Intel VTT, OSes, and improved virtualization?

[Maverick2002]

We're trying hard to upgrade from XP-64 at work. We have a mixed situation.

All of our apps run in XP-32, but we need ridiculous amounts of RAM for some critical things.

So we went with XP-64, which still runs most programs, but chokes on others. So a few machines are Vista-64, which run yet another set of apps just fine but not all of them. We're evaluating Windows 7-64 currently and it's presenting the same issues.

The point is, our "sweet spot" right now is either XP-64 or Vista with a VMware image of XP-32. The problem is that the performance of these virtual machines is dismal. I thought enabling VTT in the BIOS for supported CPUs would help, but it doesn't seem to. So my questions are:

1) What is the optimal way to virtualize XP-32 on Vista/7?
2) Is VTT even useful? I thought it was really an Intel-only thing and had nothing to do with VMware/Virtual PC?

 

[Absolution75]

It helps, I don't have any benchmarks that say how much - but it helps.

Check to see if you have it enabled in VMware/Virtual PC too. Enabling it in the bios won't help if the software isn't using it.


What CPU are you using? Not all models have VT.

 

[zerogear]

Or you can look at the Virtual PC/XP Mode in Windows 7 that is coming out. Should help a lot in terms of XP-emulation while having it intergrate pretty seamlessly into Windows 7.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

AMD also has virtualiztion technology that also allows Virtual PC/XP Mode in Windows 7. It is called V.

 

[Maverick2002]

This is for machines using VMware; CPU support has been confirmed.

Also, I don't see how XP mode integrates seamlessly. I'm running it now and it still behaves the same way that a VMware appliance does - it runs in its own window and shares some resources ... unless I missed some setting? I remember seeing screenshots where it's running in the same workspace as the desktop, but it's not for me.

I haven't really seen much of a difference in performance before/after though. Certain things still work slow as hell.

 

[Maverick2002]

bump

 

[Fox5]

Core i5/i7 machines will have much better virtualization performance.
AMD's Phenom II's are probably better tha ncore 2 as well.

 

[Maverick2002]

For what reasons (other than "it's just a faster CPU with more cores")? I've also tried out XP mode in 7 which works decent, but it uses CPU acceleration for 3D (software), which becomes quite a bottleneck when working with models in a 3d workspace. That's the biggest concern.

 

[imagoon]

Originally posted by: Maverick2002
This is for machines using VMware; CPU support has been confirmed.

Also, I don't see how XP mode integrates seamlessly. I'm running it now and it still behaves the same way that a VMware appliance does - it runs in its own window and shares some resources ... unless I missed some setting? I remember seeing screenshots where it's running in the same workspace as the desktop, but it's not for me.

I haven't really seen much of a difference in performance before/after though. Certain things still work slow as hell.

Your missing a setting / way of using. Look in the start menu for "Virtual Windows XP application" They will start citrix style with only the program's window.

You only open it as an full desktop window when you need to install apps inside it. Using those short cuts open it program only.

 

[imagoon]

Originally posted by: Maverick2002
For what reasons (other than "it's just a faster CPU with more cores")? I've also tried out XP mode in 7 which works decent, but it uses CPU acceleration for 3D (software), which becomes quite a bottleneck when working with models in a 3d workspace. That's the biggest concern.

That would be because virtualization is not for 3D applications. There is no product on the market right now that has 'good' 3d support inside a virtual environment. Few if any actually support directx / opengl well enough to be functional.

 

[Fox5]

Originally posted by: Maverick2002
For what reasons (other than "it's just a faster CPU with more cores")? I've also tried out XP mode in 7 which works decent, but it uses CPU acceleration for 3D (software), which becomes quite a bottleneck when working with models in a 3d workspace. That's the biggest concern.

Both the i7 and phenoms have better virtualization support due to the integrated mem controller.

Also, vmware and virtualbox both have built in 3d hardware support to an extent. Vmware has an emulated directx driver, and in virtualbox, the windows directx dlls can be replaced with wine so that it uses opengl.

 

[Maverick2002]

Gotcha ... I figured as much. So the hyped-up "XP Mode" isn't really anything to get excited about other than running some really old apps. Also, regarding the "launching apps directly" - yea I was doing it wrong. It still launches the virtual machine though; you just don't see it, but it is running and using the allocated resources.

 

[zerogear]

Of course it's still running VM. It was never meant for anything else besides running old incompatible apps.

 

[hooflung]

The problem with VM's in a desktop/workstation environment is disk I/O usually. Most of us just don't have iSCSI for us to run VM's on a high bandwidth share that can provide you with near ATA speeds. Having to run a VM with I/O intensive functions usually choke a VM unless you are running on bleeding edge hardware.

Try using VirtualBox and use AHCI. You'll want a really good AHCI subsystem which usually makes AMD Athlon 64 X2 platforms underdogs even though the Virt is really good on AMD. You'll want to go PHENOM II so you can use the AMD RAID drivers, which are required to turn on NCQ on SB750's and possibly 700 and 600. You'll need the extra core power because this will use up some CPU cycles unfortunately.

Or you could do a Nehelem. Ofc if you are on a server and use local raid 1/5 to store your VM's then you are kind of limited by bandwidth of your array and controller. Maybe trying a RAID 10 would get you more performance but I really, really dislike RAID 10 for obvious reasons.

 

[imagoon]

Originally posted by: hooflung
The problem with VM's in a desktop/workstation environment is disk I/O usually. Most of us just don't have iSCSI for us to run VM's on a high bandwidth share that can provide you with near ATA speeds. Having to run a VM with I/O intensive functions usually choke a VM unless you are running on bleeding edge hardware.

Try using VirtualBox and use AHCI. You'll want a really good AHCI subsystem which usually makes AMD Athlon 64 X2 platforms underdogs even though the Virt is really good on AMD. You'll want to go PHENOM II so you can use the AMD RAID drivers, which are required to turn on NCQ on SB750's and possibly 700 and 600. You'll need the extra core power because this will use up some CPU cycles unfortunately.

Or you could do a Nehelem. Ofc if you are on a server and use local raid 1/5 to store your VM's then you are kind of limited by bandwidth of your array and controller. Maybe trying a RAID 10 would get you more performance but I really, really dislike RAID 10 for obvious reasons.

This really only applies to disk i/o heavy applications. In the case of the OP though he is trying to do 3d rendering, this typically will not work well for reasons listed above. Disk I/O is only part of the equation but not likely the problem in this case. Typically an iSCSI target by itself is not any faster than a local disk. At least not until you get to the higher priced systems / 10gig etc.

Generally anything video intensive is going to run like junk in a vm. It really isn't the goal of vmware / virtual server. Virtual XP is great for random things that refuse to run in 7. The current version ESXi 4's client is an example.