Parallels Smacks Down VMware in Mac Virtualization Testing
Attention all Mac VARs and fanatics: Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion have gone head to head in a benchmark throwdown performed by MacTech Labs. The victor? Parallels Desktop for Mac. Read on for the benchmark numbers and some perspective …
Why are we reporting on virtualization software tech specs? Because as Macs become more popular and find their way into the enterprise and SMB, ensuring cross-platform support is often important. Sometimes running desktop virtualization software is the best way to make the most of IT budget constraints or compatibility issues. The two biggest popular contenders in that arena right now are Parallels Desktop for Mac and VMware Fusion. Both offer nearly the exact same features, and both companies have been after each other’s user base. But MacTech Labs has given both of them a complete benchmarking workout across five different Apple systems, with tests including 3D graphics, virtualization speed for Windows 7, application launching, Internet Explorer 9 benchmarks and virtualizing OS X Lion on top of Lion.
The results are long and numerous, but in nearly every instance, Parallels Desktop for Mac delivered more performance than VMWare Fusion. Here’s what you really need to know:
- On 3D Graphics with 3D Mark06 3D: “Parallels won by an even larger margin. Specifically, Parallels won 71 percent of the tests by 10 percent or more, and was also a bit faster on an additional 8 percent more of the tests, and tied on the rest. In other words, Parallels Desktop 7 beat or tied VMware Fusion 4.0.2 in all of the 3D graphics tests we ran.”
- On Internet Explorer 9: Using Microsoft’s own IE9 benchmarks, “… [a]cross the board, Internet Explorer 9 performed significantly better on Parallels Desktop than it did on VMware Fusion — in some cases, almost 90 percent more.”
- On Power Consumption: Of the MacBooks tested, the amount of power consumption when virtualization was running but idle was clocked. Parallels garnered “81 more minutes of battery life on the MacBook Pro.” That’s a huge chunk of time and productivity back.
- Conclusion: “Parallels Desktop 7 beat VMware Fusion 4.0.2 in 74.9 percent of the general tests we ran, and Parallels was double the speed or more in almost a quarter of the top-level tests. “
MacTech Labs didn’t vigorously test virtualized OS X Lion on top of OS X Lion, but said both Parallels and VMware were on par with each other. But the other numbers speak for themselves — Parallels is killing it right now. The bigger overall picture? According to MacTech Labs, virtualization on a Mac is more than a novelty, it’s something that works “really well.” If you’ve been hesitant to use such technology in your SMB or enterprise, perhaps MacTech Lab’s extensive review could change your mind, especially if consumerization of IT hasn’t.
Related
-
StrataCloud Aims to Make Converged Infrastructure Configuration Easy for VARs
Converged infrastructure (CI) systems, which combine compute, storage and networking functions for greater efficiency, scalability and flexibility in the data center, are exploding in popularity in the data center. Some estimates project that the CI market will grow to a $33 billion opportunity by 2019.
-
HPE Partners Get Hybrid Cloud Solutions for SMBs
-
Red Hat Makes Ansible Tower Easier to Use
-
Reader Poll: Network Virtualization Difficult to Understand
For many companies with a large mobile workforce, network infrastructure virtualization is a modern-day necessity, allowing employees across the globe to access enterprise assets from their mobile devices and close deals both from the field and from the comfort of their living rooms. But while some see network virtualization as a godsend, many companies continue to struggle to effectively make the switch from legacy data centers to virtual assets.
If everyone would just spend the $ to have at least Snow Leopard then people should be notified that they don’t need either of these because they have Bootcamp as part of the Snow Leopard upgrade that allows Windows to run natively on a Mac due to the Intel Processor. that is what i do and i just split my memory into two (Mac/PC). Works perfectly. Purchasing Fusion or Parallels in my opinion is unnecessary…
Can you run a test comparing Bootcamp to Parallels? Now that we know Parallels is better than Fusion would be good to know the difference between that and Bootcamp using the above categories or similar categories including price comparison, which if you already have Snow Leopard or better is $0 v $79?
Hi Isidro,
Thanks for reading. Bootcamp has actually been around since the days of OS X Tiger and the Intel processor switch in 2006.
But Bootcamp is just that: it’s booting Windows on the Mac, not running Windows and OS X side by side. In the enterprise and SMB, there could be a necessary Windows application[s] that must run, but running “Windows” isn’t the real priority. Parallels and VMware Fusion give you the ability to run Windows *and* Windows apps next to OS X apps, so you can enjoy all the benefits of OS X and get at your Windows stuff when you need to.
Booting back and forth to run different apps is hardly productive. Yes, anything running natively will beat a virtualized box, but that’s not really the point of this kind of software.
ahhh. got it. Thank you for the clarification. That makes all the sense.
In the enterprise and SMB, if they are really serous they would simply deploy Remote Desktop/Terminal services for any apps they need to run in windows. I don’t know any 3D software that runs only on windows so we talking about mostly business specific apps.
Damian,
Thanks for reading.
I think it really depends on the situation, or maybe even the workplace environment. There’s no single solution for everyone. Sometimes remote desktop and terminal services aren’t the most efficient or reliable, or they’re simply unavailable.