Apple M1 MacBooks can now run virtualized Windows 10 faster and more efficiently compared to Intel-based models

[Redaktion]

The latest version of the Parallels Desktop VM manager is optimized for the new M1-powered MacBooks and allows users to run virtualized Windows 10 at native speeds. Compared to previous Intel-based MacBooks, the new M1-based models are 2.5 more energy efficient, up to 60% faster in DX 11 games and up to 30% in general when running a virtual instance of Windows 10.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-M1-MacBooks-can-now-run-virtualized-Windows-10-faster-and-more-efficiently-compared-to-Intel-based-models.532716.0.html

[kek]

>buying a Mac to run virtualized windows

lol

[RB15 User]

You do understand the concept of virtualization, right? Must be one of the dumbest comments I've read today. Also what is Parallels supposed to do? Not allow you to do that? They're a company selling products.

[Jesse]

And how are they compared to ... you know, a current windows laptop, perhaps sporting the same amount of ram, and an i7-1185(and whatever other crap digits/characters intel wants to add in a bout of irony)?

Of course it is faster than the old MacBook it is replacing.  Is it faster than current windows laptops at running windows?

[iamnotacat]

But will it run crysis?

[S.Yu]

But will it run crysis?

At this point? Probably yes ;D
The original, of course.

And how are they compared to ... you know, a current windows laptop, perhaps sporting the same amount of ram, and an i7-1185(and whatever other crap digits/characters intel wants to add in a bout of irony)?

Of course it is faster than the old MacBook it is replacing.  Is it faster than current windows laptops at running windows?

I took some time wrapping my head around the dreaded phrasing "2.5x less energy", and it seems to work out to "60% less energy", in English. If energy means work as it's supposed to, then that's already very impressive. Even if it's not faster at all it's a solid upgrade, and the numbers could be derived from the difference between TGL and ICL, which is definitely not as significant.

[mike mcdermid]

its not windows it will run though is it??? isnt it windows for Arm devices not the actual windows you can buy

[_MT_]

its not windows it will run though is it??? isnt it windows for Arm devices not the actual windows you can buy

While you can't buy a retail box with Windows 10 on ARM, they use the same license keys AFAIK (i.e. Windows license is a Windows license, no matter the architecture). You can purchase x86 licences (or generate them for testing purposes if you are MSDN subscriber) and then assign them to ARM machines. But as always, check with MS before you spend money on licenses.

[Shawn Zernik]

This will not run your apps.  It's misleading.  Visual studio for windows will not work.  This is windows for arm!  Try qemu for x86 compatibility.

[Lima]

>buying a Mac to run virtualized windows

lol

I know! It is like being a heaven and having a back door to... well... other places!

But if you must, PC World magazine have stated that the best laptop to run Windows, is a Mac when it runs Windows! (even in pre-M1 era!)

It really makes it clear, that not only the software of the Mac has a much more interesting, more secure roots (Unix) than Windows, but on top of that, as it were not enough, the hardware is also better than average!

In a perfect world, all things would run natively for the M1, but for the time being, I guess running things faster on an M1, more efficiently, even if it emulated, even if it is Windows-only app, will have to do!

[S.Yu]

>buying a Mac to run virtualized windows

lol

I know! It is like being a heaven and having a back door to... well... other places!

But if you must, PC World magazine have stated that the best laptop to run Windows, is a Mac when it runs Windows! (even in pre-M1 era!)

It really makes it clear, that not only the software of the Mac has a much more interesting, more secure roots (Unix) than Windows, but on top of that, as it were not enough, the hardware is also better than average!

In a perfect world, all things would run natively for the M1, but for the time being, I guess running things faster on an M1, more efficiently, even if it emulated, even if it is Windows-only app, will have to do!

Too heavy, fascist port selection, no touchscreen nor OLED in this age, laughable price-performance pre-M1, especially the GPUs.

[vertigo]

I took some time wrapping my head around the dreaded phrasing "2.5x less energy", and it seems to work out to "60% less energy", in English.

Yeah, definitely a poor choice of phrasing, used because it sounds more impressive, with 250% being > 60%. Why be clear when you can be sensationalist?

If energy means work as it's supposed to, then that's already very impressive. Even if it's not faster at all it's a solid upgrade, and the numbers could be derived from the difference between TGL and ICL, which is definitely not as significant.

That would be a big, and risky, assumption to make based on the already clear fact whoever came up with those numbers cares more about making them sound impressive than them having real meaning. It could be that it uses "2.5x less energy" (i.e. 60% less, or 40% as much) but doesn't perform as well. Granted, that's not my understanding of it at this point, but without more info, that could be the case. After all, it doesn't say it uses that much less energy while achieving those 30-60% better performance numbers. And I thought, based on earlier articles, that the M1 chip had better performance virtualizing Windows than Intel does running Windows bare-metal, but this seems to indicate that's not the case, and that it's just better than virtualizing on Intel, meaning it still might be better to run Windows natively.

This will not run your apps.  It's misleading.  Visual studio for windows will not work.  This is windows for arm!  Try qemu for x86 compatibility.

Thanks for pointing this out. Despite my great dislike for Apple and not being one to spend twice as much for something less capable, I've been recently considering trying one out due to the M1 and ongoing, worsening issues with Windows, though I've decided to pass for now since I refuse to buy a laptop with soldered storage. This article had me really thinking I could make the switch (once Apple decides to change that idiotic decision, though that seems unlikely), but if it's only Windows on ARM it's useless.

[S.Yu]

That would be a big, and risky, assumption to make based on the already clear fact whoever came up with those numbers cares more about making them sound impressive than them having real meaning. It could be that it uses "2.5x less energy" (i.e. 60% less, or 40% as much) but doesn't perform as well. Granted, that's not my understanding of it at this point, but without more info, that could be the case. After all, it doesn't say it uses that much less energy while achieving those 30-60% better performance numbers. And I thought, based on earlier articles, that the M1 chip had better performance virtualizing Windows than Intel does running Windows bare-metal, but this seems to indicate that's not the case, and that it's just better than virtualizing on Intel, meaning it still might be better to run Windows natively.

Yeah that assumption was probably too forgiving to Apple's marketing, better wait for some more Anandtech numbers.

This will not run your apps.  It's misleading.  Visual studio for windows will not work.  This is windows for arm!  Try qemu for x86 compatibility.

It didn't even occur to me that running Windows on ARM, on ARM, even needed emulation, much less something proprietary like Rosetta 2, so I'm really skeptical about this. If this were truly the case, whoever first leaked about it suggesting otherwise would be severely deceptive.