bare minimum processor speed to run only one virtual machine

D

DeCoder

n00b
Joined
Dec 6, 2012
Messages
10
For those guys experienced in running VMs
what is the bare minimum processor speed to run only one virtual machine VM comfortably in vmware on a laptop

i ask because i had to choose earlier between getting a laptop(with 8gb ram) with either processors
http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1735144

-Celeron B820 1.7 Ghz 2 cores dual core HD Graphics with VTX virtualization
or
-Core i3 2370m 2.4 Ghz 2 cores 4 threads hyperthreading HD graphics 3000 with VTX virtualization
(i have made up my mind now to get this core i3 laptop )

and i plan on running only one VM at a time not multiple VMs

VMware Workstation 9 System Requirements state that

PC requirements:

System requirements:
64-bit x86 Intel Core™ Solo Processor or equivalent, AMD Athlon™ 64 FX Dual Core Processor or equivalent 1.3GHz or faster core speed
2GB RAM minimum/ 4GB RAM recommended

but this is i feel too minimum requirements asked by VMware and i dont have any experience in running VMs on any machines. So what is the BARE minimum processor speed to run one VM.


:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
I ran vms on my pentium 3 850mhz laptop with maybe 512meg ram. There's not really a minimum speed; it really depends on what you're doing in the VM, and what comfortably means.
 
Depends what you're doing in the VM.

Minimum specs to make it run? Basically nothing.
 
toast0 said:
I ran vms on my pentium 3 850mhz laptop with maybe 512meg ram. There's not really a minimum speed; it really depends on what you're doing in the VM, and what comfortably means.
Click to expand...

On a P3 with 1/2 GB? Ouch. I hope that was a seriously stripped version of Linux/BSD/*nix...

On Topic, I'd worry more about available RAM to be assigned and which Hypervisor used than CPU Clockspeed.
 
Nate7311 said:
I'd worry more about available RAM to be assigned and which Hypervisor used than CPU Clockspeed.
Click to expand...

Same here. Clock speed isn't all that important with VM's in my past experience... but it depends on what you're doing with it too (and what the host will be doing while running the VM). RAM is pretty important, but then again... depends on what you're going to be using it for.

If you're running something like Windows 95, you could assign the VM 256MB and it'll run fine. If you're running Vista on it, you'll probably want 512mb-1gb assigned to the VM as a bare minimum
 
ram is cheap these days you can get 4/8 gigs of ram cheap and easily make ur system to 8 or 16 gb yes your right increasing ram will give better performance and is also not cost you much.

once u buy a laptop processor ur stuck with it for 3 to 4 yrs.

so i wanted to know how the processor speed would impact running vmware with one VM only
you know different generations of processors have different instructions per second, floating point instructions per seconds, pipeline lengths, architectures etc.

Yes again it depends on what your running in VM
so i plan to get the speediest processor around that will have speed for at least some years which in this case will be i3 2.4 ghz 2 cores 4 threads

i sure will feel like i want more now that Intel i7 is come out with quad core laptop processor
Core™ i7-3612QE Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.10 GHz) 4 cores 8 threads turbo boost to 2.1 to 3.1 ghz

But ahhhh that is so expensive for my pocket and double the cost and my budget i can only dream about it or hope that Intel sends me one for free to test and review ha ha ha
 
The short version is that as long as you have a box/laptop with a 64bit compatible processor that supports VT-x and 4gb of RAM you'll be fine. Most of the time the CPU Clockspeed and RAM requirements on software are there to give a general guidline for performance.
 
You need a processor that supports virtualization. Besides that, it depends on how much ram and how many cores the vm requires.
 
dr.stevil said:
Same here. Clock speed isn't all that important with VM's in my past experience... but it depends on what you're doing with it too (and what the host will be doing while running the VM). RAM is pretty important, but then again... depends on what you're going to be using it for.

If you're running something like Windows 95, you could assign the VM 256MB and it'll run fine. If you're running Vista on it, you'll probably want 512mb-1gb assigned to the VM as a bare minimum
Click to expand...

You could VM Win95 on 64MB and be fine. XP needs atleast 512 MB in my opinion though. You could get by VM'ing an XP with 256MB - 384MB depending on what you were using it for though but it wouldn't be very pretty. I assume Vista+ needs atleast a gig or more bare minimum.
 
I used to use Virtualbox with my Intel Core Duo T2400 @ 1.83GHz with 2GB of RAM on Windows 7.

I had Windows XP SP2 with no updates setup with one CPU core and 512MB RAM and it ran fine. I imagine if you update to SP3, you might want to increase the RAM to 1GB (based on my experience with the performance of a P4 2.4GHz w/ 512MB RAM updated to SP3 from SP2).

I also had Debian 6.* (with the latest updates at the time) setup with one CPU core and 512MB RAM as well. Performance was acceptable and expected (inline with my Pentium-M 1.6GHz).

With my much weaker processor and lesser RAM, you should have no trouble running just one VM on your laptop.
 
DeCoder said:
ram is cheap these days you can get 4/8 gigs of ram cheap and easily make ur system to 8 or 16 gb yes your right increasing ram will give better performance and is also not cost you much.

once u buy a laptop processor ur stuck with it for 3 to 4 yrs.

so i wanted to know how the processor speed would impact running vmware with one VM only
you know different generations of processors have different instructions per second, floating point instructions per seconds, pipeline lengths, architectures etc.

Yes again it depends on what your running in VM
so i plan to get the speediest processor around that will have speed for at least some years which in this case will be i3 2.4 ghz 2 cores 4 threads

i sure will feel like i want more now that Intel i7 is come out with quad core laptop processor
Core™ i7-3612QE Processor (6M Cache, up to 3.10 GHz) 4 cores 8 threads turbo boost to 2.1 to 3.1 ghz

But ahhhh that is so expensive for my pocket and double the cost and my budget i can only dream about it or hope that Intel sends me one for free to test and review ha ha ha
Click to expand...

Quad i7s for laptops have been out for quite a while.. we have a couple Dell's where I work that are a couple years old already that came with Quad i7s.

I believe the fastest laptop i7 is currently the i7-3940XM.
4 core, 8 thread. Base is 3.0Ghz with a turbo up to 3.9Ghz and has an 8MB cache

http://ark.intel.com/products/71096/Intel-Core-i7-3940XM-Processor-Extreme-Edition-8M-Cache-up-to-3_90-GHz
 
Isolating the virtual machine IO from your workstation will help the experience more than trying to build up a laptop. What I did (with VirtualBox) to get better performance from my laptop was put the VM on an external USB drive with some stick on velcro on the lid to keep from having to fiddle with it. eSATA would work even better if you have it. Or maybe via an express card. All depends on what your gear supports.
 
In my experience as long as it's not an atom with a 1.8" hard drive like my sony picturebook you will do fine.
 
I run an SCO UNIX VM on an old Pentium M laptop. I think it's 1.7ghz and 2.5gb of RAM. Runs just fine.
 
I've got a NFS server for some templates/failover managers/etc running on a 1.5Ghz atom (IIRC, haven't looked at it in a while) - works fine.
 
vr. said:
Isolating the virtual machine IO from your workstation will help the experience more than trying to build up a laptop. What I did (with VirtualBox) to get better performance from my laptop was put the VM on an external USB drive with some stick on velcro on the lid to keep from having to fiddle with it. eSATA would work even better if you have it. Or maybe via an express card. All depends on what your gear supports.
Click to expand...

Since you mentioned running a VM from a usb drive..im curious on how it would run from a usb 3.0 drive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top