- #Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac for mac
- #Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac series
- #Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac mac
- #Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac windows
Geomean is the same averaging methodology used by SPEC tests, PCMark, Unixbench, and others, and it helps prevent against minor result skewing. Instead of a plain "average" or "mean", overall conclusions are done using a "geomean", which is a specific type of average that focuses on the central results and minimizes outliers.
#Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac series
We did this specifically so that we could make comparisons across different groups, and to be able to give you overview results combining a series of types of tests, and computer models. We eliminated those tests that we ran which were so short in time frame (e.g., fast) that we could not create statistically significant results, or that had imperceivable differences.įor some of the analysis, we "normalized" results by dividing the result by the fastest result for that test across all the machine configurations. The tests used were selected specifically to give a real-world view of what VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop are like to run for many users. Successive tests are repeated tests without restarting the machine in between tests, and can benefit from caching. Adam tests are when the computer has been completely restarted (hence avoiding caching).
#Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac mac
If you want to see more detail for multiple processors, 64-bit, or on an individual Mac model, you can review the spreadsheet for those details.įor the launch tests (launching the VM, Windows, and Applications), we had the option of an "Adam" test, and a "Successive" test. These tests are designed to arm you with information to help you make the best decision for your type of use.įor each set of results, you can see the analysis for each model of computer for XP, and for Vista. In the sections below, we'll walk you through what we tested, and the results for each.
See more on this in the Internet Explorer section below. One thing to note: VMware Fusion was several times slower than Parallels Desktop in the Internet Explorer tests (across the board), so we removed IE from the overall analysis to avoid skewing the overall results. (Note: This is not intended to be read, but to give you an overview of resultsīy coloring. (Note: Not all tests were run on all configurations, hence the empty cells.)įigure 2: Test Results Matrix with Coloring Darkest coloring means faster by 10% or more, medium coloring indicates 1-10% difference, and lightest coloring means less than 1% difference. Blue cell coloring indicates VMware Fusion was faster than Parallels Desktop. Green cell coloring means Parallels Desktop was faster than VMware Fusion. (Compares 3 types of VM launch times, compression, and transcoding MP3.)Īnother way to look at this is the color-coding on the results matrix.
#Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac windows
(Comparing 3 types of VM launch times, compression, transcoding MP3, 3 types of application launches, and 3 application performance tests.)įor 64-bit Windows Vista, running under two virtual processors, Parallels Desktop runs 15% faster than VMware Fusion. (Comparing 3 types of VM launch times, compression, transcoding MP3, 7 types of file and network IO, 3 types of application launches, and 3 application performance tests.)įor 32-bit Windows OSes, running under two virtual processors, VMware Fusion runs XP 10% faster than Parallels Desktop, and Parallels Desktop runs Vista 20% faster than VMware Fusion. VMware Fusionįor 32-bit Windows OSes, running under a single virtual processor (the default when you create virtual machines in either product, and therefore, the most commonly used configuration), Parallels Desktop runs both XP and Vista 14% faster than VMware Fusion. (Note: In all cases except battery life, when looking at the graphs in this article, take note that shorter bars are better.)įigure 1: Overall Results, Parallels Desktop vs. Here are the overall conclusions, but you should really look at more of the detail to understand what works best for you.
The one exception is for those that need to run Windows XP, 32-bit on 2 virtual processors, VMware Fusion runs about 10% faster than Parallels Desktop. In the majority of overall averages of our tests, Parallels Desktop is the clear winner running 14-20% faster than VMware Fusion.
#Vmware fusion for 32 bit mac for mac
VMware Fusion (cont.) How do VMware Fusion and Parallels Desktop for Mac stack up?īy Neil Ticktin, Editor-in-Chief/Publisher Overview VMware FusionĬolumn Tag: Virtualization Head-to-Head: Parallels Desktop for Mac vs. Head-to-Head: Parallels Desktop for Mac vs.