Best Windows Distro for AS5?

Go To Last Post
13 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Hello guys!

I am thinking of making a portable windows installation for the as5.

What windows distro (Winxp w or w/out SP , Vista , Win7) (32bit)(64bit) do you prefer that its better and faster for as5 to installed on a virutal machine on virtualbox?

Firstly we are not choosing any of the 64bit versions of windows because are heavier (memory) and maybe its faster to run a 32bit OS on a 64bit host.I am not sure for the winxp 64bit version which uses the windows 2003 server kernel and it could be better but the as5 its made 32bit only so its slower.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

i'd choose AS4. AS5 isn't ready for prime time.

Regards,
Steve A.

The Board helps those that help themselves.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

IMHO, running a 32bit OS on a 64bit system is a waste of resources. If your host is 64bit and the virtualbox supports it (I am not familiar with virtualbox's capabilities) why not try that first? It is only a couple of hours wasted in the unlikely event that it fails.

As for the OS, I would go with win7, maybe home premium version. Fast enough in a modern host and it includes much of the infrastructure (patches, frameworks etc). Second choice would be WinXP PRO SP3.

-Pantelis

Professor of Applied Murphology, University of W.T.F.Justhappened.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Koshchi wrote:
AS5 isn't ready for prime time.

Hey, that's my line! :wink:

"I may make you feel but I can't make you think" - Jethro Tull - Thick As A Brick

"void transmigratus(void) {transmigratus();} // recursio infinitus" - larryvc

"It's much more practical to rely on the processing powers of the real debugger, i.e. the one between the keyboard and chair." - JW wek3

"When you arise in the morning think of what a privilege it is to be alive: to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love." -  Marcus Aurelius

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

pnp wrote:
As for the OS, I would go with win7, maybe home premium version. Fast enough in a modern host and it includes much of the infrastructure (patches, frameworks etc). Second choice would be WinXP PRO SP3.
I agree with the Win7 suggestion as it works very well in Virtualbox. I'm not sure I would use Win XP PRO SP3 though. It will work but Win7 integrates better.

"I may make you feel but I can't make you think" - Jethro Tull - Thick As A Brick

"void transmigratus(void) {transmigratus();} // recursio infinitus" - larryvc

"It's much more practical to rely on the processing powers of the real debugger, i.e. the one between the keyboard and chair." - JW wek3

"When you arise in the morning think of what a privilege it is to be alive: to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love." -  Marcus Aurelius

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Well virtualization its complicated and i dont know what is going on.

Well win7 is good but i think its heavy for a guest system compared to a winxp sp3 micro-tiny versions.

I tried MicroXP 0.83 but it didnt install .net 4

I should do some speed test to see what is going on.

I think its better to have 32bit guest on a 64bit host because the application on the guest its 32bit so its faster that to have a 64bit system and a 32bit application. Secondly you need less memory for the guest system (ram & hdd). ofcourse its better to use 64bit guest on a 64bit host if you use 64bit programs or if you need more that 3gb memory.

If you use nested pages on a eg. virtualBox they say that its almost 100% same speed.

What about to have a 32bit guest on software virtualization (Virtualbox is 64bit application) on a 64bit host?

pnp wrote:
IMHO, running a 32bit OS on a 64bit system is a waste of resources. If your host is 64bit and the virtualbox supports it (I am not familiar with virtualbox's capabilities) why not try that first? It is only a couple of hours wasted in the unlikely event that it fails.

As for the OS, I would go with win7, maybe home premium version. Fast enough in a modern host and it includes much of the infrastructure (patches, frameworks etc). Second choice would be WinXP PRO SP3.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

DieCore wrote:
I think its better to have 32bit guest on a 64bit host because the application on the guest its 32bit so its faster that to have a 64bit system and a 32bit application. Secondly you need less memory for the guest system (ram & hdd).

What makes you think so? I cannot think of any reason why it is better. In my view, when your hardware is able to do native 64bit work, and you feed it 32bits, you are wasting half its abilities. Something like using an integer to store values of maximum 255. It is not emulated 64bits, its native. And memory requirements should be about the same. I am no expert in virtualization though, so I might have my facts wrong.
DieCore wrote:

What about to have a 32bit guest on software virtualization (Virtualbox is 64bit application) on a 64bit host?

As long as virtualbox supports the guest system, it should work. Or your question is about performance?

What are the specs of your host system? CPU, RAM and HDD interface? Are small performance differences (eg 5-10%) important?

Also, I usually avoid crippled down versions of OSes unless it is absolutely necessary. I prefer to not disturb the balance of a system, especially if it is used for development.

-Pantelis

Professor of Applied Murphology, University of W.T.F.Justhappened.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I am trying to use as5 as fast as possible because its really big and slow.

as5 is x86 application so if we run it on a 64bit its a bit slower that when if it was running on a 32bit os.

the host pc has win7 x64 and is i5 2400k 16gb ram!

What i mean is it could be possible when you use 32bit guest os and a 32bit application on the guest host you need less ram memory for the guest OS compared to 64bit guest and it may the hyper-visor (virtualbox which is a 64bit application) could use the 64bit OS capabilities of the host cpu and lets say <<fool>> the 32bit guest os by converting the x86 instructions to 64bit instructions (full software emulation). That works at soft mode only and not when you use AMD-V or VT-x .

i got it from here > http://www.virtualbox.org/manual....

edit: check and this http://www.vmware.com/pdf/RVI_pe...

Well in real world that its not fast as it looks like x86_64 arch it has twice (int only) in number and in width the size of the cpu registers (if i remember correctly) compared to x86 32bit arch.

Quote:

What about to have a 32bit guest on software virtualization (Virtualbox is 64bit application) on a 64bit host?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

After having a quick look at your links (which are an interesting reading), I think that it would only make sence to have hardware virtualization enabled. Any speed gain you get from 32->64bit emulation (if this is possible at all) it seems to be small compared to what you lose from having HW virtualization disabled.

But I am curious how you find it to be slow. Have you tried it? I run it on a system with a CoreDuo T5750 2.0Ghz, 4 (3) gigs of RAM and Vista 32bit SP1 which has not been formatted the last 3 years and is heavily used daily. On that bloated system, it runs quite smoothly. Of course, speed is in the eye of the beholder. But are you sure the speed gains worth the trouble? Your system is strong enough to handle any Win7 VM quite easily. If you devote 1-2 cores to your VM and a few gigs of ram, I think it should run really well.

(I am sorry I cannot answer your questions with something more concrete, but as I said, VM is not my field. Still, I am interested to see your findings!)

-Pantelis

Professor of Applied Murphology, University of W.T.F.Justhappened.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I tried both win xp sp3 micro 0.92 & win 7 nonSP1 lite 700mb and both of them they need to install .net4

WinXP it needs less hdd but win7 its much much faster not only in start up time but at compiling also!!! compiling test with the AVR32 EVK1100 control panel big application example

Both VMs have 1gb ram and 2 cpu cores.
win XP was with direct3d (its even more slow without) but on win7 i had rendering problems besides direct 3d on virtual box its beta so its safe not to use it.
the only diference is that win7 VM had ICH9 chipset & HDD sata ahci controller.

Both VMs where alread cashed in ram and i think the winner is win7.

I also noticed faster installation of the .net & as5 in win7

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I'm running AS5 in a VirtualBox Window XP SP3 client and it works just fine given 1.5 GB memory.

Happy Trails,

Mike

JaxCoder.com

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Having a reasonable Disk IO rate, should also speed up things. IMHO the Disk rate is a primary throttle for VM's. My collegue http://senthilthecoder.com always believes so.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I use AV5 on both winxp sp3 and win7 64bit and have no issues with either one. I keep the updates very current and I think that helps.