SoCalRox Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 I'm wondering- given the "same" specs for a given VM, which is more "heavy"- more memory and resource intensive, Player or Virtualbox? I'm not concerned at the moment about speed or compatibility or features- both furnish what I need. I'm just wondering in a memory constrained environment which one is lighter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top Qat Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 (edited) Personally I have always found Virtualbox to have stabilty issues. Never had any problems with VM player . Either way you still need plenty of RAM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guitmz Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 i always keep both around.. for older windows (like 9x) installs, vmware player is better at the moment and for some linux stuff, virtualbox wins, both are good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Semtex Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 I use VW Player, way lighter as VBox, but Vbox is powerful tool, but for home use VM is OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JHBrown Subscriber¹ Posted February 23, 2016 Subscriber¹ Share Posted February 23, 2016 I use both VMware Workstation, and VirtualBox. For basic usage, VirtualBox does a fine job, and I haven't had any issues. On the other hand , VMware Workstation has features that I love, that are missing from VirtualBox. Additionally, I love the UI. Depends on your needs really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kozukumi Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 (edited) I was a long time VMware Workstation customer but with the recent cull in the Workstation team I am in the process of switching to VBox. Overall I still prefer Workstation but VBox is free and still very good. I actually find my Windows VMs in VBox on Linux to run faster than they did in Workstation which is interesting. Plus no hassle with the licensing is also nice. I do miss the team function of Workstation though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+JHBrown Subscriber¹ Posted February 23, 2016 Subscriber¹ Share Posted February 23, 2016 1 minute ago, kozukumi said: I was a long time VMware Workstation customer but with the recent cull in the Workstation team I am in the process of switching to VBox. Overall I still prefer Workstation but VBox is free and still very good. I actually find my Windows VMs in VBox on Linux to run faster than they did in Workstation which is interesting. Plus no hassle with the licensing is also nice. I do miss the team function of Workstation though. Interesting note on the speed difference between these two programs. I too was thinking of switching to Virtual Box full-time after reading the news on VMware Workstation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kozukumi Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 10 minutes ago, JHBrown said: Interesting note on the speed difference between these two programs. I too was thinking of switching to Virtual Box full-time after reading the news on VMware Workstation. I also find the Android emulators run better on Linux than Windows so perhaps it is something Linux related than VBox related? One thing I love about VBox is how well it works with Docker. Workstation was always a pain and I could never really work out why. Sometimes a VM would load but the network didn't work so had to kill and restart it. Not had a single issue with VBox. I also find Windows 10 runs great in VBox with the Hyper-V paravirtualisation features. I go full screen and forget it is a VM sometimes as it works well smoothly. Overall my experience is VBox runs faster but Workstation has a couple of really nice features that I miss. Not enough to stop using VBox though. I easily developed my own solution to Workstation teams with Docket and a few shell scripts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGHammer Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 If you have Hyper-V support on your hardware, consider (very strongly) firing both vmWare *and* OVB and go with Hyper-V instead, and especially for home use. On my rebuilt desktop and my development notebook, I use Hyper-V for everything I used to use OVB for - and then some (especially, oddly enough, Android VMs), as Hyper-V does not have the limits of VT-x (which is at the core of both vmWare and OVB). +Gary7, sinetheo and Skiver 3 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+mram Subscriber² Posted February 23, 2016 Subscriber² Share Posted February 23, 2016 While this isn't exactly related to the original post, I moved from VMWare to Hyper-V fully after the VMWare workstation team got gutted. I was already paying for Windows 10 Pro anyway, and I realized I was mostly working with Windows stuff, so the choice was pretty easy. I'm finding I really like it, more than I expected. I'm giving it a few more months then I'll try converting my machines to better generations and see if I can even amp the performance more. But to the original question, a slightly related answer - Hyper-V performance seems better than VMWare on the same windows guest boxes, which is to be expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PGHammer Posted February 23, 2016 Share Posted February 23, 2016 5 hours ago, mram said: While this isn't exactly related to the original post, I moved from VMWare to Hyper-V fully after the VMWare workstation team got gutted. I was already paying for Windows 10 Pro anyway, and I realized I was mostly working with Windows stuff, so the choice was pretty easy. I'm finding I really like it, more than I expected. I'm giving it a few more months then I'll try converting my machines to better generations and see if I can even amp the performance more. But to the original question, a slightly related answer - Hyper-V performance seems better than VMWare on the same windows guest boxes, which is to be expected. Before my desktop rebuild, I had been using Hyper-V on Windows Server 2012R2 heads-up vs. both vmWare and OVB on first Windows 8.1 and Windows 10. (The very reason I went with 2012R2 is that unlike either flavor of Windows OR Server 2016, EPT isn't a requirement to leverage Hyper-V in 2012R2. Further, in the heads-up challenge, I stuck to Gen I Hyper-V virtual machines - to keep the playing field level. Result - VT-x - both vmWare and OVB - got smashed flat by Hyper-V - all else being equal.) Since that shootout, Visual Studio Community 2015 and a rewritten Emulator for Android have come along - which actually pushes OVB and Genymotion further into irrelevancy - especially for Android developers. First off, Hyper-V - which doesn't require or even USE HAXM (unlike OVB, which requires HAXM to get decent performance out of Android VMs) smashes OVB flat in terms of VM performance, while being just as easy to use. Google Play Services is deployed on VSE for Android the same way it is on OVB - with or without Genymotion (drag and drop). Notice that I said the SAME way - not a similar way. Therefore, I need either OVB or vmWare *why*? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skiver Veteran Posted February 27, 2016 Veteran Share Posted February 27, 2016 Another vote in for scrapping both and going Hyper-V if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+BudMan MVC Posted February 27, 2016 MVC Share Posted February 27, 2016 What OS are you running on the host hardware?? This really comes into play for the decision making process. What exactly do you do with these VMs is another factor.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binaryzero Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 (edited) Hyper-V. For the past 6 months at my new job I've been doing roll outs and support clients with Hyper-V, starting to enjoy using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulATMOS Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 has Vmware Workstation deteriorated since the coding was outsourced to China? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royalty Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 VMWare is paid and Virtualbox is free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceelf Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Royalty said: VMWare is paid For business yes, for home use no. In my experience, unless you've got very specific use cases VirtualBox is terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T3X4S Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 I have VMWare Wx right now. I have tried Virtualbox as well. I just like the GUI of VMWare - nice and clean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T3X4S Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 1 hour ago, freqnasty said: has Vmware Workstation deteriorated since the coding was outsourced to China? I am not a heavy or professional user - so I cant really see any difference. I think as far as home use - there wouldnt be a difference. After reading these posts - I just loaded Hyper V on my desktop (win10) - gonna create a linux guest and see how that goes - gives me something to do tonight (such a nerd) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceelf Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 1 hour ago, T3X4S said: I think as far as home use - there wouldnt be a difference. Last I checked VMWare had hardware acceleration of 3d at a DX9 level and VBox had none. Both could've improved by now though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinetheo Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 On 2/23/2016 at 0:04 PM, SoCalRox said: I'm wondering- given the "same" specs for a given VM, which is more "heavy"- more memory and resource intensive, Player or Virtualbox? I'm not concerned at the moment about speed or compatibility or features- both furnish what I need. I'm just wondering in a memory constrained environment which one is lighter. yuck neither lol If you really need anything important use Hyper-V or spend the money for Vmware workstation to get real work done. It is only $80 extra to upgrade your OS to pro (assuming you use at least 8.1). If you are on Windows 7 upgrade to 10 for free and then pay to upgrade to pro under system properties under this pc. You do not have to buy another copy of WIndows or re-install. The editions are upgradable :-) VMWare player is free and is actually vmware workstation lite. It is great for running a vm or 2 but would not recommend if you are studying for you MCSA/E as you need to run many vm's. Also your cpu will run hot with vmware player/workstation as it is a type 2 software hypervisor with layers of software to communicate your hardware and vms. With vmware workstation it is great for web development running ancient IE to code for bugs as you get nice video acceleration and can set bandwidth limitations for your vms. Virtualbox is buggy. OR was when I used it 3 years ago and is rarely updated and usb 2 was almost finished?? Like vmware it is a type 2 hypervisor and will run your cpu hot as it uses software and layers to communicate between your vms and hardware. But it is free and fun for a vm or 2. Hyper-V is great for certification as it is what is on Win dows server. Only downside is video cacceleration and you need remote desktop connections for your vms. But it is a nice type 1 hypervisor that runs natively on your hardware it has a virtual switch so you can create networks of vms. Actually VMware workstation has this too to a certain degree. You still need to install pfsense or Server 2003 for a virtual router though but with the switches you can emulate a whole domain of pcs fast. VMware workstation has a little better linux support. Hyper-V does support linux just as a generation 1 guest and you will need to install drivers seperately for guest services. VMware workstation the distros detect it out of the box for all but FreeBSD. Downside is vmware workstation is expensive for $300. My advice is to try both if you want to goof. Use hyper-V if you do real work or time studying as for only $80 to upgrade is the best value Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinetheo Posted February 28, 2016 Share Posted February 28, 2016 On 2/23/2016 at 0:57 PM, mram said: While this isn't exactly related to the original post, I moved from VMWare to Hyper-V fully after the VMWare workstation team got gutted. I was already paying for Windows 10 Pro anyway, and I realized I was mostly working with Windows stuff, so the choice was pretty easy. I'm finding I really like it, more than I expected. I'm giving it a few more months then I'll try converting my machines to better generations and see if I can even amp the performance more. But to the original question, a slightly related answer - Hyper-V performance seems better than VMWare on the same windows guest boxes, which is to be expected. They didn't gut. The fact is it can't compete with a type 1 hypervisor and ESX has a free version for non commercial use which is a type 1 hypervisor. So why develop 2 products that do the same thing? 3 if you count vmware player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalRox Posted February 28, 2016 Author Share Posted February 28, 2016 I use Virtual Box or VMWare to share VMs among several machine with different OSes- Windows, Macs, and Linux. I have Fusion on my Macs, and keep my VMs in VMDK format for the portability. That's what got me curious about which was heavier because I am often using Windows machine with only 4 GB of RAM. Since I don't choose the hardware, I have to live with what the boss at a given site decides to hand me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
binaryzero Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 Tsk tsk running your own VMs on work PCs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royalty Posted February 29, 2016 Share Posted February 29, 2016 On 2/28/2016 at 8:44 PM, randomevent said: For business yes, for home use no. In my experience, unless you've got very specific use cases VirtualBox is terrible. Really? How do I get the home version? Seems like I have the paid one right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts