Vmware Fusion VERY slow!

Discussion in 'Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac' started by n8236, Dec 1, 2007.

  1. n8236 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #1
    I don't know if it's just me, but VmWare Fusion runs Vista very slow when over Boot Camp.

    I would say it runs only at 1/2 to 1/3 of the normal speed of a regular boot camp reboot.

    Is anyone experiencing this? And is there a fix?
     
  2. tersono macrumors 68000

    tersono

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    Running Windows in a virtual machine is always going to be slower than running it natively via boot camp. However, I wouldn't call it 'very' slow - I use Fusion + XP on a 2Ghz iMac at work and it's not really any slower than some of the older PCs we have around (mostly 2Ghz+ P4s with 512mb) - certainly it's plenty usable for regular business applications - even stuff like DreamWeaver and Fireworks.

    The trick to good Fusion performance, however, is plenty of RAM. 4Gb in the Mac with 1gb allocated to Windows is about optimal.
     
  3. n8236 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #3
    I've ran Fusion w/ a virtual XP and it runs very close to native speeds. But I'm guessing booting off Boot Camp doesn't give the same performance? Or is it just Vista?

    I only have a MacBook Pro w/ 2gbs of ram, so it's no speeding bullet.

    I'll try more ram and report back.
     
  4. phillipjfry macrumors 6502a

    phillipjfry

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2006
    Location:
    Peace in Plainfield
    #4
    It has to be the fact that vista, IMHO, is one of the most resource hungry OS's I've played with in...quite a long time. Maybe that's why vmware (which is already borrowing resources from your machine) is runnin slower than with xp. I haven't tried running vista yet through vmware.
     
  5. webgoat macrumors 6502a

    webgoat

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #5
    ideally you want 2 gb for mac os x and 2 gb for vista for optimum performance... i run my xp pro boot camp partition with 1 gb and the other 3 gb set to mac os x and it runs fantastic
     
  6. nekcih macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    #6
    I had the same problem. I narrowed it down to a slow external hard drive running over USB 2. It's a 1TB Western Digital. I moved my hard drive image off to a firewire 800 drive and now everything is smokin' fast. :)
     
  7. -tWv- macrumors 68000

    -tWv-

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Location:
    Ohio
    #7
    I use VMware fusion and I installed more RAM (4GB instead of 2) and changed the settings for the bootcamp partition to allocate more RAM to the virtual machine and it made a huge difference. The virtual machine boots faster and the speeds are faster than my old RAM set. I would recommend getting the most RAM you can for your MBP (I believe it's 4GB max) if you are going to be running VMware a lot. Also when you boot into windows the RAM upgrade helps vista run faster natively as well.
     
  8. Darth.Titan macrumors 68030

    Darth.Titan

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #8
    What the OP is saying is that Fusion is much slower running a Boot Camp (native windows) partition than it is running an actual virtual machine file.

    In my experience, I would say that his observation is correct.
     
  9. MVApple macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    #9
    I run Vista in VMware Fusion as well and what I noticed is that the machine is very slow for about 15 minutes, then things settle down and they run at a pace that is still slow but borderline acceptable. If I have work I have to get done in Microsoft Office, it works. I have a laptop that runs Vista on 1GB of ram and I don't have any speed issues. This makes me think that the sharing of the hard drive is a huge bottleneck.
     
  10. TK427 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    #10
    I am seeing exactly the same performance, although I am using a Centos 5.4 image.

    I am taking delivery of a fire-wire 800 external drive today, hopefully transferring the image to there should resolve the issue. I will keep you posted.
     
  11. macjunk(ie) macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    #11
    In the VM world, I find PD5 to be significantly faster than VMWare Fusion...You could try PD5 and check how fast it performs. If it performs similarly to VMWare, then maybe you need to temper down your expectations of speed from virtualized operating systems..:)
     
  12. MacBookDan macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Location:
    West Midlands, England, United Kingdom
    #12
    Exactly the same for me, which is why I removed VMware and now use Bootcamp. Vista was running very slow, I couldn't code in that :(.... it wasn't even allowing me to see my changes within forms until it was too late lol.
     
  13. balamw Moderator

    balamw

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    #13
    What you are describing sounds just like what was going on in this thread. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=912825 where he was allocationg all his RAM to the VM.

    Either the VM or the host Mac is probably being starved of resources. Once you start paging stuff out to the HDD everything slows to a crawl.

    B
     
  14. ussone macrumors newbie

    ussone

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #14
    Thank you for all the input, as a newbie to Mac it have been very helpful. I bought my first Mac after 20 years of using Windows and could not be happier.

    I am a day trader and use TradeStation which requires I use windows. I need in help as what is my best options: Bootcamp, VM, Parallels or other? I have a 15" MacBook Pro 2.66, 500 GB with 8 GB Ram. I do not play games or use anything beyond basic word, excel, email and surfing. The only concern I have is during market trading being able to process realtime data in TradeStation stock trading software. It appears Bootcamp is the best performer, although with my upgraded system could I use VM, Parallels or something else that would allow to run TradeStation in Windows and also use my Mac OS through the day?

    Thanks in advance for any help,
    Chris
     
  15. balamw Moderator

    balamw

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    #15
    You should be able to give a VM enough resources to work well, especially since you have a fair amount of RAM.

    If you don't think you will be running something in Windows that will require all the resources or direct access to hardware, go for a dedicated Parallels or VMWare Fusion VM instead of a shared Boot Camp/VM setup. It will perform better and give you more flexibility in terms of putting the VM to sleep and/or bringing it back.

    Which version of Windows are you planning on using? Are you planning on using the VM for Office or are you running that under OS X?

    B
     
  16. ussone macrumors newbie

    ussone

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #16
    Wow, thank you for the quick reply. I will only be using Windows 7 for TradeStation (day trading software) in the mornings and afternoons. All other programs, surfing, email, etc will be in the Mac OS.

    Only using Windows 7 since TradeStation is not avaiable on Mac OS or I would never, ever use Windows again.

    Since I am not very tech wise I am looking for the smartest route. I would prefer not to use bootcamp since I would have to stay trading 8-3 then only be able to use my Mac OS before and after the market.

    Thanks,
    Chris

     
  17. jlc1978 macrumors 68000

    jlc1978

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    #17
    Here's my opinion:

    If speed of trades in an issue, then go for a fast, cheap windows desktop machine, such as a Dell. You don't want to find your trade was delayed because of your machine.

    If speed is of no concern, then any reasonably fast Mac and a VM will work. I use Parallels V5 and Vista on an old MacBook (2008) and it's fine for everything expect games and other graphics intense applications.

    Given that Parallels or Fusion plus a Windows license will set you back around $200 - $300; the marginal cost of a cheap Dell desktop or laptop isn't that much. It all comes down to how much money is at risk if a trade is delayed?
     
  18. balamw Moderator

    balamw

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    #18
    Running a few machines at a time regularly myself, there is more risk of a delay due to the fact that the human needs to be looking at two different screens/keyboards mice. (IMHO of course, and using remote desktop would be no better than running a VM).

    IMHO still the response of a Windows app in a VM on an iMac will be better than what you could get from $300 desktop or notebook, and you would not get the added distraction.

    B
     
  19. Hackint0sh macrumors member

    Hackint0sh

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2010
    #19
    To the OP. What apps are you trying to run? Speeds shouldn't be that much slower unless you are trying to run graphics intense apps like games, or you are starved for RAM.

    Also, why Windows Vista? Ick! Seriously......run either Win 7 or XP.
     
  20. jlc1978 macrumors 68000

    jlc1978

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    #20
    While I agree with your assessment that looking at multiple screens could be an issue; it does not appear the OP wants to do that. My concern is that a VM may chose an inopportune time to delay a Windows operation, messing up a trade. I do believe the OP needs to assess what his actual speed / power requirements are and the risks of a VM vs a dedicated machine and then make a buying decision.

    Depending on the application and its demands a cheap machine may be plenty fast. If it really needs serious horsepower; I doubt a Mac with VM; unless you get into the real high end, will cut it anyway.

    So to sum up my position - It's a matter of getting the right tool, whether or not that is an OSX or Windows box. What that tool is depends on the end use.
     
  21. balamw Moderator

    balamw

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Location:
    New England
    #21
    You did notice the 2007 date on the OP, right?

    Agreed, as well as the end user. I was merely pointing out that adding a box is also not what the OP wants, and that having separate boxes can be its own source of delay.

    Q: Have you ever found from personal experience that running something in a VM causes delays? 'cause I certainly have not. Certainly no more than usual in Windows, when the virus scan or file system indexing decides to kick off at the worst possible moment.

    My experience in running Windows in a VM on a Mac has been pretty smooth, as long as I'm not taxing either the VM or the Mac side too much, even light use of engineering software is fine.

    That said, I personally just added two PCs to my formerly Mac only home network. One, because I needed to support some legacy 5.25" SCSI devices. The other is my work laptop that I use for engineering software that doesn't run well in a VM.

    I guess it depends on what kind of TradeStation user ussone is: http://www.tradestation.com/platform/system_requirements.shtm it does look like the power user profile would require Boot Camp or an additional (>$300) box, but up to standard would be fine in a VM on an i7. Give it 4 GB of RAM and two cores and be happy. JMHO of course.

    B
     
  22. ussone macrumors newbie

    ussone

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #22
    WOW, you guys are so wonderful in all the advice and help.

    I would prefer staying with one computer (Mac is preference) than two since I travel and in different cities every other week and like to carry only one laptop. I do day trade 2 or 3 days a week on TradeStation although I am probably more between a Standard and Power user: http://www.tradestation.com/platform/system_requirements.shtm I believe with a 2.66, 500 GB HD and 8 GB Ram Mac is should handle everything, just concerned how a VM will process and/or lag the data.

    Due to the wonderful advice from this group I will be loading a VM with Windows 7 tonight.

    One last question? Based on my requirements of using Windows 7 only for TradeStation, would I be better with VM Fusion or Desktop Parallel?

    Also, since switching to Apple my ISP (AT&T) 2Wire router does not like Apple (kicks off for a few seconds every 15 minutes or so. I have had AT&T check the lines, etc. Everything works great for years with my PC, but I had found there is an issue with Apple & 2Wire router see link http://discussions.info.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2286470&start=0&tstart=0 Anyone else run into this issue? My sister has a new 3Com ADSL 11n Firewall Router I can have if this would help.

    Thank all of you so much.
    Chris



     
  23. jlc1978 macrumors 68000

    jlc1978

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2009
    #23

    I believe bot have free trials so try them and see which you like best. I've had good luck with both, overall. Final thought - if I recall correctly both allow you to use a bootcamp partition - you can create a small one and then have the option to boot directly into W7 if speed becomes an issue. You lose the ability to use OSX then but only need lug 1 computer around.

    Good luck
     
  24. curioduo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    #24
    Having trouble with VMWare Fusion 3 running Windows 7

    Hi -

    I'm running Windows 7 with VMWare Fusion 3 on a brand new MacBook Pro and it is quite slow sometimes.

    When I installed Fusion, I didn't partition the Hard Drive and assign a specific amount of HD space or RAM. Can I do that now? If so, and it's something I should do, can someone explain how to do that?
     
  25. midniter macrumors regular

    midniter

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    #25
    Hi guys

    MACBOOK pro 13' ... 4GB...320GB... 2.3 GHZ i5... OSX 10.6.7

    VMware Fusion 3.1.3 I think (XP)... very slow

    When Im running virtual XP... I wont be doing much on MAC....
    Can we please talk abt VMware tools settings for PROCESSOR and RAM

    1. How many cores should i allocate ?
    2. How much RAM to allocate ?
    3. Where is the HARDWARE ACCELERATION option
     

Share This Page