Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Speeding up VPC

Speeding up VPC

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
c++csharpvisual-studiocomperformance
26 Posts 9 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • N Offline
    N Offline
    Nish Nishant
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

    My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

    T J R M M 8 Replies Last reply
    0
    • N Nish Nishant

      I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

      My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

      T Offline
      T Offline
      toxcct
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      what happens using VMWare ? yeah, i know, it's not the answer you were looking for... ;P in fact, i used VPC once, and i've been disapointed enough not to use it anymore. on the other hand, VMWare 4.5 (i didn't tried v5.0 yet) looked so good that the choice were made very quickly... this is just a guess, but if you can try it, please let me/us know... ;)


      TOXCCT >>> GEII power
      [toxcct][VisualCalc 2.20][VisualCalc 3.0]

      N 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • T toxcct

        what happens using VMWare ? yeah, i know, it's not the answer you were looking for... ;P in fact, i used VPC once, and i've been disapointed enough not to use it anymore. on the other hand, VMWare 4.5 (i didn't tried v5.0 yet) looked so good that the choice were made very quickly... this is just a guess, but if you can try it, please let me/us know... ;)


        TOXCCT >>> GEII power
        [toxcct][VisualCalc 2.20][VisualCalc 3.0]

        N Offline
        N Offline
        Nish Nishant
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        I get Virtual PC for free (kinda) with the MSDN subscription. Is VMWare freeware? If so, I might try it out too. Regards, Nish

        My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

        T 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • N Nish Nishant

          I get Virtual PC for free (kinda) with the MSDN subscription. Is VMWare freeware? If so, I might try it out too. Regards, Nish

          My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

          T Offline
          T Offline
          toxcct
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          unfortunately, it isn't (but it is worth it !!) but maybe there a trial period... don't remember :doh:


          TOXCCT >>> GEII power
          [toxcct][VisualCalc 2.20][VisualCalc 3.0]

          N 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • T toxcct

            unfortunately, it isn't (but it is worth it !!) but maybe there a trial period... don't remember :doh:


            TOXCCT >>> GEII power
            [toxcct][VisualCalc 2.20][VisualCalc 3.0]

            N Offline
            N Offline
            Nish Nishant
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            toxcct wrote:

            unfortunately, it isn't (but it is worth it !!)

            Ah okay, then I'll pass for now. Maybe in the future... Regards, Nish

            My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

            T 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • N Nish Nishant

              toxcct wrote:

              unfortunately, it isn't (but it is worth it !!)

              Ah okay, then I'll pass for now. Maybe in the future... Regards, Nish

              My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

              T Offline
              T Offline
              toxcct
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              i got a link : you can download a 30 days-trial[^] version 5.5. hope it will change your vision of the Virtual Machines world :)


              TOXCCT >>> GEII power
              [toxcct][VisualCalc 2.20][VisualCalc 3.0]

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • N Nish Nishant

                I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                J Offline
                J Offline
                Jack Puppy
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                My machine at home is similar to yours CPU-wise. Two biggest bottlenecks I've found: 1) Using dynamic virtual hard drives instead of fixed drives. 2) Using the Undo feature. I think my XP VPC is set to use 192MB with 512MB and it runs fine. (I haven't tried it using a hog like VS though) Win2K runs good with only 48MB. ... and there is a freeware VMWare "player" that (I think) can handle VPC machines. "My dog worries about the economy. Alpo is up to 99 cents a can. That's almost seven dollars in dog money" - Wacky humour found in a business magazine

                N 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • N Nish Nishant

                  I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                  My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                  R Offline
                  R Offline
                  Richard Day
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Have you got the VPC additions installed?

                  N 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • N Nish Nishant

                    I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                    My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                    M Offline
                    M Offline
                    Mike Dimmick
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Right-click the Virtual PC icon in the tray, and select Options. In the list, select Performance. Consider selecting 'When Virtual PC is running in the background: Run Virtual PC at maximum speed' rather than 'Give processes on the host operating system priority'. You can also balance the amount of CPU time given to each virtual machine: you probably want 'Allocate more CPU time to the virtual machine in the active window' if you're working interactively, whereas if you were running a number of virtual machines as test clients you'd probably want 'All running virtual machines get equal CPU time'. Here at work I have a virtual machine in which I run IE 7.0 Beta 1 on XP SP2 (which I'm posting this comment from). It has 256MB of the system's 1GB. I assume you've already installed the Virtual Machine Additions? If not, select Action, Install or Update Virtual Machine Additions from the VM's menu bar. Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder

                    N 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Richard Day

                      Have you got the VPC additions installed?

                      N Offline
                      N Offline
                      Nish Nishant
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Richard Day wrote:

                      Have you got the VPC additions installed?

                      Yes, I do. Regards, Nish

                      My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • N Nish Nishant

                        I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                        My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                        M Offline
                        M Offline
                        Madhu Cheriyedath
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        Nish, Try the following things 1) Install Virtual Machine additions 2) Right-click the Virtual PC icon in the tray, and select Options in the performance list, select "Allocate more CPU to the virtual machine in the active window" option. 3) Select "Run Virtual PC at maximum speed" in the 'When Virtual PC is running in the background' option. I use Virtual PC a lot. I have a 2GB laptop and a lot of times I am running a Virtual Machine with 512 MB. I also have an external HDD(7200 rpm with 16 MB cache) and one of my other virtual machine is running from there. Also check for VMWare player which is a free download. If you have a Virtual PC image(VHD/VMC files), you can import that to VMWare player and run them. In that case you don't need to use Virtual PC( just use virtual pc to to complete the OS install and create the image). I use VMWare player at one of my home PC because Virtual PC doesn't run on Windows XP x64 editions. It seems fine. The new Virtual Server 2005 R2 will run on Windows XP x64. Thanks, Madhu

                        N 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • J Jack Puppy

                          My machine at home is similar to yours CPU-wise. Two biggest bottlenecks I've found: 1) Using dynamic virtual hard drives instead of fixed drives. 2) Using the Undo feature. I think my XP VPC is set to use 192MB with 512MB and it runs fine. (I haven't tried it using a hog like VS though) Win2K runs good with only 48MB. ... and there is a freeware VMWare "player" that (I think) can handle VPC machines. "My dog worries about the economy. Alpo is up to 99 cents a can. That's almost seven dollars in dog money" - Wacky humour found in a business magazine

                          N Offline
                          N Offline
                          Nish Nishant
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          Jack Squirrel wrote:

                          1. Using dynamic virtual hard drives instead of fixed drives.

                          Ah okay, though I don't think I can afford a true partition right now, let alone a full physical drive.

                          Jack Squirrel wrote:

                          1. Using the Undo feature.

                          Hmmm, I don't know if I have that enabled. I'll look into this and try and disable it. Thanks for your suggestions, really useful. Regards, Nish

                          My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                          J 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • M Mike Dimmick

                            Right-click the Virtual PC icon in the tray, and select Options. In the list, select Performance. Consider selecting 'When Virtual PC is running in the background: Run Virtual PC at maximum speed' rather than 'Give processes on the host operating system priority'. You can also balance the amount of CPU time given to each virtual machine: you probably want 'Allocate more CPU time to the virtual machine in the active window' if you're working interactively, whereas if you were running a number of virtual machines as test clients you'd probably want 'All running virtual machines get equal CPU time'. Here at work I have a virtual machine in which I run IE 7.0 Beta 1 on XP SP2 (which I'm posting this comment from). It has 256MB of the system's 1GB. I assume you've already installed the Virtual Machine Additions? If not, select Action, Install or Update Virtual Machine Additions from the VM's menu bar. Stability. What an interesting concept. -- Chris Maunder

                            N Offline
                            N Offline
                            Nish Nishant
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            Wow, thanks Mike. I really appreciate your help. Regards, Nish

                            My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • M Madhu Cheriyedath

                              Nish, Try the following things 1) Install Virtual Machine additions 2) Right-click the Virtual PC icon in the tray, and select Options in the performance list, select "Allocate more CPU to the virtual machine in the active window" option. 3) Select "Run Virtual PC at maximum speed" in the 'When Virtual PC is running in the background' option. I use Virtual PC a lot. I have a 2GB laptop and a lot of times I am running a Virtual Machine with 512 MB. I also have an external HDD(7200 rpm with 16 MB cache) and one of my other virtual machine is running from there. Also check for VMWare player which is a free download. If you have a Virtual PC image(VHD/VMC files), you can import that to VMWare player and run them. In that case you don't need to use Virtual PC( just use virtual pc to to complete the OS install and create the image). I use VMWare player at one of my home PC because Virtual PC doesn't run on Windows XP x64 editions. It seems fine. The new Virtual Server 2005 R2 will run on Windows XP x64. Thanks, Madhu

                              N Offline
                              N Offline
                              Nish Nishant
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              Thanks Madhu. Appreciate your tips. I'll also try VMWare player out. I just wodner why the default setting is to run it as slow as possible. Regards, Nish

                              My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • N Nish Nishant

                                I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                                My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                                D Offline
                                D Offline
                                Daniel Grunwald
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                One possible issue: If the host OS is Windows XP SP2, VPC 2004 will run with all optimizations disabled. Install VPC 2004 SP1 to fix the problem.

                                N 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • D Daniel Grunwald

                                  One possible issue: If the host OS is Windows XP SP2, VPC 2004 will run with all optimizations disabled. Install VPC 2004 SP1 to fix the problem.

                                  N Offline
                                  N Offline
                                  Nish Nishant
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #16

                                  Daniel Grunwald wrote:

                                  One possible issue: If the host OS is Windows XP SP2, VPC 2004 will run with all optimizations disabled. Install VPC 2004 SP1 to fix the problem.

                                  Ooooh, thanks. Regards, Nish

                                  My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • N Nish Nishant

                                    I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                                    My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                                    V Offline
                                    V Offline
                                    Vipin Aravind
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #17

                                    VPC SP1 claims to have some performance fixes, if I remember right. Have you tried that? I use vmware for all the operating systems at work, it is good. But I don't think VPC would be bad though, that's what I felt on my colleague's machine sometime back. Vipin

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • N Nish Nishant

                                      I installed XP on a Virtual PC and then installed VS 2005 as well. I gave the VPC 768 MB Ram (which is the max I can afford as the host PC has only 2 GB). It's a P-4 3.2 MHz with HT enabled. But the VPC performs like a 486 DX2 running on 128 MB RAM. Is this normal? Is there anyway to improve performance? I looked at the VPC task manager and saw a 100% processor usage. But at the same time the host computer shows only about 5-10% CPU usage. To me this looks as if VPC is running under low priority. Why is this so? Is it safe to increase the process priority of the VPC process in the host machine? Any suggestions are hugely appreciated. Thank you. Regards, Nish

                                      My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                                      T Offline
                                      T Offline
                                      Taka Muraoka
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #18

                                      In addition to all the advice other people have offered, Scott Hanselmann suggests[^] making sure your VM's live on a different physical drive to your system drive (even if it's connected via USB).


                                      The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.

                                      N 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • T Taka Muraoka

                                        In addition to all the advice other people have offered, Scott Hanselmann suggests[^] making sure your VM's live on a different physical drive to your system drive (even if it's connected via USB).


                                        The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.

                                        N Offline
                                        N Offline
                                        Nish Nishant
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #19

                                        Thanks Taka. I guess it helps if you have 2 physical drives :( Regards, Nish

                                        My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                                        T 2 Replies Last reply
                                        0
                                        • N Nish Nishant

                                          Thanks Taka. I guess it helps if you have 2 physical drives :( Regards, Nish

                                          My blog : Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET

                                          T Offline
                                          T Offline
                                          Taka Muraoka
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #20

                                          Nishant Sivakumar wrote:

                                          I guess it helps if you have 2 physical drives

                                          He he :-) I just bought my fourth external USB drive. 460 Mb of disk storage just wasn't cutting it so I got a new 300 Gb one, just for backups.


                                          The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity. - Harlan Ellison Awasu 2.2 [^]: A free RSS/Atom feed reader with support for Code Project.

                                          N 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups