Virtual Machine Help

[StAndrew]

Ive just stumbled upon this neat little program on Microsoft.com that allows you to run two OS's at on time. I have Vista 64 Ultimate Installed on the RAID HDDs and will be partitioning it for installing Windows XP next (the program works regardless of how the MBR is Config). XP is currently on a sep HDD but I figured why not put it on the RAID as I have plenty of space.

My question is this: How will this affect my performance. Are the system resources alocated automatically or can I do it manually (num of procs and amount of RAM per OS, etc...)? How will the Vid cards work (SLI/Non-SLI). I got a third 9600GT for PhysX but I really dont use it/need it for PhysX.

I got an extra 4GB kit of ram to run a total of 8GBs for this setup. I was able to fix the 4 core sh*t so I have all four cores on my Q6600 working. Any thoughts or advice is greatly appreciated.

Quick update: Read this > http://www.pctipsbox.com/xp-virtual-computing-avoids-dual-boot-complexity/

Will installing programs/games in XP run the same on a VM or would it just be better to run a dual boot?

[MentholMoose]

Ive just stumbled upon this neat little program on Microsoft.com that allows you to run two OS's at on time. I have Vista 64 Ultimate Installed on the RAID HDDs and will be partitioning it for installing Windows XP next (the program works regardless of how the MBR is Config). XP is currently on a sep HDD but I figured why not put it on the RAID as I have plenty of space.

My question is this: How will this affect my performance. Are the system resources alocated automatically or can I do it manually (num of procs and amount of RAM per OS, etc...)? How will the Vid cards work (SLI/Non-SLI). I got a third 9600GT for PhysX but I really dont use it/need it for PhysX.

I got an extra 4GB kit of ram to run a total of 8GBs for this setup. I was able to fix the 4 core sh*t so I have all four cores on my Q6600 working. Any thoughts or advice is greatly appreciated.

Quick update: Read this > http://www.pctipsbox.com/xp-virtual-computing-avoids-dual-boot-complexity/

Will installing programs/games in XP run the same on a VM or would it just be better to run a dual boot?

What is the program you plan to use? Virtual PC? If so, performance-wise it will be better to dual boot. The performance difference it depends on the application. For example, office programs in a VM will be similar or identical to running natively, whereas games will run very poorly, if at all, because Virtual PC doesn't support any 3D acceleration (some other virtualization programs do, though, such as VMware Workstation).

You cannot allocate a particular video card to the VM (VPC doesn't support 3D acceleration anyway). You can allocate RAM and number of processors, but there are limits (check the software documentation). I don't know if VPC will let you allocate a drive partition, or even a physical drive; however, I believe VMware Workstation supports both, but I haven't tried either.

VPC is very easy to use, just download and install it, then go through the process of creating a new VM to see how it works.

[StickyRICE]

I used vpc and you can allocate to a different physical drive. But vmdesktop is tons better, but its not free.

[3Z3VH]

I agree with Menthol. If you are building XP for older games, or just general use, go ahead and Virtualize it, but if you plan to play current 3D games on the XP install, dual boot is the only option (though why not just run them in Vista ?)

Personally, I recommend VMWare Workstation, since it is more dynamic in its RAM and Hard Drive Allocation, so you can run more virtuals on the same box, and you will save a LOT of hard drive space (unlike Microsoft VPC where you must take as much HD space as the virtual drive you create).

I use VMWare with a virtual machine in non-persistent mode for web browsing, so if I get spyware or viruses, they don't infect my host OS, and once I reboot that virtual, it reverts back to the virtual image before I ever did any of the browsing, so all the spyware and viruses are gone. I also have another I leave up for torrents and for playing music.

Leaving these VMs up and running in the background while gaming has not negatively affected my game's performance in any noticeable manner.

That computer is a Q6600 with SLI 8800GTX cards, and 8GB of RAM... so nothing super amazing, but no slouch of a machine either.

I say virtuals are the way to go nowadays for everything but 3D gaming.

[StAndrew]

I was planning on using just Vista and sell XP, however, Ive noticed some dismal performance when running games in DX10 vice DX9 (ie Crysis running up to 20-30FPS slower in DX10; though there is a DX9 option which really helps). CoH's runs horibly in Vista, while XP I can run it up to x4AA. Other games dont show much diff but they are generally older and less graphics intensive.

Can anyone offer a guide to a dual boot with Vista already installed? I have a second 400GB WD HDD thats not in use (yet), but would rather put it in the RAID partition. Or is there free/cheap VM software (VMware Workstation was mentioned) that would support 3D acceleration (ie, gamming under XP) and/or alow XP to run with its own XP drivers?

[3Z3VH]

DX10 will always run slower than DX9 on the games that are out nowadays. This is not a Vista vs XP issue. The High Level shaders and Geometry Shaders are a lot more GPU intensive, but render frames with MUCH more accuracy, and quality.

Also, DirectX 10 will eventually be faster than DX9 once hardware and game manufacturers make their games, hardware, and drivers fully compliant with the new Display Driver Model.