On 12/06/2013 07:58 AM, Toralf Lund wrote:
> On 06/12/13 12:26, Scott Robbins wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 01:08:05AM -0800, John R Pierce wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/6/2013 12:22 AM, Toralf Lund wrote:
>>>> KVM? I must admit I haven't even heard of it, except if you are talking
>>>> about switchboxes;-)
>>>>
>>>> Can it be configured to run an actual Windows partition? (This is how I
>>>> use VirtualBox today.)
>>> http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/KVM
>> Note that the article there is very out of date, but there is a link at the
>> top to a more current article.
>>
>>> yes, you can run a windows VM rather nicely.
>> It can run a Windows VM,
> The question wasn't whether it can run Windows, but whether it can be
> set up to use a Windows *partition*. As in a system originally set up to
> run natively, and not through a virtual machine.
>
>> but, at least in my experience, a Windows, or
>> actually, even a Linux with GUI, doesn't run as well as it does with
>> VirtualBox.
> OK.
>
> I sort of got the impression from other posters that it would actually
> work better than VirtualBox...
>> In addition, bridged networking takes a bit of work to set
>> up--not very difficult once you're familiar with it, but it's done with a
>> mouse click as it is in VirtualBox.
>>
>> On the plus side, it seems (not thoroughly tested on my part) to be less
>> resource intensive than VBox, and better at sharing resources.
> I see...
>
> - Toralf
>>
>
This article say KVM runs better than VB at least on the haswell
cpu
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_haswell_virtualization&num=1
--
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: steve.clark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netwolves.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
