Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > Alternative Operating Systems > Need FACTUAL statements... on speed = Parallels vs. VMWare Fusion

Need FACTUAL statements... on speed = Parallels vs. VMWare Fusion
Thread Tools
bishopazrael
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 01:53 AM
 
Please, only those that have used both programs need to reply.

I'm looking at statements around the web that say that VMware is faster....no no no.. Parallels is faster.... no no no... vmware.... and on and on and on. What I'm looking for is for someone who has both current versions of the software to please tell me which one you find faster. I'd like to narrow the field by adding that Im running on a current MB w/ 4gb of RAM and a new 5400rpm 160gb drive. I'll be running xp w/ service pack 2. Please don't respond if you just have one or the other and just want to say what you think. I'm lookng for someone who can say they have it and can say with certainty that one or the other is faster.
Which gives more speed doing regular mundane tasks?

Which uses less of the hardware resources?

Thanks,
Bishop
Backups are like guns and condoms. It's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.
     
MacosNerd
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 08:22 AM
 
I'd say they're both pretty close. You may get better responses if you posted this in the correct forum.

My $.02 is that fusion was faster when I tested both out, but I suspect that parallels may have caught up. I know in fusion you can utilize both cpus and parallels you cannot (at least couldn't, I don't know if that changed) This alone increases the performance of fusion.

Regardless, I think the speed difference is small at this point and go with the product you like the best. They both have good and bad points
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 08:23 AM
 
I've moved this to Alt OS.
     
Pierre B.
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 09:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by bishopazrael View Post
I'm lookng for someone who can say they have it and can say with certainty that one or the other is faster.
Which gives more speed doing regular mundane tasks?
Here is an answer to your question. The results are interesting and sometimes unexpected.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2008, 09:10 AM
 
Pierre is right-some of those results ARE unexpected. I find it very interesting that Parallels and Fusion sort of swap back and forth as to which is faster for a variety of applications. Even more interesting is how the different Macs that were tested performed, with some test numbers coming out VERY different based on both which virtualization and which computer was used. This is VERY good reference stuff!

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
   
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:31 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,