What I've done in the past is simply Dual boot, but I would like to not have to reboot my computer in order to switch OS's. Specifically, what I'd like is:
Computer would mainly run Linux,
When I want to play a Windows only game I can switch over to Windows, for that period of time then return to Linux.
Both Linux and Windows need to run up to native in speed.
I'm looking for suggestions in setting this up.
I've looked into Xen, however, I hear that Xen doesn't support 3D graphics? is this accurate. I've also looked into WineD3D and VMGL. However, Wine won't play every game, so I'd still need the Windows VM, and VMGL doesn't seem to work universally either.
I'm running two different machines that I plan to put this setup on:
Laptop:
Intel i7 4720HQ
16GB Ram
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
Desktop:
AMD FX-8350
16GB Ram
EVGA GeForce GTX 960
I just joined and the "Tour" said, don't ask questions that could lead to a discussion than an answer. Anyway, If gaming is your primary goal, have windows as primary boot & dive into linux as VM. Otherwise you need to find a hyper-visor that provides 3D services or pass-through to your actual GPU.
There is a discussion here
Related
I installed the latest version of the HoloLens 2 Emulator (10.0.20348.1501) on my Windows 10 Pro machine. I have 32GB of RAM, 11th Gen Intel 8 Core CPU, Nvidia 3080 (mobile) graphics card.
Initially I thought that the HoloLens emulator was super slow (an input such as trying to move the pointer can take 10, 20, 30 seconds to show up and sometimes doesn't even show up).
But upon testing some more, I've realized that my inputs are going through immediately (as I can tell from the sound feedback), it's just the visual feedback which is not updating. This testing is just inside the OS (without trying to launch an app I developed).
Any ideas what could be going on? In the performance monitoring tool, everything looks fine.
In the end, the only way to fix it, was to disable graphics switching in the BIOS, and set to Discrete only - despite the fact that the Nvidia GPU Activity shows that the GPU turns on when I launch the emulator.
If the emulator takes 10 seconds to update the graphic, there should be configurations issues. Based on my test, though I cannot say it works fluently in my PC, the HoloLens 2 emulator runs at around 15 fps. There is delay but should be work fine for testing. (I am running it with Nvidia 1080 (mobile), with a much older CPU than yours.)
Please check the document on Using the HoloLens Emulator - Mixed Reality | Microsoft Docs and make sure you have configured your computer properly.
In BIOS
Intel VT -> enabled
Intel VT-d -> disabled
Hardware-based Data Execution Prevention (DEP) (or any Intel data protection related feature, display name could be varied) -> disabled
In Windows
After BIOS configuration is done, completely shut down your PC, then boot. (Directly reboot may not apply changes).
Run dxdiag to check:
DirectX 11.0 or later (12.0 in my PC)
WDDM 2.5 graphics driver or later (3.0 in my PC)
Hyper-V Checking
Enable it if it is not. Reboot is required.
If it is already enabled. Disable it -> reboot the PC -> enable it again -> reboot
Others
For the laptop, make sure the power supply is plug-in and it is not in power-save mode. Check the GPU payload (around 36% in Nvidia 1080 mobile)
Then you may run the emulator again to see if this issue still exists.
I am pretty much new to Linux OS. And currently I am using KDE NEON... And it works absolutely fine, better than windows..
I have a laptop of HP with 1TB Hard Disk and 4GB RAM with Intel i3 x64 based processor.
But,
Can I know as in Windows we have a feature of a mouse pad where we can operate our Laptop without pressing pad buttons. The Pad area works as they were buttons..
So, is it possible to use this feature in Linux PC?
If it is please tell how?
I have a TurboX Laptop with AMD E-1800 APU with 4GB RAM, I use it for development purposes, but the CPU is not working well, i have installed ubuntu 16.04 amd64 on it. Whenever i load more than two tabs in chromium it gets more slower,even gets more worst while working in IDEs. Cant afford new one right now. Any suggestions about some lightweight linux distros to work on development and with easy package installation like lamp, Android Studio and NetBeans etc.
Good morning my friend,
I think that the major problem here is your hardware.
In every distro it will be slow with so less RAM and an unpowerfull CPU like that.
Although, you can try Lubuntu or Puppy and see if your situation will get improved.
BR,
Loukas
I have dual booted windows 7 and ubuntu 14.04 on my PC.
I have a recurring problem with windows.
The screen frequently becomes blank for a few seconds, showing an error message in a popup menu:
"Display driver stopped responding and has recovered. Display driver NVIDIA windows kernel mode driver version 266.58 stopped responding and has successfully recovered."
Here are my computer specifications:
Intel core i5 processor,
4gb ram,
Nvidia GeForce 210 graphics card.
I updated the drivers on my computer.
I also formatted my PC, but the problem still persists.
Now the problem is worse and windows shuts down within a few minutes of starting.
Today, Ubuntu also started randomly freezing, a symptom which had not presented itself until now.
As Astor139 said:
Honestly, this particular question doesn't fit stack overflow, since it isn't strictly programming related. (As far as I can tell, you have a hardware issue.) Since it persists across two different OS, with very different arch, I would say you need a new gpu. A Nvidia GT 730 is under $50 USD and would be a suitable replacement/upgrade for your 200.
Posted as his comment is really a suitable answer.
I am looking to purchase a new development PC. My budget is not more than $1,000 USD (including monitor). I am open to laptop (desktop replacement type) or the traditional desktop PC would do just fine.
My primary development environment will be Microsoft, Visual Studio 2008 (and support of older Visual Studio 6 code as well). SQL Server 2005, 2008 as well as legacy support of SQL Server 2000. Microsoft Office 2003, potential to install 2007 but support as far back as Office 2000. The software I will wrote and support will be Windows XP mostly, but some Vista. I am going to have to assume there are 64-bit implementations out there to install to.
My first confusion begins with choosing AMD or Intel. My concern is that there is a compatibility issue with building software using Visual Studio in an AMD environment. I dont have any evidence, its just a concern that hopefully someone will clear up for me.
Last, I am confused about 32-bit and 64-bit installations. Should I stick with the least common denominator (32-bit) even though 64-bit is steadily gaining ground? I am aware that the 64-bit operating systems will address over 4G of RAM and that I like because I would like to set up as many Virtual Machines for test environments as possible, and may have many active at once..
I am not looking for the dream machine, just a machine with a monitor and the best processor for about $1000 that will allow me to write software for the majority of machines out there.
There are some instruction level differences between AMD and Intel but nothing that Visual Studio is going to uncover. Perhaps if you were developing with Sun Studio you might run into them (I have!).
I would go for a 64 bit machine and run 32 bit VMs on it if you feel the need to do testing in that environment. The common feeling around here seems to be that the highest level of Vista you can afford is the platform on which to develop.
With 32-bit XP and Vista, you might not have access to much more than 3GB or RAM, but possibly quite less (My home machine could only access 2.25GB with Vista 32). If you can afford getting a machine with 4GB of RAM, I would recommend using Vista-64 (Home Premium or Ultimate).
Depending on what kind of development you are doing hard drive speed can make a big difference in compile times. Get 10,000 RPM hard drives if possible for a desktop machine and 7200 RPM drives for a laptop, but they do cost more.
AMD smoothed out their incompatibilities long ago. Your decision on that should simply be which brand you feel has better performance/features. I would definitely go with 64 bit because you can always emulate 32 bit for VM's and apps and so on. The ability to use extra memory will pay dividends later when you're just spending $100 for another 2-4 gigs instead of another $1000 to finally buy a 64 bit machine.
Given you're interested in running multiple VM's RAM is going to be key, as is the CPU.
Currently Intel are ahead on performance for dollar (especially if you are interested in overclocking) however AMD's options are acceptable and the batch of phenoms seem to be better at true quad core applications than the Intel quads.
The quality and speed of the RAM is largely unimportant. Generic DDRII 800mhz will be fine, just make sure you've got 4 or 8 GB of it.
In terms of operating systems, xp 64bit is fairly wanting on driver support even though it's been around for a while. Vista 64bit however has almost all the driver support of Vista 32bit. While this means that some of your older devices wont work, you should have much less hassles with Vista than XP. In terms of versioning, I recommend premium, however you'd need to look into the added feature list to determine if it's worth it or not (to me, it's not worth it at all).
In terms of issues that may occur due to specific processors? I agree with stimms that while there may be slight differences, it's not something you'd encounter in VS development. However my experience in that arena is by no means extensive.
If you look for a not-too-expensive dev machine, AMD should be better.
AMD 780G/790G mainboard has on-board integrated VGA, out-perform most nvidia/intel video integrated mainboard at a reasonable price. AMD Phenom CPU's performance is not as good as those of Intel. But considering you can get a AMD 3-core CPU at the price that Intel offers you only 2-core, it's a good deal.
Intel's CPU has great overclock potential. However as a developer, I suppose you like a solid-as-a-rock machine and not like to take risk geting a blue death screen while compiling your code.
Hardware virtualization is important if you like to paly with X64 virutal machine for testing. Most modern AMD CPUs have hardware virtualization feature built in, while Intel cut this feature from its low-end CPUs.
Get 4 gigs rams minimum equal that you need a system that can handle more than 3 gigs (so 64bits OS). Rams is cheap and IDE with all others software (debugging, testing, database client, etc) will require you some rams if you want something fast.
For the cpu, you can get a Quad Core for less than 190$, with a board that can handle it (about 125$) you have a strong start. You do not need to have the latest video card...
A lot of already build PC can be nice for you under your budget (under 720$). See this example:
Vista Home Premium 64-bit
320 gig hard drive
3 gig rams
GeForce 7100 graphics
22" Acer LCD included
Core 2 Duo E4700