#Vmware vs virtualbox 2015 full#

#Vmware vs virtualbox 2015 full#

To see anyВ chart in its full-sized Retina glory, just click or tap on it to load the full image. Some tests required that we cram a lot of data into a single chart, and some of these charts may be difficult to read on smaller or low-resolution screens. You can browse all results in order by using the вЂњNextвЂќ and вЂњPreviousвЂќ buttons below, or you can jump directly to a specific test using the Table of Contents, which is found at the bottom of every page. Our benchmark tests and results are divided into the sections identified below.

We therefore ran select CPU- and GPU-focused tests on a 2013 Mac Pro, and we have those numbers available in their own dedicated section later on. But we were also curious about just how well Fusion and Parallels would perform if given access to clearly вЂњhigh-endвЂќ resources. As weвЂ™ll describe in more detail in the next section, all of our tests were performed on 2014 15-inch MacBook Pro, a system that we consider to be in the вЂњmid-to-highвЂќ range of Mac configurations. WeвЂ™ve therefore run all applicable testsВ in Boot Camp as well, which gives us an idea of how close these options are to eliminating the need for something like Boot Camp altogether, at least for certain tasks.ДЄlso new this year is the addition of a вЂњhigh endвЂќ host for some tests. Part of our goal with this analysis is not to simply determine which virtualization solution is the fastest, we also want to see how they compare to вЂњnativeвЂќ Windows performance on the same hardware.

Although Parallels and Fusion are more popular options for OS X users looking to run Windows and other x86 operating systems on their Macs, we always like to keep an eye on VirtualBox to see just how well this free open source alternative can keep up with its commercial competitors. Today, weвЂ™ll be looking at a performance comparison of Parallels Desktop 11, VMware Fusion 8, and OracleвЂ™s VirtualBox 5.