I can say, though, that if your virtualization needs include being able to run Intel-based, Power PC-based, or other architectures on your Mac, UTM is probably your best bet. Unfortunately, I can’t explicitly tell you which option to choose. UTM, on the other hand, could very well offer the support you’re looking for. However, if your needs extend to running operating systems for a processor other than what’s inside your Mac’s case, Parallels won’t help you. If you’re looking for a software solution that’s tried and tested, and backed by a strong customer and technical support team, Parallels excels in that, too. If you’re wanting or needing to run Windows and have daily snapshot backups, Parallels supports that. Parallels Desktop focuses its feature set very clearly on the corporate users. Both UTM and Parallels Desktop will fully support that need. This becomes crucial for corporate users who want to work on a Mac, but need access to Windows-based productivity apps. That’s because, for obvious reasons, corporations and corporate users are much more likely to pay for such software. The fact of the matter is, development on these tools focuses primarily on work-related needs. The State of Virtualization or Emulation Is Heavily Work-Slanted If you want to check whether your favorite game will run under Parallels Desktop, check out the AppleGamingWiki list of Parallels Windows-compatible games on M1 Macs. You won’t find that in Parallels Desktop or in UTM. That being said, many of the top games today need DirectX 12, Vulcan or OpenGL 4.6 support. Parallels Desktop does support DirectX 11 applications in Windows, using Apple Metal to power it. Parallels Desktop is somewhat better, although my own experience has shown the difference to be minimal at best. There is experimental support for hardware OpenGL acceleration on Linux through Virgl. You may be able to run older games with software rendering options, but nothing with hardware acceleration. UTM does not currently support GPU emulation/virtualization on Windows and therefore lacks support for 3D acceleration (e.g. UTM even comes right out and says gaming probably isn’t an option. That’s often not nearly good enough for the heavy demands of AAA games. Both Parallels Desktop and UTM provide a virtual graphics card. Now, one reason quite a few folks want to run Windows on their Mac in the first place is to play games. You can do that with UTM, but not with Parallels Desktop. Let’s say you want to run the old Mac OS 9 operating system on your Mac, or Sun Solaris 9. This means you can run not just Windows or macOS in your emulator under UTM, but a host of older operating systems as well. Currently, UTM supports emulating dozens of different processors, including those used for enterprise solutions. This means that on an Apple Silicon Mac, you can only run operating systems in Parallel that are made for the Arm chipset.Įmulation, on the other hand, allows the software to create a PC with one of several different CPU architectures. With virtualization, the software is basically offering the guest operating system a virtual copy of your Mac’s CPU and other hardware. UTM eases that pain, by intuitively setting the options to best suit the OS you’re running. The problem with QEMU is that it can be difficult to set up and configure. This is because UTM is built upon QEMU, a free and open source emulation software that’s been around for decades. To grok this difference, you need to know the difference between virtualization (which Parallels Desktop relies upon) and the emulation support offered by UTM. The core difference between the two tools, though, lies deep under the hood. On the other hand, UTM supports a bit more customization. Parallels Desktop tends to offer more bells and whistles that matter to the average user. They also perform similarly, although some reports indicate UTM offers better GPU performance. Parallels Desktop and UTM both serve very similar purposes. The Core Difference Between Parallels and UTM: Virtualization vs Emulation Let’s explore both software packages to help you make that decision. You’ll need to think about what your specific needs are as far as running Windows virtually on your Mac. Both options have their own strengths and weaknesses. Unfortunately, there’s no easy answer to this debate. So, the question is, which will prove better at running Windows on your M1 or M2-powered Mac? Read on as I compare Parallels vs UTM on M1 and M2 Macs. Two of the easiest to use are Parallels Desktop and UTM. If you’re looking to run Windows on your Apple Silicon Mac, you have a few options.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |