UTM vs Parallel's desktop for vm's

You have to look at why loading VM in the first place.

UTM website specifically mentioned no GPU virtualization, if you are doing graphic/3D stuff, heavy encode/decode, games, Parallel may be a better choice for now. Otherwise, UTM may be a great option if you have M1/M2 machine and it is currently free.

For Intel Mac, VMWare Fusion is also a great option relatively good performance.

Again, VM performance is very much depending on what you do. Since UTM and VMware Fusion are free (non commercial), simply try out and see if it works for you. The worst is to spend an hour or so setting up and find it is not suitable, I wouldn’t say a waste of time, just consider it an hour of lesson, that’s all.

MoronX Said:

"UTM vs Parallel's desktop for vm's: In regards to another discussion post I made; I want to determine whether or not i should use UTM, or parallels's desktop. For the feedback, could you focus on the speed aspect of it"

-------

Based on Personal Experience:

To put it mildly, I use VMWare Fusion. If you have an Intel-based Mac, then there should be no issues with compatibility. oHowever, if an M1 or an M2 Mac, then incompatibility may get in the way here. So, bare that in mind when using a VM, whatever the app.

remember that the reason you would ever need to use a Virtual machine for this is to have the other environment running 'in a window' under MacOS.

some users find it simpler to alternate boot the other operating system.

--------

The investment (estimated at an hour) MIGHT be enough to tell you whether this was a complete dead end or not. But to get any one of these working to your satisfaction will take all afternoon or possibly quite a bit longer. This stuff gets complicated in a hurry.

This discussion?

Ram requirements for VM's - Apple Community

.

MoronX Said:

"UTM vs Parallel's desktop for vm's: Thanks a lot for the answer, i will check that software out."

-------

You are welcome.

Go Here: VMware Fusion