[Bio-Linux] Graphics Performance in VMs

[Rudy J. Richardson]

Yes, I maxed out the video settings on VB as well as on Parallels and 
VMware Fusion. I also installed the additional tools in each case.

One way that I assess relative video performance is to run a 
graphics-intensive molcular modeling program, YASARA. With Parallels, 
YASARA runs passbly well, whereas under VB, I get a flickering screen with 
YASARA and cannot really run the program. VMware Fusion is intermediate 
between Parallels and VB.

Regarding Xfce, I have found that the Mint implementation of Xfce is 
particularly nice. It looks superb right out of the box with Mint's 
default settings.

On Sun, 3 Aug 2014, Steve Moss wrote:

> Dear Rudy,
> Parallels and Fusion are slightly different to VirtualBox as they can be
> considered similar to container-based or OS-level virtualisation, rather
> than full-blown hypervisor-based virtualisation.
> 
> With regards to VirtualBox graphics performance. Did you install the Guest
> Additions in the guest OS, as well as increasing available video memory and
> enabling acceleration in the VM settings? I find that these improve things
> greatly.
> 
> I certainly agree re Xfce. Hence why Xubuntu is so great for lower end
> machines/laptops.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Steve
> 
> On 3 August 2014 16:31, Rudy J. Richardson <rjrich at umich.edu> wrote:
>       Hi,
>
>       fyi, I have compared Parallels 9, VMware Fusion 6, and VB 4.3.14
>       on my MacPro 6.1 under OS X 10.9.4.
>
>       Each virtualization program works, but for good graphics
>       performance, Parallels 9 is far superior to the other two. The
>       graphics performance of VB is the poorest by far. I have tested
>       this with linux (Ubuntu 12.04, 12.1, 14.04, Mint 13, 17, and
>       Windows 7 guests.
>
>       Regarding DEs for linux, I get the best results with Xfce. KDE
>       also works, and I have found instabilities in Cinnamon and MATE.
>
>       rjrich
> 
> 
> --
>  
> Steve Moss
> about.me/gawbul
> Steve Moss on about.me
>  
> 
>