With Parallels and VMWare Fusion having been around for
a while now, have they developed the power to cope with the demands
of CAD applications?
People often ask me if Autodesk will release a Mac version of
AutoCAD and, while evidence would suggest that they are seriously
considering it, there are not yet any solid answers. There may,
however, be another way: virtualisation software for the
Mac has matured a lot in the last year or so and
both of the major players (VMWare and Parallels ) now offer
3D acceleration in their products.
We know that a virtualisation solution will never be as fast as
running software natively using Boot Camp - the aim of this article
is not to test that. The strength of virtualisation software lies
in its capacity to let users run Windows software without
re-booting their machine; both VMWare and Parallels can
seamlessly integrate Windows programs with OSX, making the
experience much more convenient than with Boot Camp. What
I want to find out is if either of these pieces of software can run
CAD programs at an acceptable level for day-to-day work.
Test Setup and Methods:
For the test we used a Mac Pro workstation with the following
specification:
CPU: Dual Intel Xeon X5482 (4 Cores, 3.2 GHZ, 12MB
L2 Cache)
Memory: 16GB of RAM (800 MHZ FBDIMMS)
Graphics: NVIDIA 8800 GT with 512MB GDDR3
onboard
Operating System: OSX 10.5.7 with all current
updates
Hard Disk: 500GB 7200 RPM Seagate 7200.12 SATA
2
VMWare Fusion 2.0 and Parallels Desktop 4.0 were installed on a
clean, fully updated copy of OSX. Windows Vista is the only 64-bit
operating system supported by Boot Camp so it was my choice of
guest operating system (although it is worth noting that both
VMWare and Parallels fully support Windows XP 64-bit). Each guest
system was given as many virtual CPU's as the software would allow
(2 for VMware and 4 for Parallels) and assigned 4GB of RAM. 3D
acceleration was also turned on. All other settings for the
virtual machine were left at default to simulate as close to an
out-of-box experience as possible.
I wanted to see what the software could do without any tweaking
as this is how I believe most users will experience it. AutoCAD was
chosen as the test software as it makes good use of both the CPU
and Graphics Hardware so should give a good idea of how CAD
applications will perform.
Once Vista was installed on the virtual machine all current
updates were applied and AutoCAD 2010 was installed. The virtual
machines were set to a screen resolution of 1280x1024 and switched
to full-screen mode on the Mac Pro. Parallels/VMware tools were
also installed. The testing under Boot Camp was also conducted at a
resolution of 1280x1024.
For the testing itself I ran a script that opened
several 2D drawings and 3D models in sequence and performed
operations on them. To test 3D performance, the models
were rotated in wireframe, hidden, conceptual and realistic views.
To test 2D performance, lines, text, and blocks were created and
erased, and zoom functions were also tested. To test the disk and
CPU performance calculations were carried out; 2D objects were
arrayed and the drawings were saved in both .dwg and .dxf formats.
All operations were timed and, based on these times, individual
scores were calculated for the 3D, 2D, CPU and Disk
performance.
Results
I ran the script 5 times under each setup and averaged the
results to get the final (normalised) scores shown below (taller
bars = better performance).

As you can see the virtualisation software was pretty close to
running AutoCAD natively under Boot Camp in everything except 3D
graphics. The disk scores were actually higher in the virtual
machines than under Boot Camp (I have verified this result and can
only conclude that there must be some kind of caching going on in
the background to account for this).
The CPU scores were all but identical, proving that both
the VMWare and Parallels hypervisors can execute CPU instructions
with almost no overhead. This is thanks to Intel's VT-X
(hardware support for CPU virtualisation allowing CPU instructions
to be passed from the virtual machine directly to the CPU) being
built into the CPUs of all Macs. The 2D graphics scores
were also very close, with only two points separating VMware and
Parallels. They weren't quite as fast as Boot Camp but the
2D performance of the virtual machines was perfectly
acceptable.
This brings us to the 3D performance. VMware was slightly faster
than Parallels here but the win is academic (and within the margin
of error) as neither could come close to the level of
performance possible while running under Boot Camp. At
this point I decided to repeat the tests using the OpenGL renderer
built into AutoCAD as opposed to the Direct3D renderer. My
reasoning behind this was that OpenGL is a public standard so may
be better supported by the virtualisation software. The results I
obtained were even worse than with the Direct3D renderer. Again
there was little to separate VMware and Parallels but the scores
were around half those obtained with the Direct3D renderer. OpenGL
in AutoCAD is generally slower than Direct3D so this result needs
to be taken with a pinch of salt but the conclusion we can draw is
that neither OpenGL nor Direct3D is fast enough to be useful.
Final Thoughts
Based on the results of these tests I still don't think
virtualisation software is an option if you use any type of CAD
application that requires 3D performance. For 2D
applications such as AutoCAD LT I don't think there would be any
noticeable performance difference between running natively and
running in a virtual machine provided the host machine had plenty
of RAM available.
Currently, 3D acceleration is difficult in a virtual machine as
it has to be emulated in software. The results of the test clearly
show that this has significant overheads. The new
generation of Intel CPUs contained in the early 2009 model Mac Pros
support a feature called VT-D.This extends the
capabilities of VT-X and allows users to dedicate an entire
graphics (or other expansion) card to their virtual machine. In
turn, this means there is no longer a need for the slow software
emulation layer and should allow 3D applications to be run
inside a virtual machine at similar speeds to running them
natively. Currently, VT-D is not supported in Parallels
Desktop or VMWare Fusion. It is supported in the beta version of
Parallels server. VT-D is still relatively new so I'm keeping my
fingers crossed support will filter down into the desktop
applications soon. Watch this space for a test as soon as it
is!
For our massive range of creative software, hardware and
peripherals, visit Jigsaw24. Alternatively,
call 03332 409 309 (email 3D@jigsaw24.com) if you've a
question for our 3D team!