I am currently using MS Virtual PC 2004 on a Windows XP Pro system. I
use it to run a second instance of XP for experimentation, to avoid the
risk of messing up my main system. The host computer has 4GB of RAM, and
I have allocated 1GB of RAM to the virtual XP.

I have downloaded both MS Virtual PC 2007 SP1 and MS Virtual Server 2005
R2 SP1, but I have yet to try either of them. How should I expect them
to perform relative to MS Virtual PC 2004? I am interested in obtaining
better CPU usage efficiency if possible, but I'm wondering if these
newer applications will actually put more of a load on my CPU, an Intel
820 Dual Core P4.



Do either of these newer apps have additional features that I might find
worthwhile? Vista compatibility is not currently a concern. Thanks!

John
--
Please reply in this newsgroup. I never post my true
email address to prevent spam. Thank you.

>I am interested in obtaining

>better CPU usage efficiency if possible, but I'm wondering if these
>newer applications will actually put more of a load on my CPU, an Intel
>820 Dual Core P4.

You will find that VPC2007 will be pretty similar speed-wise on your
system, though it might be *slightly* faster.

There is no additional load on the system, so that's not a worry.

>Do either of these newer apps have additional features that I might find
>worthwhile? Vista compatibility is not currently a concern. Thanks!

If Vista compatibility is not much of a concern and since you don't
have VT hardware, you don't have much to gain other than running the
latest supportable version.

--
Bob Comer


On Sat, 30 May 2009 13:22:18 -0500, John <notme@xxxxxx> wrote:

>I am currently using MS Virtual PC 2004 on a Windows XP Pro system. I
>use it to run a second instance of XP for experimentation, to avoid the
>risk of messing up my main system. The host computer has 4GB of RAM, and
>I have allocated 1GB of RAM to the virtual XP.
>
>I have downloaded both MS Virtual PC 2007 SP1 and MS Virtual Server 2005
>R2 SP1, but I have yet to try either of them. How should I expect them
>to perform relative to MS Virtual PC 2004? I am interested in obtaining
>better CPU usage efficiency if possible, but I'm wondering if these
>newer applications will actually put more of a load on my CPU, an Intel
>820 Dual Core P4.
>
>Do either of these newer apps have additional features that I might find
>worthwhile? Vista compatibility is not currently a concern. Thanks!
>
>John

John, In addition, a VM in VS run slower then as a VPC. I do not use server
applications, and the only reason I use VS is to gain programable control of
the serial port. Save your documentation and machine additions if you plan to
use OSs prior to Win98SE before you upgrade to VPC2007
--
Wesley


"John" wrote:

> I am currently using MS Virtual PC 2004 on a Windows XP Pro system. I
> use it to run a second instance of XP for experimentation, to avoid the
> risk of messing up my main system. The host computer has 4GB of RAM, and
> I have allocated 1GB of RAM to the virtual XP.
>
> I have downloaded both MS Virtual PC 2007 SP1 and MS Virtual Server 2005
> R2 SP1, but I have yet to try either of them. How should I expect them
> to perform relative to MS Virtual PC 2004? I am interested in obtaining
> better CPU usage efficiency if possible, but I'm wondering if these
> newer applications will actually put more of a load on my CPU, an Intel
> 820 Dual Core P4.
>
> Do either of these newer apps have additional features that I might find
> worthwhile? Vista compatibility is not currently a concern. Thanks!
>
> John
> --
> Please reply in this newsgroup. I never post my true
> email address to prevent spam. Thank you.
>