 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Virtual PC / September 2008Vista vs XP memory capacity
I plan to set up a new development system designed to host 3 VM guests running XP Pro. This will be a new machine and I have a sense that a Vista host would be more robust than an XP host in terms of larger memory capacity, resource management, etc. Am I wrong? Does Vista have any advantages as a VPC host over XP? Thanks! On 06/09/2008 in message >I plan to set up a new development system designed to host 3 VM guests >running XP Pro. This will be a new machine and I have a sense that a Vista [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Thanks! Both XP Pro and Vista 32 have the (around) 3.5GB memory limit. If you want a real heap of memory then XP Pro x64 or Vista 64 may be a better bet, I can't remember the exact limits but it's lots! I run XP x64 here with 8GB RAM. If you go that route makes sure you can get 64 bit drivers, many are available but there are odd bits of hardware that can catch you out.  SignatureJeff Gaines Damerham Hampshire UK By the time you can make ends meet they move the ends Shall I infer that the 64-bit version of VPC2007SP1 supports (any) 32-bit OS(es)? What are the requirements on the 64-bit host CPU? (like: you cannot run a 64-bit VMware guest on a 32-bit host unless the CPU supports some extensions...) I bet it does, but better safe than sorry... > On 06/09/2008 in message > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > can get 64 bit drivers, many are available but there are odd bits of > hardware that can catch you out. >Shall I infer that the 64-bit version of VPC2007SP1 supports (any) 32-bit >OS(es)? Yes, and only 32bit OSes. You cannot use a 64bit OS in a VM with VPC. >What are the requirements on the 64-bit host CPU? None really, as long as the CPU is 64bit, VPC will run on it. >(like: you cannot run a 64-bit VMware guest on a 32-bit host unless the CPU >supports some extensions...) Yes, unlike VMWare, VPC only supports 32bit VMs. SignatureCheers, Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP http://vpc.essjae.com/ I do not work for Microsoft. >> Shall I infer that the 64-bit version of VPC2007SP1 supports (any) >> 32-bit OS(es)? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > None really, as long as the CPU is 64bit, VPC will run on it. OK; what about the performance? Assuming the host is x64, is the perf of 32-bit guest-on-top-of-64-bit-host on par with the perf of 32-bit guest-on-top-of-32-bit-host on the very same hardware? >> (like: you cannot run a 64-bit VMware guest on a 32-bit host unless >> the CPU supports some extensions...) > > Yes, unlike VMWare, VPC only supports 32bit VMs. Too bad... That'll be a VPC-killer for many of our teams... > OK; what about the performance? Assuming the host is x64, is the perf of > 32-bit guest-on-top-of-64-bit-host on par with the perf of 32-bit > guest-on-top-of-32-bit-host on the very same hardware? How slow it is depends on the 32 bit OS and what you do with it. Win98 is dog slow, Win2000 is much better. I didn't want to sacrifice one of my XP keys to test XP in VPC, so I can't comment on how XP would perform. I've switched to Sun's VirtualBox for Win2000, and found it to be much faster. I could not get Win98 to install in VB, so I use VPC for that. This is one of those try-it-and-see sort of things, as performance is quite dependant on what you use it for. >>> Shall I infer that the 64-bit version of VPC2007SP1 supports (any) >>> 32-bit OS(es)? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >32-bit guest-on-top-of-64-bit-host on par with the perf of 32-bit >guest-on-top-of-32-bit-host on the very same hardware? Yep, performance is fine on x64 hosts. I don't think there's any difference really. The single biggest faster in VM performance (or lack) is disk I/O. Running a VM on the same HD as the host OS will give you the biggest hit. SignatureCheers, Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP http://vpc.essjae.com/ I do not work for Microsoft. > >>> Shall I infer that the 64-bit version of VPC2007SP1 supports (any) > >>> 32-bit OS(es)? [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Running a VM on the same HD as the host OS will give you the biggest > hit. Not if you're running CPU intensive apps. >I plan to set up a new development system designed to host 3 VM guests > running XP Pro. This will be a new machine and I have a sense that a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > a > VPC host over XP? Not really... In fact, Vista generally needs twice as much RAM as XP. That said, if you were to install 64-bit Vista on the host, that would allow it to use more than the theoretical 4GB RAM available to 32-bit OS... SignatureMark Rae ASP.NET MVP http://www.markrae.net Thanks. I take it from your response (& Jeff's) that the issue is more of a 32 vs 64-bit OS rather than a Vista vs X issue. Further, since XP has a smaller footprint as a host, I'd have more available memory for VM with an XP host. Does that sum it up? Sounds like my best best would go with XP 64-bit if I want to jack up the RAM. thx - tinfoil. > >I plan to set up a new development system designed to host 3 VM guests > > running XP Pro. This will be a new machine and I have a sense that a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > That said, if you were to install 64-bit Vista on the host, that would allow > it to use more than the theoretical 4GB RAM available to 32-bit OS... [top-posting corrected] >>> I plan to set up a new development system designed to host 3 VM guests >>> running XP Pro. This will be a new machine and I have a sense that a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > a > 32 vs 64-bit OS rather than a Vista vs X issue. Inasmuch as 64-bit OS aren't bound by the 4GB RAM limit of 32-bit OS... > Further, since XP has a smaller footprint as a host, I'd have more > available > memory for VM with an XP host. Does that sum it up? Yes. SignatureMark Rae ASP.NET MVP http://www.markrae.net It's both, really. A 32bit Windows OS won't use more then 3-3.5 GB of ram, whether it's Win98, 2k, XP or vista. A 64 bit XP or Vista will. Vista is a pig. XP is leaner. It's (more or less) that simple. If you had time and have some techincal expertise, you could try a 64bit distro of linux, if your VM server comes in 64 bit linux binaries. You might find that to be even more efficient then XP64, and with linux, if you know how, you can tweak the cpu scheduler and memory manager and block io scheduler to optimize them for your particular needs and get even better performance. > Thanks. I take it from your response (& Jeff's) that the issue is more of > a [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> allow >> it to use more than the theoretical 4GB RAM available to 32-bit OS... >It's both, really. A 32bit Windows OS won't use more then 3-3.5 GB of ram, >whether it's Win98, 2k, XP or vista. A 64 bit XP or Vista will. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >scheduler to optimize them for your particular needs and get even better >performance. How could running a Linux-64 host help the OP? He wants to know which host operating system to base his deployment of a number of virtual machines on. He is asking here which implies using VPC2007, which only is available for Windows.... SignatureBo Berglund (Sweden) > How could running a Linux-64 host help the OP? > He wants to know which host operating system to base his deployment of > a number of virtual machines on. He is asking here which implies using > VPC2007, which only is available for Windows.... 1) He could try it under Wine on Linux. Might or might not work, and if so may or may not be faster then under native Windows. 2) He could switch to a better and more efficient VM then VPC, one that does have 64 bit binaries for Linux. 3) He could stick to Windows and maybe some day in the future remember this weirdo that suggested 64 bit Linux and try it then. 4) The price of tea in China could go up. >Thanks. I take it from your response (& Jeff's) that the issue is more of a >32 vs 64-bit OS rather than a Vista vs X issue. Further, since XP has a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >thx - tinfoil. Vista x64 is a better bet than XP x64. The support for Vista is better. XP x64 was always the black sheep. SignatureCheers, Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP http://vpc.essjae.com/ I do not work for Microsoft. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.