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.
What is the state of virtualization (VMs) on the M1 nowadays?
- Thread starter Faize
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Parallels is beta testing Windows for ARM. You can sign up too.
Microsoft it’s also working on the ARM version to increase compatibility with x86 software. They’re also trying to get 64 bit software working.
Its coming along and should eventually get there. Although it may just be a side project for MS. Unless the PC industry starts pushing ARM in their products.
Microsoft it’s also working on the ARM version to increase compatibility with x86 software. They’re also trying to get 64 bit software working.
Its coming along and should eventually get there. Although it may just be a side project for MS. Unless the PC industry starts pushing ARM in their products.
Parallels is out now, so you have to pay for it, and Windows on Arm is still the same, no purchasable license for it and insider builds only.
No x86/64 emulation except with QEMU and UTM, which I really wouldn't suggest for real work.
You can run x86 Windows apps on arm version of Windows via Windows's own user-mode emulation(something like rosetta)as well, and it would be faster than emulation a whole x86 CPU.
Technically we cannot 'virtualize' a CPU of another architecture, we can only emulate it. Virtualization is an hardware function that allow a CPU to run multiple OS at the same time, therefore the OS has to be natively supported by that CPU. We do have software implementation that lets to to emulate an x86 CPU and run x86 version OS, but it is slow, and I would not say it is capable for production usage.
If what you want is to run some x86 Windows apps, try the arm version of windows and run those apps via user mode emulation, or you can try crossover, which runs on top of rosetta and translates windows apis to posix apis(the one macOS is using). The latter could be faster because rosetta is faster, but it would have higher chance that the app you want to run is not supported.
Technically we cannot 'virtualize' a CPU of another architecture, we can only emulate it. Virtualization is an hardware function that allow a CPU to run multiple OS at the same time, therefore the OS has to be natively supported by that CPU. We do have software implementation that lets to to emulate an x86 CPU and run x86 version OS, but it is slow, and I would not say it is capable for production usage.
If what you want is to run some x86 Windows apps, try the arm version of windows and run those apps via user mode emulation, or you can try crossover, which runs on top of rosetta and translates windows apis to posix apis(the one macOS is using). The latter could be faster because rosetta is faster, but it would have higher chance that the app you want to run is not supported.
Last year I bought a Macbook Air with M1 chip to satisfy my curiosity about Rosetta 2. Unfortunately, 16 GB RAM models were in short supply and as I didn't want to wait I got the 8 GB RAM 512GB SSD model. Nevertheless, I'm still surprised how good this notebook is. For example, I had no problems playing World of Warcraft on an external 5k monitor. But I couldn't do much work related stuff as this all needs Windows!
When Parallels 16.5 came along and I had a spare license for it, I installed Parallels and loaded the Microsoft Windows on Arm evaluation copy, build 21354. I then installed Visual Studio 2019 Community edition, copied some source code from work and compiled a large project that does a lot of scientific computations.
Result: The 64bit C++ program ran at about 70% of the speed that I get on Windows 10 on my 2019 Intel i5 MacBook Pro 13", also running under Parallels 16.5, a little slower than hoped but still respectable, in my opinion.
So, for me everything comes down to finally getting an official production level version of Windows 10 on Arm for installation on the new Macs to be expected later this year! Until then I will have to stick to Intel Macs for real work.
When Parallels 16.5 came along and I had a spare license for it, I installed Parallels and loaded the Microsoft Windows on Arm evaluation copy, build 21354. I then installed Visual Studio 2019 Community edition, copied some source code from work and compiled a large project that does a lot of scientific computations.
Result: The 64bit C++ program ran at about 70% of the speed that I get on Windows 10 on my 2019 Intel i5 MacBook Pro 13", also running under Parallels 16.5, a little slower than hoped but still respectable, in my opinion.
So, for me everything comes down to finally getting an official production level version of Windows 10 on Arm for installation on the new Macs to be expected later this year! Until then I will have to stick to Intel Macs for real work.
Thanks everyone. The lease on my 2017 MBP expired several months ago and IT has been badgering me to get it replaced ever since. Like most companies, this is a Windows shop, so a Windows VM is pretty much mandatory.
I really hope things improve fast, otherwise I'll have to settle for a Thinkpad. Maybe I should just get last year's MBP so I can ride out the transition before Apple ditches Intel completely...
I really hope things improve fast, otherwise I'll have to settle for a Thinkpad. Maybe I should just get last year's MBP so I can ride out the transition before Apple ditches Intel completely...
Last edited:
If that’s the case. Then that’s what I’d do. Nothings going to change radically any time soon. Just make sure it’s got plenty of RAM. To support Windows and macOS.
It really depends on what you need to do. I use Parallels Desktop with the Preview Developer Channel and Crossover.
- Parallels Desktop is pretty solid. I can do Intel Visual Studio product builds using Qt with third-party updaters and installers, everything works and does so quickly including USB and USC-C access of peripherals, which work if they have ARM64 drivers for Windows or do not need them like HID devices.
- All my applications, GoG and Steam Games work and do so with great performance considering it is not a high-end PC with high end video card. But performance is equal to or better than what I have seen with any integrated Intel graphics.
- Crossover emulates an Intel Window environment running on Rosetta2. It is not quite as compatible as Parallels with Windows 10 ARM64, but the stuff it runs is fast enough for many games. You can look up your app compatibility here: https://www.codeweavers.com/crossover
- Parallels Desktop is pretty solid. I can do Intel Visual Studio product builds using Qt with third-party updaters and installers, everything works and does so quickly including USB and USC-C access of peripherals, which work if they have ARM64 drivers for Windows or do not need them like HID devices.
- All my applications, GoG and Steam Games work and do so with great performance considering it is not a high-end PC with high end video card. But performance is equal to or better than what I have seen with any integrated Intel graphics.
- Crossover emulates an Intel Window environment running on Rosetta2. It is not quite as compatible as Parallels with Windows 10 ARM64, but the stuff it runs is fast enough for many games. You can look up your app compatibility here: https://www.codeweavers.com/crossover
Internaut
macrumors 65816
I'm actually really quite impressed. Currently running Windows ARM on just the base level MBA and it really is giving near as damn-it native performance (not to mention booting very quickly from the attached Samsung T7).
For a lot of users, the limiting factor is going to be Windows on ARM but, looking at the comments above, perhaps not as limiting as I would have assumed.
Only issue I'm having is DHCP seems to be a bit hit and miss. It's important to me that each VM has its own IP address on the network. For example, since I'm trying to beef up my Infosec skills, I might want to be able to deploy a simple Web App to Ubuntu and then try to murder it from Kali....
For a lot of users, the limiting factor is going to be Windows on ARM but, looking at the comments above, perhaps not as limiting as I would have assumed.
Only issue I'm having is DHCP seems to be a bit hit and miss. It's important to me that each VM has its own IP address on the network. For example, since I'm trying to beef up my Infosec skills, I might want to be able to deploy a simple Web App to Ubuntu and then try to murder it from Kali....
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Usually switching between bridged and NAT, and back makes it work, other times rebooting may make it work.
Internaut
macrumors 65816
That's my experience and I suspect caveat YMMV applies depending on your WiFi router. My BT Smart Hub has a range of addresses reserved for static allocation so I could go down that route.
Internaut
macrumors 65816
To add to the above - Windows is a little strange. Sometimes it will DHCP an IPv6 address but not IPv4. So at the moment I'm doing my first Windows Update all via an IPv6 address, not to mention posting to here from the same VM.