| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
clpalmer
n00b
Joined: 18 May 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Vancouver, Canada
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: VMWare Server vs. Player w/ Dual-Core Athlon64 |
 |
|
I have an AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ running gentoo at the moment. I'm considering installing windows w/ vmware to run some non-linux apps and I'm confused on whether to install server or player. As I understand it, player doesn't support more than 1 CPU, but is in general faster than server. Is it worth it to install server for the dual-core support or should I stick with player?
I'm not doing anything in windows that's particularly CPU intensive, but if it'd run noticeably faster w/ server and dual cpu support, then I'd consider it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alex.blackbit
Advocate
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 2397
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
test both cases.
you can also consider using some other virtualization product like virtualbox which is OSS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kingc
n00b
Joined: 11 Feb 2008
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
VMWare player supports 2 virtual CPU's afaik (the newer versions at least).
Never used VirtualBox, but was put off by the fact that the website lists usb support only for the closed-source version. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Kernel & Hardware
