![vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12 vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12](https://bilder.macwelt.de/4271824_620x310_r.jpg)
We therefore turned to our old standby for measuring battery life in OS X: Automator.
![vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12 vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12](https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Parallels-retina-Win8.png)
![vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12 vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12](https://www.appgefahren.de/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/VMware-Fusion-8-Icon.jpg)
Powermark has its own internal battery life calculator that reports both actual running time and estimated battery life remaining, but we didn’t want to take the chance that the virtualization process could introduce inaccuracies in that counter. Unlike PCMark, however, which runs a particular scenario just three times in order to determine a system’s performance level, Powermark runs the designated usage scenario repeatedly until the battery is drained.
#Vmware fusion 8.5 vs parallels 12 windows#
To test that question, we turned to Futuremark Powermark, a battery life benchmark for Windows that’s based on tests similar to those conducted by its sister app, PCMark. We obviously expect that our MacBook will experience shorter running times when using a virtual machine in OS X, but the question is how much shorter. Although energy efficiency and battery capacity have improved dramatically in recent years, it still takes a lot of power to run a complex modern operating system, and with any of the virtualization platforms we’re looking at today, we’re asking our MacBook to go even further and run two operating systems (at least!). With the ever increasing use of laptops and mobile computing devices, battery life is one of the most important areas of product development and the customer experience.