VirtualBox vs VMware: part 2010 
Because the free Vmware Player now supports also the creating of virtual machines, it’s
time to make another short benchmark.
Guest Windows 7 64Bit Home, 2xCPU, 2GB RAM, 20GB virtual HD on 1TB Samsung Spinpoint HD
Virtual Machines (64Bit) VirtualBox 3.2.1, VMware Player 3.1.2
Windows 7 Performance Index
| VirtualBox | VMware | |
| CPU | 5,5 | 5,5 |
| RAM | 5,5 | 5,5 |
| Graphic | 1,0 | 4,2 |
| Graphic (Games) | 1,0 | 3,4 |
| Harddisk | 5,9 | 6,0 |
| Performance Index: | 1,0 | 3,4 |
Crystal Disk Mark 3.0
| VirtualBox | VmWare Player | |||
| Read | Write | Read | Write | |
| Seq | 115.8 | 34.61 | 122.1 | 54.81 |
| 512k | 60.31 | 30.80 | 43.69 | 53.45 |
| 4k | 0.858 | 0.718 | 1.004 | 11.78 |
| 4k QD32 | 0.950 | 0.911 | 1.129 | 19.13 |
Summary
There is no difference for the computing performance. VirtualBox and VMware playing at the same level.
For graphic performance/support VMware wins. VirtualBox 3D support is only rudimentary and does not work for Windows Airo (so the bad performance index for graphics).
The disk/caching performance of VMware is better.
The overall performance of VMware Player is better then VirtualBox.
If you need 3D support eg. for Windows 7 Airo as a guest, VMware is the only solution.
If you need snapshots VirtualBox wins, for such features you need VMware Workstation.
English
Deutsch
