Reasonably Expectable Performance

Not even close, Harry.

At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz

850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)


On 3/25/05 8:12 PM, in article
260320051212185163%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com, "Helpful Harry"
wrote:



 >
  >> Hey folks,
  >>
  >> Has anyone out there done expected performance studies on VPC7?
  >>
  >> I'd like to know, in general but Wintel terms, what the performance of
  >> VPC7 would be on a Powerbook G4 1.67Ghz running Windows XP Pro.
 >
 > It depends on far too many factors:
 > - Mac's chip, RAM, OS, software, etc.
 > and - VirtualPC's RAM, OS, software, etc.
 >
 > A *VERY ROUGH* guide is that on avergae VirtualPC runs the equivalent
 > PC chip at about half the speed of the Mac's chip (ie. a 1.67GHz G4
 > will perform at around a 850MHz Pentium4), usually a bit better these
 > days.
 >
 >
 > Helpful Harry
 > Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

It's too bad I haven't been able to find someone who runs it so I can
see the performance.

But perhaps a look at what I'm trying to do would help with the
discussion:

I have a Sony VAIO Laptop with 512MB Ram running WinXP SP2. I use it
for:
Quickbooks
Quicken
Firefox
Thunderbird

I do some other things with the laptop on occasion: I run NetStumbler
from time to time for clients. But, really, that's it.

It's a nice laptop. But I really want a Macintosh, specifically a
Powerbook G4. (I'd like a G5, but I digress.)

I am wondering if I spend a really shiny nickel on a PBG4 1.67 with 1
GB RAM and get VPC, I am wondering if I can run those applications.
Really, all I'm looking to run are the financial apps. The rest are
doable with other Mac-centric apps.

For what it's worth, I do wonder about MS' motivation for continuing
this software. What are they gaining? The occasional Windows sale? And
if the performance is merely tolerable, wouldn't people be so inclined
to dump it as soon as possible? At $250, maybe it's better for me to
get QB and Quicken WITH my Mac?

Also: Helpful Harry did say a ROUGH estimate! ;-)
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

TCV wrote:
 > It's too bad I haven't been able to find someone who runs it so I can
 > see the performance.
 >
 > But perhaps a look at what I'm trying to do would help with the
 > discussion:
 >
 > I have a Sony VAIO Laptop with 512MB Ram running WinXP SP2. I use it
 > for:
 > Quickbooks
 > Quicken
 > Firefox
 > Thunderbird
 >
 > I do some other things with the laptop on occasion: I run NetStumbler
 > from time to time for clients. But, really, that's it.
 >
 > It's a nice laptop. But I really want a Macintosh, specifically a
 > Powerbook G4. (I'd like a G5, but I digress.)
 >
 > I am wondering if I spend a really shiny nickel on a PBG4 1.67 with 1
 > GB RAM and get VPC, I am wondering if I can run those applications.
 > Really, all I'm looking to run are the financial apps. The rest are
 > doable with other Mac-centric apps.
 >
 > For what it's worth, I do wonder about MS' motivation for continuing
 > this software. What are they gaining? The occasional Windows sale? And
 > if the performance is merely tolerable, wouldn't people be so inclined
 > to dump it as soon as possible? At $250, maybe it's better for me to
 > get QB and Quicken WITH my Mac?
 >
 > Also: Helpful Harry did say a ROUGH estimate! ;-)
 >

I run Quicken for the Mac on my system. And it came with a "light"
version of QuickBooks. Can you not get by with the Mac versions of those
programs and just forget about VPC? And this message was posted with the
Thunderbird for Mac version. Firefox also runs very nicely in the Mac
version.


Bill
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

In article , Paul wrote:
 > On 3/25/05 8:12 PM, in article


 >


  > >
   > >> Hey folks,
   > >>
   > >> Has anyone out there done expected performance studies on VPC7?
   > >>
   > >> I'd like to know, in general but Wintel terms, what the performance of
   > >> VPC7 would be on a Powerbook G4 1.67Ghz running Windows XP Pro.
  > >
  > > It depends on far too many factors:
  > > - Mac's chip, RAM, OS, software, etc.
  > > and - VirtualPC's RAM, OS, software, etc.
  > >
  > > A *VERY ROUGH* guide is that on avergae VirtualPC runs the equivalent
  > > PC chip at about half the speed of the Mac's chip (ie. a 1.67GHz G4
  > > will perform at around a 850MHz Pentium4), usually a bit better these
  > > days.
 >
 > Not even close, Harry.
 >
 > At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
 >
 > 850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)

I think you're misunderstanding. VirtualPC doesn't *emulate* a Pentium
4 (it can't since the software isn't designed to emulate that chip),
but the *speed* performance will be ROUGHLY equivalent to a Pentium 4.

If you're only getting 350MHz Pentium 2 speed out of a 1.67GHz G4 then
you're doing something "wrong" - like using the resource hog Windows
XP. :o)






Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

helpful_harry.TakeThisOut@nom.de.plume.com (Helpful Harry) wrote:

  > > At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
  > >
  > > 850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)
 >
 > I think you're misunderstanding. VirtualPC doesn't *emulate* a Pentium
 > 4 (it can't since the software isn't designed to emulate that chip),
 > but the *speed* performance will be ROUGHLY equivalent to a Pentium 4.
 >
 > If you're only getting 350MHz Pentium 2 speed out of a 1.67GHz G4 then
 > you're doing something "wrong" - like using the resource hog Windows
 > XP. :o)

Have you actually run any software under Windows under VPC that reports
what sort of CPU you seem to have, Harry? Under VPC 6, I have "BGInfo"
from SysInternals (I think - it's googlable, anyway) and it has never
reported an emulated CPU speed greater than 4x the bus speed of the Mac
I'm running it on. I'm pretty sure I've pointed this out before.

I can't say whether maybe the 266MHz CPU it claimed for my 500MHz iBook
with a 66MHz bus was actually equivalent to a 266MHz Pentium or not.
Nor can I say whether VPC 6 runs faster on my 1.5GHz PowerBook with a
167MHz bus than the 390MHz (yes, that's less than 167 * 4, pout!) it
claims or not.

But suffice to say, I'd be very interested to hear what benchmark or
diagnostic tool you've run within the guest OS to come up with numbers
half those of the Mac's clock speed - on any Mac higher than 500Mhz.

(I haven't done this test on a G5, but would be interested in any numbers
folks can get out of BGInfo on a G5 with VPC 7)

-Dan

--
Dan Birchall, Hilo HI - <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://hilom.multiply.com/" target="_blank">http://hilom.multiply.com/</a> - images, words, technology
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 01:04:34 -0000,
nobody RemoveThis @imaginary-host.danbirchall.com (Dan Birchall) wrote:



   >> > At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
   >> >
   >> > 850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)
  >>
  >> I think you're misunderstanding. VirtualPC doesn't *emulate* a Pentium
  >> 4 (it can't since the software isn't designed to emulate that chip),
  >> but the *speed* performance will be ROUGHLY equivalent to a Pentium 4.
  >>
  >> If you're only getting 350MHz Pentium 2 speed out of a 1.67GHz G4 then
  >> you're doing something "wrong" - like using the resource hog Windows
  >> XP. :o)
 >
 >Have you actually run any software under Windows under VPC that reports
 >what sort of CPU you seem to have, Harry? Under VPC 6, I have "BGInfo"
 >from SysInternals (I think - it's googlable, anyway) and it has never
 >reported an emulated CPU speed greater than 4x the bus speed of the Mac
 >I'm running it on. I'm pretty sure I've pointed this out before.
 >
 >I can't say whether maybe the 266MHz CPU it claimed for my 500MHz iBook
 >with a 66MHz bus was actually equivalent to a 266MHz Pentium or not.
 >Nor can I say whether VPC 6 runs faster on my 1.5GHz PowerBook with a
 >167MHz bus than the 390MHz (yes, that's less than 167 * 4, pout!) it
 >claims or not.
 >
 >But suffice to say, I'd be very interested to hear what benchmark or
 >diagnostic tool you've run within the guest OS to come up with numbers
 >half those of the Mac's clock speed - on any Mac higher than 500Mhz.
 >
 >(I haven't done this test on a G5, but would be interested in any numbers
 >folks can get out of BGInfo on a G5 with VPC 7)
 >
 >-Dan

I don't think he's saying that the CPU speed reported by Windows will
be 50% of the Mac's, but rather, that the performance of VPC will be
comparable to an x86 system running at half the speed of the Mac. In
other words, if you have a 1Ghz Mac, VPC will perform like its running
on a 500Mhz Windows box.


--
Cheers,
Steve Jain, Virtual Machine MVP
Website: <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.essjae.com" target="_blank">http://www.essjae.com</a>
"This posting is provided "AS IS" with
no warranties, and confers no rights.
You assume all risk for your use.
I am not am employee of Microsoft."
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

In article , Steve Jain
wrote:

 > On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 01:04:34 -0000,

 >


   > >> > At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
   > >> >
   > >> > 850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)
   > >>
   > >> I think you're misunderstanding. VirtualPC doesn't *emulate* a Pentium
   > >> 4 (it can't since the software isn't designed to emulate that chip),
   > >> but the *speed* performance will be ROUGHLY equivalent to a Pentium 4.
   > >>
   > >> If you're only getting 350MHz Pentium 2 speed out of a 1.67GHz G4 then
   > >> you're doing something "wrong" - like using the resource hog Windows
   > >> XP. :o)
  > >
  > >Have you actually run any software under Windows under VPC that reports
  > >what sort of CPU you seem to have, Harry? Under VPC 6, I have "BGInfo"
  > >from SysInternals (I think - it's googlable, anyway) and it has never
  > >reported an emulated CPU speed greater than 4x the bus speed of the Mac
  > >I'm running it on. I'm pretty sure I've pointed this out before.
  > >
  > >I can't say whether maybe the 266MHz CPU it claimed for my 500MHz iBook
  > >with a 66MHz bus was actually equivalent to a 266MHz Pentium or not.
  > >Nor can I say whether VPC 6 runs faster on my 1.5GHz PowerBook with a
  > >167MHz bus than the 390MHz (yes, that's less than 167 * 4, pout!) it
  > >claims or not.
  > >
  > >But suffice to say, I'd be very interested to hear what benchmark or
  > >diagnostic tool you've run within the guest OS to come up with numbers
  > >half those of the Mac's clock speed - on any Mac higher than 500Mhz.
  > >
  > >(I haven't done this test on a G5, but would be interested in any numbers
  > >folks can get out of BGInfo on a G5 with VPC 7)
 >
 > I don't think he's saying that the CPU speed reported by Windows will
 > be 50% of the Mac's, but rather, that the performance of VPC will be
 > comparable to an x86 system running at half the speed of the Mac. In
 > other words, if you have a 1Ghz Mac, VPC will perform like its running
 > on a 500Mhz Windows box.

Yep, and it's only a VERY ROUGH guide.

There's far too many things that can affect the speed to give an exact
"this Mac equals this PC". For example, running Windows XP usually
causes everything to appear slower than if you were running Windows 98
(again also depening on other factors).

From what I remember, benchmark applications running under VirtualPC
(and the computer Windows thinks you're using) are notoriously
unreliable.




Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

helpful_harry DeleteThis @nom.de.plume.com (Helpful Harry) wrote:


 >
  > > On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 01:04:34 -0000,

  > >


   > > >> > At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
   > > >> >
   > > >> > 850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)
   > > >>
   > > >> I think you're misunderstanding. VirtualPC doesn't *emulate* a Pentium
   > > >> 4 (it can't since the software isn't designed to emulate that chip),
   > > >> but the *speed* performance will be ROUGHLY equivalent to a Pentium 4.
   > > >>
   > > >> If you're only getting 350MHz Pentium 2 speed out of a 1.67GHz G4 then
   > > >> you're doing something "wrong" - like using the resource hog Windows
   > > >> XP. :o)
   > > >
   > > >Have you actually run any software under Windows under VPC that reports
   > > >what sort of CPU you seem to have, Harry? Under VPC 6, I have "BGInfo"
   > > >from SysInternals (I think - it's googlable, anyway) and it has never
   > > >reported an emulated CPU speed greater than 4x the bus speed of the Mac
   > > >I'm running it on. I'm pretty sure I've pointed this out before.
   > > >
   > > >I can't say whether maybe the 266MHz CPU it claimed for my 500MHz iBook
   > > >with a 66MHz bus was actually equivalent to a 266MHz Pentium or not.
   > > >Nor can I say whether VPC 6 runs faster on my 1.5GHz PowerBook with a
   > > >167MHz bus than the 390MHz (yes, that's less than 167 * 4, pout!) it
   > > >claims or not.
   > > >
   > > >But suffice to say, I'd be very interested to hear what benchmark or
   > > >diagnostic tool you've run within the guest OS to come up with numbers
   > > >half those of the Mac's clock speed - on any Mac higher than 500Mhz.
   > > >
   > > >(I haven't done this test on a G5, but would be interested in any numbers
   > > >folks can get out of BGInfo on a G5 with VPC 7)
  > >
  > > I don't think he's saying that the CPU speed reported by Windows will
  > > be 50% of the Mac's, but rather, that the performance of VPC will be
  > > comparable to an x86 system running at half the speed of the Mac. In
  > > other words, if you have a 1Ghz Mac, VPC will perform like its running
  > > on a 500Mhz Windows box.
 >
 > Yep, and it's only a VERY ROUGH guide.
 >
 > There's far too many things that can affect the speed to give an exact
 > "this Mac equals this PC". For example, running Windows XP usually
 > causes everything to appear slower than if you were running Windows 98
 > (again also depening on other factors).
 >
 > From what I remember, benchmark applications running under VirtualPC
 > (and the computer Windows thinks you're using) are notoriously
 > unreliable.

Ah. I had wondered if that might be the case; if it is, that would
explain a lot. I'll still have to do some real benchmarking, since I
don't see anyone else volunteering. ;)

--
Dan Birchall, Hilo HI - <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://hilom.multiply.com/" target="_blank">http://hilom.multiply.com/</a> - images, words, technology
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

In article , Paul wrote:
 >
 >Not even close, Harry.
 >
 >At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
 >
 >850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)

Sorry, but I see better than that kind of performance, even on my
1.5 GHz PowerBook. My PC seems to run about as good as an 8-900 MHz
Pentium-class machine, and I fathom that because my PowerBook runs
Windows XP Pro about half as good (more or less) as any of today's
1.7 GHz Pentium 4 Ms (a comparatively priced Sony Vaio, to be exact).
And... it runs Windows 95 seemingly faster! ;-)

What software are you trying to run, and on what Virtual PC
configuration?! To be honest, all I run on my Pentium box is Visual
Studio and Internet Explorer 6. Everything else I do is on the Mac.


 >On 3/25/05 8:12 PM, in article


 >


  >>
   >>> Hey folks,
   >>>
   >>> Has anyone out there done expected performance studies on VPC7?
   >>>
   >>> I'd like to know, in general but Wintel terms, what the performance of
   >>> VPC7 would be on a Powerbook G4 1.67Ghz running Windows XP Pro.
  >>
  >> It depends on far too many factors:
  >> - Mac's chip, RAM, OS, software, etc.
  >> and - VirtualPC's RAM, OS, software, etc.
  >>
  >> A *VERY ROUGH* guide is that on avergae VirtualPC runs the equivalent
  >> PC chip at about half the speed of the Mac's chip (ie. a 1.67GHz G4
  >> will perform at around a 850MHz Pentium4), usually a bit better these
  >> days.
  >>
  >>
  >> Helpful Harry
  >> Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)
 >
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

Tony Kavadias wrote:

 >
  >>Not even close, Harry.
  >>
  >>At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
  >>
  >>850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)
 >
 >
 > Sorry, but I see better than that kind of performance, even on my
 > 1.5 GHz PowerBook. My PC seems to run about as good as an 8-900 MHz
 > Pentium-class machine, and I fathom that because my PowerBook runs
 > Windows XP Pro about half as good (more or less) as any of today's
 > 1.7 GHz Pentium 4 Ms (a comparatively priced Sony Vaio, to be exact).
 > And... it runs Windows 95 seemingly faster! ;-)
 >
 > What software are you trying to run, and on what Virtual PC
 > configuration?! To be honest, all I run on my Pentium box is Visual
 > Studio and Internet Explorer 6. Everything else I do is on the Mac.
 >
 >
 >
  >>On 3/25/05 8:12 PM, in article


  >>
  >>


   >>>
   >>>
   >>>>Hey folks,
   >>>>
   >>>>Has anyone out there done expected performance studies on VPC7?
   >>>>
   >>>>I'd like to know, in general but Wintel terms, what the performance of
   >>>>VPC7 would be on a Powerbook G4 1.67Ghz running Windows XP Pro.
   >>>
   >>>It depends on far too many factors:
   >>> - Mac's chip, RAM, OS, software, etc.
   >>>and - VirtualPC's RAM, OS, software, etc.
   >>>
   >>>A *VERY ROUGH* guide is that on avergae VirtualPC runs the equivalent
   >>>PC chip at about half the speed of the Mac's chip (ie. a 1.67GHz G4
   >>>will perform at around a 850MHz Pentium4), usually a bit better these
   >>>days.
   >>>
   >>>
   >>>Helpful Harry
   >>>Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)
  >>
My emulation speed went up to 533 mhz when I switched the Mac's color
depth from thousands to millions. A simple change in system
preferences/display.
Incidentally, Scottrade's streaming ticker now looks and responds
correctly on the Mac side. Before increasing the resolution it did not
show the popup text boxes correctly. I increased the resolution because
TurboTax (Mac side) always wanted to reset the color resolution when
starting TT.

I run Quicken and Excel on the vpc xp pro side and am very happy with
the speed. These applications improved considerably with this
resolution change.
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

MacKenzieMouse wrote:
 > Tony Kavadias wrote:
 >

  >>
   >>> Not even close, Harry.
   >>>
   >>> At very BEST, VPC will emulate a Pentium 2 at 350Mhz
   >>>
   >>> 850Mhz Pentium 4 performance is on the wish list for VPC 9 or 10 (maybe)
  >>
  >>
  >>
  >> Sorry, but I see better than that kind of performance, even on my
  >> 1.5 GHz PowerBook. My PC seems to run about as good as an 8-900 MHz
  >> Pentium-class machine, and I fathom that because my PowerBook runs
  >> Windows XP Pro about half as good (more or less) as any of today's
  >> 1.7 GHz Pentium 4 Ms (a comparatively priced Sony Vaio, to be exact).
  >> And... it runs Windows 95 seemingly faster! ;-)
  >>
  >> What software are you trying to run, and on what Virtual PC
  >> configuration?! To be honest, all I run on my Pentium box is Visual
  >> Studio and Internet Explorer 6. Everything else I do is on the Mac.
  >>
  >>
  >>
   >>> On 3/25/05 8:12 PM, in article


   >>>
   >>>


   >>>>
   >>>>
   >>>>> Hey folks,
   >>>>>
   >>>>> Has anyone out there done expected performance studies on VPC7?
   >>>>>
   >>>>> I'd like to know, in general but Wintel terms, what the performance of
   >>>>> VPC7 would be on a Powerbook G4 1.67Ghz running Windows XP Pro.
   >>>>
   >>>>
   >>>> It depends on far too many factors:
   >>>> - Mac's chip, RAM, OS, software, etc.
   >>>> and - VirtualPC's RAM, OS, software, etc.
   >>>>
   >>>> A *VERY ROUGH* guide is that on avergae VirtualPC runs the equivalent
   >>>> PC chip at about half the speed of the Mac's chip (ie. a 1.67GHz G4
   >>>> will perform at around a 850MHz Pentium4), usually a bit better these
   >>>> days.
   >>>>
   >>>>
   >>>> Helpful Harry Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle
   >>>> handiwork hardships ;o)
   >>>
   >>>
 > My emulation speed went up to 533 mhz when I switched the Mac's color
 > depth from thousands to millions. A simple change in system
 > preferences/display.
 > Incidentally, Scottrade's streaming ticker now looks and responds
 > correctly on the Mac side. Before increasing the resolution it did not
 > show the popup text boxes correctly. I increased the resolution because
 > TurboTax (Mac side) always wanted to reset the color resolution when
 > starting TT.
 >
 > I run Quicken and Excel on the vpc xp pro side and am very happy with
 > the speed. These applications improved considerably with this
 > resolution change.
I forgot to mention the system in my previous post:
dual 1.8 mhz with 1 gig. vpc is allocated 256 meg.
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

TCV wrote:
 > Quickbooks
 > Quicken
 > Firefox
 > Thunderbird
 >
 > I do some other things with the laptop on occasion: I run NetStumbler
 > from time to time for clients. But, really, that's it.
 >
 > It's a nice laptop. But I really want a Macintosh, specifically a
 > Powerbook G4. (I'd like a G5, but I digress.)
 >
 > I am wondering if I spend a really shiny nickel on a PBG4 1.67 with 1
 > GB RAM and get VPC, I am wondering if I can run those applications.
 > Really, all I'm looking to run are the financial apps. The rest are
 > doable with other Mac-centric apps.

Well FireFox, ThunderBird and Netstumbler are doable on the mac by simply
running the mac versions of FireFox, ThunderBird and NetStumbler (aka
iStumbler on the mac). This is obviously going to be infinately better than
any emulation solution (and we won't even get into the fact that a Virtual
PC NetStumbler won't work on an emulated machine because it won't see the
airport card as a wireless card).

As for the rest of it, its tough to say, performance can be very subjective
going by people's experiences that i've seen here and in various other
forums. Simply saying, for example, that "Your proposed mac will run like a
P iii-500" (or whatever) is all well and good, but it doesn't take into
account how your target programs use the PC.

Indeed, do you know how your emulated OS + target program would run on a
*real* PC with the same spec as the proposed one for Virtual PC? If it would
suck on a real PC of that spec its not likely to run better than that on an
emulated PC with that spec.


--
--
Rob Moir
Website - <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.robertmoir.co.uk" target="_blank">http://www.robertmoir.co.uk</a>
Virtual PC 2004 FAQ - <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.robertmoir.co.uk/win/VirtualPC2004FAQ.html" target="_blank">http://www.robertmoir.co.uk/win/VirtualPC2004FAQ.html</a>
Kazaa - Software update services for your Viruses and Spyware.
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance 

Dan Birchall wrote:

 > But suffice to say, I'd be very interested to hear what benchmark or
 > diagnostic tool you've run within the guest OS to come up with numbers
 > half those of the Mac's clock speed - on any Mac higher than 500Mhz.
 >
 > (I haven't done this test on a G5, but would be interested in any
 > numbers folks can get out of BGInfo on a G5 with VPC 7)

I wouldn't look at the numbers.

I've spent a fair amount of time playing with Virtual PC 6, Virtual PC 7,
Virtual PC 2004 and PearPC for the various guides on my website and the one
thing i'm certain of on all of them, is that whatever number claimed in the
OS reported processor speed, or any benchmarks that look at the same, will
have absolutely no comparison to what actually happens when you put a "real
world" load on the virtual system and try to do some work.

--
--
Rob Moir
Website - <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.robertmoir.co.uk" target="_blank">http://www.robertmoir.co.uk</a>
Virtual PC 2004 FAQ - <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.robertmoir.co.uk/win/VirtualPC2004FAQ.html" target="_blank">http://www.robertmoir.co.uk/win/VirtualPC2004FAQ.html</a>
Kazaa - Software update services for your Viruses and Spyware.
 >> Stay informed about: Reasonably Expectable Performance