Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Parallels 17 and Windows 11 on Mac Studio?
- Thread starter Avenger
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There was a new version of Parallels released today, maybe that addressed some issues.
Well it won’t fix his issue with no AVX2 since that has nothing to do with Parallels but is missing from the Microsoft x86 to Arm translator. I thought it was funny that he was blaming Parallels for that.
it also won't fix his "problem" of wanting 8 CPUs (which he does harp on about a tad) ... it says on screen he needs to have the Pro version of Parallels not the versions he's got (though maybe not in words that are as clear as they could be)
For those wondering about windows 11 keys- two options.
1) Buy a Key- you can buy whatever is the best price.
2) Bring a Key from a old PC. Any Key from a Windows 7,8,8.1,10 or 11 system will work. Both OEM or Retail.
Remember- you have the version of Windows that your key represents.
1) Buy a Key- you can buy whatever is the best price.
2) Bring a Key from a old PC. Any Key from a Windows 7,8,8.1,10 or 11 system will work. Both OEM or Retail.
Remember- you have the version of Windows that your key represents.
2) Sometimes the keys are linked to a certain PC configuration, they are not guaranteed to work on a VM. I’ve had that trouble.
Although Microsoft are nowhere near as strict as they used to be on activation, it still can be hit or miss.
I am using Parallels 17 on a Macbook Air M1 (4 Performance Cores + 4 Efficiency Cores) and I have assigned 4 cores to Windows 11 ARM.
How does Parallels assign the 4 cores: 2 Efficiency + 2 Performance? Or 4 Efficiency?
I'd like to speed up the Windows 11 Virtual Machine because I do use with quite a lot of software, but I can't find any setting on the cores except the number which is set to the maximum 4. My intention was to assign all the 4 Performance cores for the Virtual Machine and no Efficiency cores.
How does Parallels assign the 4 cores: 2 Efficiency + 2 Performance? Or 4 Efficiency?
I'd like to speed up the Windows 11 Virtual Machine because I do use with quite a lot of software, but I can't find any setting on the cores except the number which is set to the maximum 4. My intention was to assign all the 4 Performance cores for the Virtual Machine and no Efficiency cores.
Works great for me. Can run MicroCap 12 spice simulator and software to process RF spectrum captures. Runs fast.
I am guessing, I'm looking at average activity levels and then see what changes with Parallels.
The non-subscription version of Parallels is using 4 Performance Cores for Win 11 ARM in my tests.
I just yesterday tried Parallels 17 running Win 11 ARM for the first time. What a wonderful surprise!
Years ago I wrote some utility apps for various products (and some apps for my personal use) that I released in both 32-bit Mac and x86 Windows versions. Now I can't run the 32-bit Mac versions on my new Studio (I previously ran them on my Mac Pro using Mojave), but the Windows versions of all the apps run perfectly fine with WoA x86 emulation using Parallels on the Studio. Even special USB drivers are working with them.
It does seem a bit ironic (maybe a bit sad). I have to use Windows ARM with x86 emulation in a Virtual Machine to run old PC versions of old 32-bit Mac OS apps I wrote. Well, whatever works! I guess it was too much for Apple to support 32-bit apps with Rosetta 2. (Not criticizing Apple, just seems kind of strange that MS supports old 32-bit x86 apps with WoA and Apple Mac OS doesn't with their previous Rosetta experience - yeah I know Rosetta 2 works very differently).
Anyway, I'm a happy camper that I can run my old x86 apps and it looks like newer Windows x86 utility apps on my Mac Studio. I haven't tried any heavy duty engineering apps with WoA yet, but my need for that is vastly reduced now that I've retired. Hopefully I can now retire my old Mac Pro to other uses as well.
I want to play very old Nancy Drew games from 2000-2010. I wonder if they would run good on Parallels.
Thank you, I know that, but how do you make the link between that and Parallels Desktop using only the efficiency cores, I don't see any process details on cores usage
Well, I guess you could fire up some Windows apps that make heavy use of the CPU's and see which CPU's they use. That's what I did.
Just migrated to an M1 Macbook Pro, upgraded to Parallels Version 17.1.0 (51516), installed the W11 for Arm from the Windows Insider Program Windows11_InsiderPreview_Client_ARM64_en-us_22598. I then installed Altium Designer (fairly sophisticated/heavyweight Wintel Electronic CAD S/W), and It Just Worked.
It works remarkably well, in fact, with no hassles whatsoever- it is almost as if it is intended to be a product one day! Total time to get the installation running: 2 hours, mostly download time. Who knew?
This isn't a Mac Studio- it is the 16GB/1TB 14" M1. However, here's an existence proof: this porky Wintel stuff can indeed can be made to work on Parallels/M1, and I'd expect the higher-end machine to have proportionally higher performance.
I can't comment on the performance on any absolute scale. It is more than adequate for my needs. For me, the fact that it works at all without having to sacrifice a chicken is wonderful, and the fact that it is *at least an order of magnitude* faster than Parallels/W10 my old 2010 2.4GHz MBP is icing on a very grateful cake. YMMV, of course.
It works remarkably well, in fact, with no hassles whatsoever- it is almost as if it is intended to be a product one day! Total time to get the installation running: 2 hours, mostly download time. Who knew?
This isn't a Mac Studio- it is the 16GB/1TB 14" M1. However, here's an existence proof: this porky Wintel stuff can indeed can be made to work on Parallels/M1, and I'd expect the higher-end machine to have proportionally higher performance.
I can't comment on the performance on any absolute scale. It is more than adequate for my needs. For me, the fact that it works at all without having to sacrifice a chicken is wonderful, and the fact that it is *at least an order of magnitude* faster than Parallels/W10 my old 2010 2.4GHz MBP is icing on a very grateful cake. YMMV, of course.
Last edited: