Recommended Posts

hi

i don't use virtualation software like virtualbox , and on my bios intel Intel virtualization VT-x was Off

 

i tried to enble and seems that it slows down a little my machine

 

does somebody know it's true?

have Intel virtualization on could slow down a litte a machine like 5%?

have somebody benchmarket a machine with virtualization VT ON and OFF

 

thanks

1 minute ago, drugo said:

hi

i don't use virtualation software like virtualbox , and on my bios intel Intel virtualization VT-x was Off

 

i tried to enble and seems that it slows down a little my machine

 

does somebody know it's true?

have Intel virtualization on could slow down a litte a machine like 5%?

have somebody benchmarket a machine with virtualization VT ON and OFF

 

thanks

No. 

11 minutes ago, adrynalyne said:

There is no need to. He is right. 

hi

what do you mean ?

it doesn't slow down a machine?

i guess only virtualbox or other virtualation software do need it

i read about it and in the article there a 5% -10% of slow down ,w10 /8.1 and w7

thanks

In theory if CPU has  virtualization built-in and not all processors do, it will not affect the system performance in CPU tasks. However You will have to register or dedicate system memory for every Virtual machine You are running and HDD space. These can and will affect system performance, especially if HDD is not dedicated only to virtualization.

12 hours ago, drugo said:

i read about it and in the article there a 5% -10% of slow down ,w10 /8.1 and w7

Where did you read that just enabling of the feature/instruction set would slow down your machine - even if you were not using virtual machines or have virtual software installed?

 

Did they back up such a claim with benchmarks?  And show how they did the benchmark?

 

Should be simple enough to do.. Boot your machine - run benchmark software of your choice.  Reboot machine enable the feature/instruction set, and rerun benchmark.  Rinse and repeat showing that this repeatable occurrence.

Enabling virtualization in the BIOS just means that the processor is capable of using those instructions. If you have no virtualization software running, your system will never use those instructions and there is no performance degradation.

10 hours ago, BudMan said:

Where did you read that just enabling of the feature/instruction set would slow down your machine - even if you were not using virtual machines or have virtual software installed?

 

Did they back up such a claim with benchmarks?  And show how they did the benchmark?

 

Should be simple enough to do.. Boot your machine - run benchmark software of your choice.  Reboot machine enable the feature/instruction set, and rerun benchmark.  Rinse and repeat showing that this repeatable occurrence.

Hi

on a german newspaper , with a benchmark

thanks

Yes, it does, if:

You install a virtual appliance on the same harddrive as your system drive, it will slow down the performance.

 

Then there's the simple fact that your host machine will have less processing cores and memory at its disposal.

 

With a semi-modern machine, you won't notice much though.

If you plan to do some work on a virtual machine, consider using a separate harddrive/SSD.

 

---

 

But, as long as you're not running a virtual machine, your system should not have slowed down.

So in this German Newspaper.. Were they running a virtual machine.. Since yes this will take away from the performance.. Did they have the virtual software installed and running, without running any virtual machine.  Just enabling the instruction set makes no sense that it would slow down the machine.

  • Like 3
3 hours ago, drugo said:

Hi

on a german newspaper , with a benchmark

thanks

Would you like to be more specific with your sources? Most newspapers now replicate their stories on their website, so can you link to that?

Can you provide benchmark configurations and results/figures to backup your claim?

 

From my understanding, turning on that option allows your processor to be able to understand and process those specific sets of instructions when it receives them, rather than not knowing what they are and ignoring them (which may cause overhead in itself?). Sure, a small amount of system memory may be allocated to accommodate for this, but you're talking about a minute amount.

3 hours ago, Bamsebjørn said:

Yes, it does, if:

You install a virtual appliance on the same harddrive as your system drive, it will slow down the performance.

 

Then there's the simple fact that your host machine will have less processing cores and memory at its disposal.

 

With a semi-modern machine, you won't notice much though.

If you plan to do some work on a virtual machine, consider using a separate harddrive/SSD.

 

---

 

But, as long as you're not running a virtual machine, your system should not have slowed down.

Nobody has said if you run a VM you will not see a possible reduction (Depends on the VM and resources).  The question is, does turning that BIOS setting on slow the machine down.

The answer from my experience has been No it does not.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...
Just now, Riva said:

If you are not using the intel or amd virtualisation extensions then it will slow down your machine. The extensions overcome this issue by allowing hypervisors access to resources on rig 3 of the CPU, OSes favor rig 0, 1, 2 for execution- or something like that

Many hypervisors won't even run without the extensions.

  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/10/2017 at 5:25 AM, Riva said:

True that. Virtualbox isnt a hypervisor and i think vmware workstation can work in both modes.

I'm sorry, did you say that VirtualBox isn't a Hypervisor? How does it run Virtual Machines then?

 

You should have a read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervisor

 

Pay attention to the difference between a Type 1 and Type 2 Hypervisor. I think what you meant was that VirtualBox isn't a bare-metal Type 1 hypervisor.

  • 7 months later...

All of a sudden, probably due to an update or a mistake, my laptop's fan started switching on a few  times an hour, from almost never. I tried everything and nothing worked. Then I saw a post that linked having virtualization set to "enabled" in bios and excessive fan operation. I knew that virtualization had previously been off, and I tinker a lot, so I must have turned it on by accident, but it was on, and once I turned it off, the fan operation went back to normal. Doesn't that indicate that virtualization is indeed tasking the machine and making it work harder if it was repeatedly triggering my fan?

39 minutes ago, saul-goodman said:

All of a sudden, probably due to an update or a mistake, my laptop's fan started switching on a few  times an hour, from almost never. I tried everything and nothing worked. Then I saw a post that linked having virtualization set to "enabled" in bios and excessive fan operation. I knew that virtualization had previously been off, and I tinker a lot, so I must have turned it on by accident, but it was on, and once I turned it off, the fan operation went back to normal. Doesn't that indicate that virtualization is indeed tasking the machine and making it work harder if it was repeatedly triggering my fan?

no.

 

if you have VT-x enabled in the bios, all that does is tell windows and any hypervisor host that your processor supports VT-x extra instructions. IF nothing is installed or using the extra instruction set, then it lies dormant.

 

 Your post above sounds more like a flakey quirk of a bios revision.

2 hours ago, saul-goodman said:

All of a sudden, probably due to an update or a mistake, my laptop's fan started switching on a few  times an hour, from almost never. I tried everything and nothing worked. Then I saw a post that linked having virtualization set to "enabled" in bios and excessive fan operation. I knew that virtualization had previously been off, and I tinker a lot, so I must have turned it on by accident, but it was on, and once I turned it off, the fan operation went back to normal. Doesn't that indicate that virtualization is indeed tasking the machine and making it work harder if it was repeatedly triggering my fan?

You do know this is 8 months old, right? Unless you made a new account, you aren't the OP...

20 minutes ago, Mindovermaster said:

You do know this is 8 months old, right? Unless you made a new account, you aren't the OP...

IMO it's not considered a necro post unless the thread hasn't been touched in over a year.

 

it's a new poster plus his post is exactly on the subject and was able to be answered in a single reply so i don't see any issue personally :). 

7 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

IMO it's not considered a necro post unless the thread hasn't been touched in over a year.

 

it's a new poster plus his post is exactly on the subject and was able to be answered in a single reply so i don't see any issue personally :). 

Just seemed out of place, that's all. :/

This topic is now closed to further replies.