Qemu vs. Virtualbox CPU usage

Discussion in 'sandboxing & virtualization' started by Gullible Jones, Dec 20, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Something I noticed about Qemu (without KVM) vs. Virtualbox, on my 1.6 GHz dual core Pentium D laptop, without hardware virtualization support:

    - Qemu uses about 40-50% of one core's resources when installing Windows 2000, with occasional spikes to 80-90%.

    - Virtualbox, on the other hand, spends most of its time pegging one core to 99%.

    In terms of guest OS performance Virtualbox is better, probably because of the better graphics support. But what's with the CPU use? I thought that KVM-less Qemu emulated all its hardware, while Virtualbox (even without hardware virtualization) ran everything on the host CPU. So why is Virtualbox being a bigger CPU hog?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.