4 ms·
The snapshot options are much better in fusion, for that solo workflow, then stock virtualbox. I suspect vagrant covers those gaps. Long running (and pausing)
by heelix 7y ago
The snapshot options are much better in fusion, for that solo workflow, then stock virtualbox. I suspect vagrant covers those gaps.
Long running (and pausing) VMs behave better on fusion. I see better stability when pushed hard. Better use of the hardware. Been a long time since I ran benchmarks, but the same VM was about 4-10 seconds faster on a 2 minute process. Not enough to matter for most. The native disk access helps with things that are IO sensitive.
The UI drivers are better... so if you open up and run a Linux desktop, it feels much more native, if that is a thing.
I don't think I've even opened virtualbox in the last couple years... so my comparisons may be dated. YMMV
- gorgoiler 7y agoThanks for the write up.
- lloeki 7y agoI’ll add idle usage. VirtualBox shaves one-two hours off my MBP’s battery while Fusion leaves it untouched. Vbox graphics performance also left much to be desired: e.g dragging a terminal window around was slow, produced insane tearing and huge performance impact, and no amount of tuning would help; I’m not even talking about 3D stuff, this is just some plain X lightweight WM without a compositor. No such issue on Fusion, where I just imported the same VM.