[Bio-Linux] Graphics Performance in VMs

[Steve Moss]

Dear Rudy,

Parallels and Fusion are slightly different to VirtualBox as they can be
considered similar to container-based or OS-level virtualisation, rather
than full-blown hypervisor-based virtualisation.

With regards to VirtualBox graphics performance. Did you install the Guest
Additions in the guest OS, as well as increasing available video memory and
enabling acceleration in the VM settings? I find that these improve things
greatly.

I certainly agree re Xfce. Hence why Xubuntu is so great for lower end
machines/laptops.

Cheers,

Steve

On 3 August 2014 16:31, Rudy J. Richardson <rjrich at umich.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> fyi, I have compared Parallels 9, VMware Fusion 6, and VB 4.3.14 on my
> MacPro 6.1 under OS X 10.9.4.
>
> Each virtualization program works, but for good graphics performance,
> Parallels 9 is far superior to the other two. The graphics performance of
> VB is the poorest by far. I have tested this with linux (Ubuntu 12.04,
> 12.1, 14.04, Mint 13, 17, and Windows 7 guests.
>
> Regarding DEs for linux, I get the best results with Xfce. KDE also works,
> and I have found instabilities in Cinnamon and MATE.
>
> rjrich


-- 

Steve Moss
about.me/gawbul
[image: Steve Moss on about.me]
  <http://about.me/gawbul>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.bioinformatics.org/pipermail/bio-linux-list/attachments/20140803/953b2290/attachment.html>