VMware Fusion Stuns VirtualBox In CPU Tests
Phoronix: VMware Fusion Stuns VirtualBox In CPU Tests
Aside from VMware virtualization smacking Oracle VirtualBox when it comes to the OpenGL support that's passed through to VM guests, VMware Fusion 4 also does a nice job at outperforming VirtualBox when it comes to computational-focused workloads.
I expect the same benchmark with linux when you get it to work on the MBPr.
BTW there are people that had success with running linux on the MBPr although many stuff don't work.
Isn't apache performance tied to the network? That would tend to indicate that the networking layer of vmware is a *little* more efficient than virtualbox under apple. Quite frankly however, you'd have to be completely insane to run a virtualized web server for serving static pages. The *smart* way to do it is to run apache virtual hosts.
The rest of the tests show only MARGINAL differences, not the dramatic annhilation as the article would suggest.
Further, I see absolutely no relevance AT ALL in the results, since they are tested over APPLE. The performance of a virtual machine is VERY strongly tied to the host operating system.
Try again, this time with a LINUX HOST.
Michael let's be honest, Vmware payed you to write such a stupid article. I'm really mad with you this time! But I accept it if this is what you need to continue making phoronix exist.
Holy crap, when are people like you going to stop making this same lame, annoying, unproductive statement? I am so tired of people whining and rumoring that a free content provider is being paid by a company to endorse a product. Virtualbox is free and vmware fusion has a trial - if you really think he's making up all this stuff then why don't you test it for yourself?
Originally Posted by bulletxt
I'm not surprised virtualbox did worse. Oracle doesn't really give a crap about virtualbox, or OpenOffice for that matter. Virtualbox is starting to become the most unmaintained modern x86 emulator. Not only does the VMware company focus on pretty much only emulators/virtualizers but they ask to be paid for most of their better stuff. Set performance issues aside and VMware is still better, you don't need a sponsor to know that.
How really cares about 3d speed in a vm? The normal usecase is running win inside a vm from linux host and that usually not because of some games but other software that does not run with wine. It might be already enough to use aero.
How many legends my friend. i have more than 45 vm running with vbox from over 1 year and they never hanged,always worked perfectly and serve mysql ,apache and java services perfectly. all this with a gpl software. how you dare say oracle doesn't give a shit of vbox?have seen all feateures it supports? have seen there are packages for all major distros? have you seen new features coming with vbox 4.2? this article is just trying to say vmware is great while vbox is crap. he should do the same with kvm, but he wont because red hat is behind it. michael hates oracle,thats the problem here .
Originally Posted by schmidtbag
Two issues here:
Originally Posted by droidhacker
1) Many, many enterprises virtualize 50+% of their workloads. Web services are often the earliest one to move to a virtualized environment. Or a cloud environment, which is virtualized.
2) Given that we are talking desktop virtualization, these results matter when you are running a small test environment on your laptop.
I see a GREAT amount of relevance to these tests as I run alot of Linux VMs on OSX, and check the performance of VMWare vs VirtualBox vs Parallels often.
Originally Posted by droidhacker