VPC Speed - Windows 2000 vs. XP

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by cpjakes, Feb 24, 2004.

  1. cpjakes macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2003
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    #1
    I own VPC 5 and run Windows 2000 on both my G4 DP 450 (1.25GB RAM) and TiBook 550 (512MB RAM). Both are pretty slow, but usable. Would there be any speed difference in running Windows XP?

    Thanks in advance...

    cpjakes
     
  2. 7on macrumors 601

    7on

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Location:
    Dress Rosa
    #2
    XP will be slower

    Though I'll wait to see if XP SP2 will streamline it any. Heard it might be a major release like 98SE was to 98.
     
  3. cyberkazoo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2002
    #3
    Win2k

    I also have TiBook 550, and XP Pro is rediculously slow on X... Win2k is still slow, but I consider fast enough to be usuable, especially on OS 9.

    Boy, am I glad mine's dual-bootable! LOL

    -K
     
  4. nate13 macrumors 6502

    nate13

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2004
    Location:
    Fargo, ND
    #4
    upgrade to 7

    Even though its not out yet, im sure VPC 7 will have major speed improvements to v5, even v6. Havent used it myself, but i am planning on getting it after its next release.
     
  5. edmitch macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    #5
    VPC and XP

    Win98 and Win2000 both run very nicely on a dual 867 Mhz Power Mac. SiSandra estimates the processor speed to be equivalent to a 500+ Mhz Pentium. And it feels very responsive too - even plays mp3 files and some digital video using Windows Media Player or an MP3 player running inside Windows 98 inside VPC. Realistically, it is NOT a 500 Mhz equivalent - but it certain runs the same as Win98 on a several hundred Mhz Pentium which was, in fact, the standard configuration around when Win98 came to market.

    That said, Win XP or XP Pro are both very, very slow by comparison and I would not recommend either choice for now. Which is too bad since Microsoft no longer sells Windows 98.

    I have also run Linux inside VPC with decent results.

    Like the VPC documentation says, a key factor in VPC performance is the presence and amount of L3 cache available on the PowerPC. When I run VPC on a nearly equivalent PowerBook having only L2 cache and no L3 cache, performance is noticeably slower.

    Another factor is available system RAM. Basically, the more RAM you can allocate to the VPC Windows OS, the better your performance. While Microsoft says you can run XP in 128 MBytes, performance is terrible, even on Pentium 4 hardware. 256 MB is much bettter, and 512 MB is just about right. I my PowerMac I have 512 MB of RAM and can allocate up to 352 MB of RAM to the VPC virtual OSes and that makes a big perf boost (I will also soon add more RAM to my Power Mac and will test how much larger I can go with the VPC memory allocation).

    Ed
     
  6. cpjakes thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2003
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    #6
    Thanks for the opinions, I suppose I might just scrap my usage of VPC anyway, I've gotten a decent PC since then for gaming and running PC only applications. If there's no real speed increase, I guess I'll put it on the back burner...
     
  7. crenz macrumors 6502a

    crenz

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2003
    Location:
    Shanghai, China
    #7
    I'm using Win2k on an AlPB 15", and it's definitely very usable. Even used for demonstrations for clients. I found that setting the color depth to 256 colors got me a huge speed increase. Might try to find a Win98 license on Windows, though... Windows XP is basically unusable on VPC for me.
     
  8. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #8
    Re: upgrade to 7

    Um, sure it will.

    Until the get hardware video card support everything will run like a POS.

    I would like real emulation...

    :(

    The older the version of Windows the faster it gets...:p

    Less bloated code.
     

Share This Page