Poor performance of VMware reviews

Similar Questions

• Poor performance in VMWare Workstation 10 comments VM, score on memory Windows experience index is low

  Specification of the host is A10-5800 AMD CPU & 8 GB DDR3 - 1600 RAM(dual-channel), running VMware workstation 10 on Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit SP1. WEI (Windows experience index) score on memory is 7.3.

  Comments is running Windows 7 Professional 32-bit SP1. VMware tool has been installed. The WEI score on memory is only 4.5. I can feel the difference when you work in the guest, because of the bad performance RAM problem.

  Some way to optimize the performance of comments?

  Can I assume that the customer has more than 960 MB and less than 1.5 GB of memory?  The more possible memory under-score with less than 1.5 GB memory is 4.5.

• Poor performance of Firefox after you apply the latest Microsoft Updates (Win 7 x 64); all solutions?

  Recently, I updated to Firefox 27 and noticed really horrible performance (Manager tasks indicates FF connecting a carrot, frequent "Firefox is not responding messages", even strikes in late development in the URL bar). It's on an Ideapad s205 (AMD E450 APU, Win 7 x 64, 8 GB RAM, SSD) who has always had pretty decent web browsing performance for a low end machine.

  At first, I blamed FF because poor performance coincided with the update to version 27, but now I think that the first cause to be a recent Microsoft Update. The reason is that my wife has a laptop with a same low-end APU (APU C60, hard drive 5400 RPM, 4 GB of RAM, Win 7 x 64), and she was getting much better performance with FF27 until I applied a backlog of some 90 + updates. Now she suffers from the same poor performance I am and she is pretty p * ssed at home.

  Interestingly, I have two WIn 7 x 64 Intel computers to office who have 27 FF and are fully patched, and performance are very good. Maybe this problem is specific to AMD APU.

  Any thoughts? I tried to turn off the backend Azure with some comments in this forum, but makes little or no difference.

  Thank you!

  Success! 32 FF seems to have solved my problems of performance. Thank you!

• HP Mini 110-3530NR extremely poor performance on the Internet

  My HP Mini 110-3530NR Netbook has very poor performance on the Internet.  I use Windows 7 Starter.

  Say hello to new coppens1.  I apologize for the delay in my responses.  I have not received the normal e-mail notifications.

  When I had to go to msconfig earlier in our interactions you make sure that the Synaptics driver load with Windows?  Follow these steps to check.

  1. Click Start, type "msconfig" and press ENTER.
  2. Go to the Services tab and search for "HP Software Framework".  This should load with Windows for a lot of the HP software to work properly.
  3. Then go to the Startup tab and make sure that anything it either by "Synaptic" is loaded with Windows.
  4. Save your changes and exit msconfig.
  5. Then go to your touchpad settings and, even once, make sure that the settings are correct.
  6. Finally, restart the machine and make sure it works properly.

  I totally understand if you want to open a new thread as this covered a few topics!  Just make sure to send me a private message with the link so that I can make sure to help you here.

  I wish you a beautiful day JC!

• SG300 switches have poor performance in layer 3?

  We have several switches SG300 Serices. We use them to route traffic to VLAN remote offices, the Internet connections and wireless access Points.

  In a remote office, we have a SG300-10 facility to route the HQ network and the remote office subnet. The SG300 is connected to the seat through fiber and contains several VLAN Tag. If I speed, tests on the fiber of the entrants Netwotk tag link I get decent performance, 80Mbs. If I switch to a networtk who is not priginating of the central administration and road SG300-10 package, I get poor performance. 15 - 20Mbs.

  I have Fireded until a new FW SG300 - 28 p v1.2.7.76. Added a HQ VLAN 101 and VLAN new, 1025. Mapped some Tagged and not marked for each ports.  Switch has been connected to the network of HQ as untagged VLAN 101.  I put a laptop on a unmarked port VLAN 101. Ran some tests, cam is back with 750-850Mbs. great.  Put the same computer laptop on a Port of 101 tag, set the NETWORK card for tag VLAN 101, same test, same speed, 750-850Mbs.

  I configured then laptop for tag VLAN 1025. Connected to the port 1025 VLAN scored. Done speed tests, the results were 15-20Mbs!

  Then I configured laptop for Untagged VLAN 1025. Connected to unagged port 1025 VLAN. Done speed tests, the results were 15-20Mbs!

  It was only the laptop and connect to the net on the SG300 - 28 p P.C. Why this device's performance is so poor when he needs to route?

  Other switches have v1.0.0.27 FW or FW v1.1.2.0. They have similar speed problems. All configured for layer 3.

  Thank you!

  Scott<>

  How are customer gateways and server configured?

  The default gateway for connecting devices should probably be that of the IVS, they are directly connected to. So if you have a server connecting to a SVI 192.168.1.100 then the gateway server should be 192.168.1.100, not a router upstream. Who can create a loop of road if the return circulation.

  -Tom
  Please mark replied messages useful

• VPN poor Performance - Cisco RV220W and routers WRVS4400N

  Hello

  To one of our customer IPSec VPN is established between Cisco RV 220W and routers of Cisco WRVS4400N.

  Router VPN /ISP details are as below

  Location was	Location B
  Details of the Internet ---------------------- DOWNLOAD: 6 to 10 Mbps Upload: 1 to 2 Mbps Details of router ---------------------- Cisco RV220W Firmware: 1.0.3.5 IKE policy Encryption: 3DES Authentication: MD5 Group: Group 2 Life key: 28800 sec VPN strategy Encryption: 3DES Authentication: SHA - 1 Group: 1024 bits (Group 2) Life key: 3 600 s Perfect Forward Secrecy: enabled	Details of the Internet ------------------------- DOWNLOAD: 1.35 Mbps Upload: 1.24 Mbps Details of router ---------------------- Cisco WRVS4400N Firmware version: V2.0.1.3 Phase 1 Encryption: 3DES Authentication: MD5 Group: 1024 bits (Group 2) Life key: 28800 sec Phase 2 Encryption: 3DES Authentication: SHA - 1 Group: 1024 bits (Group 2) Life key: 3 600 s Perfect Forward Secrecy: enabled

  From the day that VPN has been implemented, the performance was poor. Frequent disconnections sessions live to the VPN nodes and very low transfer rate was alarming to users.

  The servers in A location and users to the site B gets authenticated at the server DC level in A location

  Applications of Terminal Server remote as Quickbooks, QQ Evolution, attendance RX serve also the location has by users to the location B

  The login is your time and all applications are extremely slow.

  I tried to copy files between share data between two locations and the results are as follows

  Location A to location B-> 130 Kbps 140 Kbps

  Location location B A-> 150 Kbps to 160 Kbps

  What can be the problem for these poor performance VPN?

  -Change the encryption for the least secure OF THE /MD5 would have a significant impact because it can reduce the overload on the routers?

  -Even if both routers are routers SMB, it has really good VPN flow according to the data sheets. I couldn't find VPN flow mentioned in the WRVS4400N data sheet. One of the sons of CSC, I also noticed the VPN of WRVS4400N flow seemed really low as only about 1.6Mbps. (https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2107881)  Whereas RV220W router has VPN 90Mbps flow, according to the datasheet.

  So, what can be the cause of the problem and what can be fixes possible?

  Help, please!

  ANUP sisi

  Beginner to router Cisco VPN, please help

  RVS4000 was designed to work in a small office. It supports 5 VPN tunnels with a maxium of 2 Mbps flow measured in a laboratory environment. It has a processor that has a motor integrated IPS, who would deliver 20 Mbps LAN - WAN throughput when IPS is enabled.

  RV220W has been designed to operate in a slightly larger office with 25 IPsec VPN tunnels. It has a processor that has a built-in cryptographic engine able to deliver throughput 90 Mbps of IPsec. RV220W also supports 5 SSL VPN tunnels that can be used by employees and business partners for remote access.

• Poor performance Alienware 13

  Hello, I have recently updated my Asus G55VW to 13 Alienware and he's surprisingly poor performance in some games from my old laptop. As far as I know that I put everything to max performance but it is still low in some areas.

  Old sheet

  Intel i7 @ 2.5 GHz to 3.4 GHz

  NVIDIA geforce 660 m

  8 GB ram

  Alienware 13

  Processor Intel i5 1.7 GHz to 2.7 GHz

  NVIDIA geforce 860 m

  8 GB ram

  So far, Borderlands 2 runs poor while others like Warframe can operate at max settings no problem.  Other games like naruto shippuden ultimate ninja storm 3 full bursting cannot run because it selects only the integrated graphics card and I can not change... Right now, I think that the graphics card integrated into the issue and if there is a way to disable it, which could make things much better. Not to mention that any help to increase performance would be greatly appreciated.

  JLM264

  Alienware 13

  Processor Intel i5 1.7 GHz to 2.7 GHz

  You have a 1.7 GHZ dual core CPU... Borderlands 2 recommends the use of 2.4 GHZ quad core CPU

  Your "old" laptop ASUS who had a 2.3 GHZ quad core CPU meets this requirement more than your new machine

  Warframe works very well, because any CPU dual core is sufficient and that's what you have

• HOL-INF-04 - display performance and VMware vSphere 5.1 - Lab has expired

  Hello

  I started 'HOL-INF-04 - display performance and VMware vSphere 5.1' lab and before I could make the workshop, it has expired.

  Now I can not re - start. What should I do now?  Help, please...

  Concerning

  Nishant

  Nishant,

  It's a little gremlin that snuck into the code, guys it fixed today. It was that if lab has not started and user not leave lab cleanup script would enter in...

  Test, it should work...

  Lets us know.

  Pablo

• Poor performance InternetExplorer9

  Hello

  I have my InternetExplorer9 on a clean Windows7 VM thinapped and have Veery poor performance when I run the finished app.
  I tried many things to increase the speed. My normal ie9 starts in 5 seconds, until it's on google.com, my thinapped however ie9
  needs about 10 seconds, even after the restart of the 5th. What I've tried so far is:

  -J' have compressed the ie9.exe when generating

  -J' put 'AutoStartServices = 0' in the Package.ini generating

  -J' put 'NetRelaunch = 0' and 'AutoStartServices = 0' in the Package.ini.

  -J' set the sandbox sand-path %appdata%\microsoft\windows\sendto and the local path (tried both)

  -J' deleted some unnecessary user-specific folders in the project path

  -J' got only InternetExplorer.exe as entry point

  I tried the last few steps of each constellation, but no finished package is better than the others. You have any other suggestions for

  My problem? (I use the Thinapp_4.7.2 by the way)

  Kind regards

  Tobias

  It doesn't matter as long as it is in the right section:

  [Compression]

  CompressionType = None

  [Segregation]

  DirectoryIsolationMode = merged

  [BuildOptions]

  OptimizeFor = mΘmoire

  DisableTransactionRegistry = 1

  I forgot to mention it, but there was a new feature of Internet Explorer 9: hardware acceleration.

  Change IE9 to disable hardware acceleration has helped me get better performance in my VDI environments.

  See:

  http://support.Microsoft.com/kb/2528233

  Go to Internet Options, advanced, check ""use the software instead of GPU rendering rendering "."

  Recover application or use sbmerge to update your project file.

  
  

• disc Flash of poor performance

  Hello
  When I run $cellcli EI list physical disk, some of the Flash drive is showing a poor performance.
  
  
  alprod1st09: FLASH_5_0 1116M08EUW poor performance
  alprod1st09: there is no such thing as FLASH_5_1 1116M08EV9
  alprod1st09: FLASH_5_2 1116M08EVA poor performance
  alprod1st09: FLASH_5_3 1116M08EVC poor performance
  
  is it requires to call oracle for the replacement of flash drive... it is very critical?
  Kind regards
  ANI

  One of your flash cards shows also absent I would suggest contact you oracle for a glance. You are on the last cell server software? There used to be a problem that caused problems with the pci riser cards. It is fixed in the latest software drivers.

• Android apps have poor performance

  I have several applications created for Android and all my folios seem poor performance on android devices. It takes a long time for any article to focus on the text (all sheets are built using PDF), and there is a significant for interactivity in a Folio delay, if it does not crash the app entirely. Has anyone else had problems with Android apps? I have not read a lot of useful information on them.

  All my applications are built for android with the dimensions of 2048 x 1536 to make them readable on the Nexus-10. All applications have been rebuilt with v27 and PDFS.

  I'd appreciate comments you can give.

  Thank you

  One thing that can help with the Active Viewer is to design to a smaller size (1024 x 768, for example), use a PDF object and the viewer intensify folios to fit larger screens. Put scale up to adjustment is supported in our 28 Viewer version of AIR and it makes a big difference in performance while maintaining the reasonable quality of the assets.

  Neil

• Poor performance VMWare View 4.6

  We deployed a small VMWare View solution for administrative personnel, accounting and CAD / drafting of users. Currently, we have race 21 VM and received daily complaints about the performance, some days better than others but all well below the level of performance of a desktop computer configured in a way appropriate. We are either duty put an end to the use of the output of this system and return to the standard desktop computers or add an additional server to view VMWare and persevere, we can find the cause of the weak performance of hope.

  Here is the specification of

  The virtual computer running server:

  Dell PE R510, 2 x 6 core Xeon 5670 CPU clocked at 2,933 ghz, 64 GB of memory, TB 1.81 storage Raid 5 using 6-disc 7200 tr / MIN SATA 6 g, NICs 4 x 1 Gbit

  Configuration of the VM:

  Windows 7 32 - bit, 2 CPU and 3 GB of memory by the system, we have 3 pools Clone related to the installation of specific software for accounting, Admin, and CAD.

  I can't see were the loss of performance is. Sometimes the users sessions hang for a few seconds when they choose the various functions in the office or AutoCad, then the system is again significant. Other times the screen quality degrades a bit before clear. For some office programs take an excessive amount of time to load and become available. Sometimes to connect or general file / network access is slow, summary record lists taking extended periods to update or view the content. Sometimes of functions such as print and trace take excessive amounts of time before appear in their respective dialog boxes.

  I've attached screenshots of our performance to review statistics. Any help would be welcome.

  Hi Matt,

  Please provide more information.

  On a hardware RAID 5 type 6-pin, your number of IOP on a RAID 5 is about 130 IOPS / s based on an 80% writing / reading of 20% ratio.

  You use 21 workstations more than 130 IOPS / s, then you're essentially allowing for 6 inputs/outputs by the office without any room for overhead.

  Now, if you have moved to 15K SAS with the same amount of battery, you would end up with a result of 304 IOPS / s based on the same report.

  21 offices spread over 304 is 14 inputs/OUTPUTS per desktop, but again, no overhead.

  Essentially, simply by moving to 15 K SAS, you more than double your IO, but your RAID set is not optimal.

  If you went hardware RAID 10 with the same number of PIN, your IOPS / s would rise to 555 based on the same ratios.

  21 workstations more IOPS 555 / s 26 IOPS / sec per desktop computer that comes close to the 30-40 recommended for VDI.

  If you can afford to go 8 x 600 GB 15 K on your R510, surprise you pleasently with performance - he would net you have a 740 IOP account

  21 offices on 740 IOPS / IOPS 35 s / s by the office which is more in line with the recommendation of VDI.

  I mine with a range 40 IOPS / sec per office more overhead, and we have no problem on our end here.

  Do not give up, with a little more work and planning, you could end up with a great platform - we use the R510 is there as well and love them.

  I hope that helps you, it's a great place to ask questions and get answers.

  I'm also on Twitter if you want to ask more questions, more than happy to help you!

  See you soon!

• Performance of poor graphics on VMWare Fusion when using an external monitor

  Hello

  When you use an external monitor (connected to VGA via adapter Thunderbolt), I noticed severe lag while doing operations with open windows (for example, drag, maximize, minimize). In general, it is safe to say that all operations that appeal to no effect whatsoever (for example open a start menu), are significantly lag. When running in a one-stop single mode or unplug the external monitor, none of these discrepancies. So I strongly guess that arises the question of having a connected external monitor.

  -Would be my Macbook is not powerful enough to run 4 screens simultaneously (two for Mac OS in native mode as well as more virtual both inside Windows)? Are there settings I can try and change that could affect this underperformance? Or is it a problem with VMWare? Please note that the CPU is not even by far the most when running the virtual machine and 'stress test' moving around the windows.

  My settings for the virtual machine are attached to this post.

  I use a Macbook to mid-2014 Pro retina 13 "with 16 GB of RAM and a processor Intel i7 @ 3 GHz, as well as the latest Version of VMWare Fusion (7.1.0). The OS I am running using VMWare is a Windows 8.1. (implemented from scratch on this machine) with all updates installed (as well as VMWare tools). I am running Windows in a resolution of 2560 x 1600 with icons on the scale, but I tried to run VMWare low with 1440 x 900 resolution, which made no difference.

  Hi ltzi1,

  Are there when you select "Unit" only for "Scaled high resolution" in the display settings?

  Please can you give us the external monitor resolution setting and attached support beam (it can be collected by 'Help-> support Collect information') which could help understand the problem?

  Or a registration form would be useful. : D

  Thank you.

  -Shan

• Poor performance during copy/clone a VM disk

  Hello

  for several days, we try to find a solution to improve performance when the computer images virtual of one ESXi (free) to another.

  Our situation is as follows:

  We have 4 different servers ESXi running, must benefit from all the material according to the compatibility of the VMWares guide. Connected via gigabit, all virtual machines network has stopped, nothing else running on the network. All virtual machines are stored locally on SATA drives.

  Now we wanted to spend a bunch of computer images virtual of one ESXi for others - but regardless of what technique, we used, we have reached a maximum. Speed about 10 MB/s (which would take several days to transfer everything).

  We tried the following:

  -Enable SSH and SCP allows you to copy the files directly between servers (using several different encryption algorithms)

  -Use Veeam FastSCP for copy files directly

  -Connect through SSH on both sides and has used a combination of tar and netcat to push raw on the network files

  -Install ProFTPD and copy files via FTP

  For all of these methods, the write speed was never over the ~10MByte/s (often it is still slower). So we thought that the networking might have a problem, that's why we tried a few transfers the.

  But even a local "dd" to transfer data of 1 local disk to another was just as slow as the transfer of network... We tried this on all the different materials of ESXi we have, with the RAID on, off, etc.

  After some googling, we discovered that this should be a problem with the VMFS that really does not support the use of "standard" file system tools That's why we tried to find a way to use the ESX-internal tools to copy/clone VM images.

  We installed a NFS server 'between' 2 ESXi servers, i.e. both have the NFS share accessible. Copy of ESXi to NFS is incredibly fast (via vSphere client, operating at gigabit full speed) - but the copy of NFS to ESXi is slow again (as before ~10MByte/s). The last test we did was use the vmkfstools command line utility to clone from the NFS share on the local disk of VMFS. This seems to be a little faster (difficult to measure due to missing statistics, seems to be ~20MByte/s), but far from a quick fix.

  What is the mechanism to move a virtual computer image on a server ESXi? Is there a way to improve the transfer speed?

  Yes, he does. As I said, this problem (poor local disk IO performance observed in ESXi, but not in the virtual machine) can be eliminated only by 'mature' raid-controller with large onboard cache, usually 512 MB - 2 GB (or storage network, of course, but now we are talking about local drives).

  It does not matter if you have a local drive attached to the controller chipset or raid - without performance cache controller is just as bad. In fact, it can be even worse on raid-controller (without cache) If you use raid5/6 to parity calculations...

• poor performance iTunes 12.4.3.1

  iTunes 12.4.3.1 worst level ever? Incomplete, burning playlists, software crashes frequently, slow dead URL, performance, WIN7

  For general advice, see troubleshooting problems with iTunes for Windows updates.

  The steps described in the second case are a guide to remove everything related to iTunes and then rebuild what is often a good starting point, unless the symptoms indicate a more specific approach.

  Review the other boxes and other support documents list to the bottom of the page, in case one of them applies.

  The more information box has direct links with the current and recent if you have problems to download, must revert to an older version or want to try the version of iTunes for Windows (64-bit - for older video cards) as a workaround for problems with installation or operation, or compatibility with third-party software.

  Backups of your library and device should be affected by these measures but there are links to backup and recovery advice there.

  TT2