 64bit)
    >
    > time to reload "saved state" XP:
    > VMplayer +/- 1.5 minute
    > V-box +/- 15 seconds
    > cpu%'s when XP is idle:
    > VMplayer varies between 6 -> 11%
    > V-box in the 60% range (XP is 98% idle)


    With essentially identical hardware but with 32-bit OS 11.0, V-Box shows NO
    discernable increase in CPU usage when XP is idling. The only noticeable
    change in resource usage is the memory used by th vm. I am using hardware
    virtualization (AMD-V) - that may have some impact.

    --
    Will Honea

  3. #3
    google01103 NNTP User

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    Will Honea wrote:

    > google01103 wrote:
    >
    >> some simple numbers using V-box 1.6.2 x64 and VMplayer 2.04
    >> (my hw 2gb ram on an AMD 64 3800+ x2 under Suse 11.0 64bit)
    >>
    >> time to reload "saved state" XP:
    >> VMplayer +/- 1.5 minute
    >> V-box +/- 15 seconds
    >> cpu%'s when XP is idle:
    >> VMplayer varies between 6 -> 11%
    >> V-box in the 60% range (XP is 98% idle)

    >
    > With essentially identical hardware but with 32-bit OS 11.0, V-Box shows
    > NO
    > discernable increase in CPU usage when XP is idling. The only noticeable
    > change in resource usage is the memory used by th vm. I am using hardware
    > virtualization (AMD-V) - that may have some impact.
    >

    well doing a clean install within V-box instead of using an existing VMware
    image makes an unbelievable performance difference in a positive way.

    Got everything working except for shared folders - any hints? They show
    correctly in the setup dialogs and my Linux folders can be selected with
    the shared folder config gui but nothing shows in Windows Explorer (V-box
    additions seems install as it shows in system tray but not in add/delete
    programs).

    thanks,
    --
    Suse 11.0 x64, Kde 3.5.9, Opera 9.x weekly

  4. #4
    Will Honea NNTP User

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    google01103 wrote:

    > Will Honea wrote:
    >
    >> google01103 wrote:
    >>
    >>> some simple numbers using V-box 1.6.2 x64 and VMplayer 2.04
    >>> (my hw 2gb ram on an AMD 64 3800+ x2 under Suse 11.0 64bit)
    >>>
    >>> time to reload "saved state" XP:
    >>> VMplayer +/- 1.5 minute
    >>> V-box +/- 15 seconds
    >>> cpu%'s when XP is idle:
    >>> VMplayer varies between 6 -> 11%
    >>> V-box in the 60% range (XP is 98% idle)

    >>
    >> With essentially identical hardware but with 32-bit OS 11.0, V-Box shows
    >> NO
    >> discernable increase in CPU usage when XP is idling. The only noticeable
    >> change in resource usage is the memory used by th vm. I am using
    >> hardware virtualization (AMD-V) - that may have some impact.
    >>

    > well doing a clean install within V-box instead of using an existing
    > VMware image makes an unbelievable performance difference in a positive
    > way.
    >
    > Got everything working except for shared folders - any hints? They show
    > correctly in the setup dialogs and my Linux folders can be selected with
    > the shared folder config gui but nothing shows in Windows Explorer (V-box
    > additions seems install as it shows in system tray but not in add/delete
    > programs).


    I built my images with 1.5.6 OSE and they have run quite well since - even
    transitioning to the 1.6.2 binary version was no problem. I DO have to
    re-run the installation with every kernel update but everything seems to
    survive intact.

    I am having a slight issue with the closed source binary after the most
    recent kernel update - I seem to have lost USB access in the VM but that
    may be from running the wrong install package - I really need to clean up
    this disk...

    --
    Will Honea

  5. #5

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    If I remember correctly you you access the virtuallbox shared folders in xp (vm) from My Network Places, they even show up as VirtualBox Shared Folders I think

    You can map them as a network drive if you want them to show up in My Computer/explorer


    I tend to use samba shares rather than vbox shared folders as most of what I might wish to access from a windoze vm is set up as samba shares anyway because of the other machines on my lan

    Also I have a folder named Windows Shares for windows specific files set up as a samba share, this way any vm or windows pc on the network can access the files there without needing to keep adding vbox shared folders to any and every vm anyone uses

    More convenient if you have than one machine on your lan and/or use more than one vm

    Ecky

  6. #6
    google01103 NNTP User

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    Will Honea wrote:

    > google01103 wrote:
    >
    >> Will Honea wrote:
    >>
    >>> google01103 wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> some simple numbers using V-box 1.6.2 x64 and VMplayer 2.04
    >>>> (my hw 2gb ram on an AMD 64 3800+ x2 under Suse 11.0 64bit)
    >>>>
    >>>> time to reload "saved state" XP:
    >>>> VMplayer +/- 1.5 minute
    >>>> V-box +/- 15 seconds
    >>>> cpu%'s when XP is idle:
    >>>> VMplayer varies between 6 -> 11%
    >>>> V-box in the 60% range (XP is 98% idle)
    >>>
    >>> With essentially identical hardware but with 32-bit OS 11.0, V-Box shows
    >>> NO
    >>> discernable increase in CPU usage when XP is idling. The only
    >>> noticeable
    >>> change in resource usage is the memory used by th vm. I am using
    >>> hardware virtualization (AMD-V) - that may have some impact.
    >>>

    >> well doing a clean install within V-box instead of using an existing
    >> VMware image makes an unbelievable performance difference in a positive
    >> way.
    >>
    >> Got everything working except for shared folders - any hints? They show
    >> correctly in the setup dialogs and my Linux folders can be selected with
    >> the shared folder config gui but nothing shows in Windows Explorer (V-box
    >> additions seems install as it shows in system tray but not in add/delete
    >> programs).

    >
    > I built my images with 1.5.6 OSE and they have run quite well since - even
    > transitioning to the 1.6.2 binary version was no problem. I DO have to
    > re-run the installation with every kernel update but everything seems to
    > survive intact.
    >
    > I am having a slight issue with the closed source binary after the most
    > recent kernel update - I seem to have lost USB access in the VM but that
    > may be from running the wrong install package - I really need to clean up
    > this disk...
    >

    check theit website the /etc/fstab entry seems to have changed to
    none /proc/bus/usb usbfs
    auto,busgid=xxxx,busmode=0775,devgid=xxxx,devmode=0664 0 0
    --
    Suse 11.0 x64, Kde 3.5.9, Opera 9.x weekly

  7. #7
    google01103 NNTP User

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    Ecky wrote:

    >
    > If I remember correctly you you access the virtuallbox shared folders in
    > xp (vm) from My Network Places, they even show up as VirtualBox Shared
    > Folders I think
    >
    > You can map them as a network drive if you want them to show up in My
    > Computer/explorer
    >
    >
    > I tend to use samba shares rather than vbox shared folders as most of
    > what I might wish to access from a windoze vm is set up as samba shares
    > anyway because of the other machines on my lan
    >
    > Also I have a folder named Windows Shares for windows specific files
    > set up as a samba share, this way any vm or windows pc on the network
    > can access the files there without needing to keep adding vbox shared
    > folders to any and every vm anyone uses
    >
    > More convenient if you have than one machine on your lan and/or use
    > more than one vm
    >
    > Ecky
    >
    >

    found issue - needed to reinstall guest additions after update to XP
    --
    Suse 11.0 x64, Kde 3.5.9, Opera 9.x weekly

  8. #8
    google01103 NNTP User

    Default Re: VMplayer vrs VirtualBox performance

    google01103 wrote:

    > Will Honea wrote:
    >
    >> google01103 wrote:
    >>
    >>> Will Honea wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> google01103 wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> some simple numbers using V-box 1.6.2 x64 and VMplayer 2.04
    >>>>> (my hw 2gb ram on an AMD 64 3800+ x2 under Suse 11.0 64bit)
    >>>>>
    >>>>> time to reload "saved state" XP:
    >>>>> VMplayer +/- 1.5 minute
    >>>>> V-box +/- 15 seconds
    >>>>> cpu%'s when XP is idle:
    >>>>> VMplayer varies between 6 -> 11%
    >>>>> V-box in the 60% range (XP is 98% idle)
    >>>>
    >>>> With essentially identical hardware but with 32-bit OS 11.0, V-Box
    >>>> shows NO
    >>>> discernable increase in CPU usage when XP is idling. The only
    >>>> noticeable
    >>>> change in resource usage is the memory used by th vm. I am using
    >>>> hardware virtualization (AMD-V) - that may have some impact.
    >>>>
    >>> well doing a clean install within V-box instead of using an existing
    >>> VMware image makes an unbelievable performance difference in a positive
    >>> way.
    >>>
    >>> Got everything working except for shared folders - any hints? They show
    >>> correctly in the setup dialogs and my Linux folders can be selected with
    >>> the shared folder config gui but nothing shows in Windows Explorer
    >>> (V-box additions seems install as it shows in system tray but not in
    >>> add/delete programs).

    >>
    >> I built my images with 1.5.6 OSE and they have run quite well since -
    >> even
    >> transitioning to the 1.6.2 binary version was no problem. I DO have to
    >> re-run the installation with every kernel update but everything seems to
    >> survive intact.
    >>
    >> I am having a slight issue with the closed source binary after the most
    >> recent kernel update - I seem to have lost USB access in the VM but that
    >> may be from running the wrong install package - I really need to clean up
    >> this disk...
    >>

    > check theit website the /etc/fstab entry seems to have changed to
    > none /proc/bus/usb usbfs
    > auto,busgid=xxxx,busmode=0775,devgid=xxxx,devmode=0664 0 0

    or try these fstab entries:
    /sys/bus/usb/drivers /proc/bus/usb usbfs devgid=xxx,devmode=664 0 0
    none /dev/bus/usb usbfs devgid=xxx,devmode=664 0 0
    --
    Suse 11.0 x64, Kde 3.5.9, Opera 9.x weekly

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •