virtualbox vs installation

[phreddy53]

I'm trying out ubuntu on oracle virtualbox on my win 10. Ubuntu doesn't seem to be any faster than windows on this older (7 yr old) computer. Also, the audio sputters and robots more on ubuntu.
Is this because I'm running it through virtualbox? Will Ubuntu speed up and fix the audio farts if I do a full install?

 

[Condobloke]

G'day phreddy53, Welcome to linux.org

prepare a usb stick with ubuntu or Linux Mint ot whatever linux you like.....

Download it from the Linux Mint site or Ubuntu site

Use rufus to 'burn' the downloaded .iso file to the usb stick
You could also use Balena etcher to do this

This makes the usb stick bootable.

When that is done you will need to boot the pc/laptop to that usb stick.
When it boots it will not be running on the main drive.....it will run in RAM so your win 10 will be left in peace

This achieves a "Live" Linux....it will happily run in ram for as long as you like......Please note....that if/when you reboot etc ...any changes you have made will disappear.
You can test it thoroughly...download browsers etc etc etc.....this will include the audio and internet connectivity etc etc

Seeing it will be running in RAM it will be slightly slower than if it were properly fully installed.

One question...you mentioned your pc is around 7 years old. Does that mean it has a standard HDD ?

 

[Brickwizard]

I'm trying out ubuntu on oracle virtualbox on my win 10. Ubuntu doesn't seem to be any faster than windows on this older (7 yr old)

Welcome
firstly, 7 yrs old is not old for most computers, there are many people running kit thats 12 yrs or older
if you are using a VM/VB then you will not notice much difference as the machine is still being controlled by Windows, the only real way to see any difference is to install it to either the main hard drive or to an external drive [but installing to the main drive will always be faster.
The second thing is speed will be affected by the quality of your machine [amount of ram and CPU model ] entry level machines may need a mid or lightweight distribution, Ubuntu has become a little bloated over recent years [which also will apply to its clones] so benefits from higher performance kit, whereas something like Linux -Lite will run better on entry and base level kit.

 

[tinfoil-hat]

If you run Linux under Windows via Virtualbox, you are running 2 Operatingsystems at once. If you boot a normal Linux Installation, it should be much faster

 

[dos2unix]

Everyone above has mentioned some good ideas, and things to check.

The other thing I would mention that's really important here.

Make sure Virtualization is enabled in your BIOS/UEFI.

 

[Aristarchus]

Everyone above has mentioned some good ideas, and things to check.

The other thing I would mention that's really important here.

Make sure Virtualization is enabled in your BIOS/UEFI.

3.3. Hardware vs. Software Virtualization

...As opposed to other virtualization software, for many usage scenarios, Oracle VM VirtualBox does not require hardware virtualization features to be present. Through sophisticated techniques, Oracle VM VirtualBox virtualizes many guest operating systems entirely in software. This means that you can run virtual machines even on older processors which do not support hardware virtualization.

DIfference between hypervisor I and II

However as mentioned already by @tinfoil-hat you are running OS in OS so obviously speed loss is the consequence (one of many). Get hypervisor type I properly installed or use dualboot for actual comparison.

 

[kc1di]

Hello @phreddy53 Welcome to the Linux.org forum, With virtual machines the performance tends to be regulated but the host machine not the virtual one. So what you see is not Ubuntu but Windows performance. To get a better look do what others have suggested and try it via live usb. But even with a live usb run it will not be as fast or responsive as a Hardware install. Simply because of the fact that in a live session many of apps are compressed and need to be uncompressed on the fly. But it will give you a better Idea of how things will work if installed on the machine in question. In any event with a live usb you could try several Distro and choose the one that best fits your Hardware and work style. Cheers!

 

[Tolkem]

You haven't mentioned your PC's specs; CPU, RAM, storage type, etc. In any case, when running an OS inside a virtual machine using Vbox or any other similar software, performance is mostly limited by hardware, so the stronger the hardware, the better the performance, it's nothing to do with "running an OS inside another OS". For example, If your pc has a dual-core CPU and 8 gigs of RAM, the VM will use 1 core and a max of 4 gigs of RAM, which is not enough by today's standards, so performance will be poor, on the other hand, if the PC has a quad-core CPU (8 threads) and 16 gigs of RAM, the VM can use up to 4 cores and 8 gigs of RAM, so performance will be better, in other words, the more resources the host machine has (CPU cores and RAM), the better the VM will perform. That said, it'll never be as fast and responsive as running in bare metal (installed in the real machine). So your best bet is to follow @Condobloke suggestion; download, burn/write to a USB, and boot from it the system, you'll get a better/closer feeling to how really well the system performs in your PC.

 

[phreddy53]

Thanks for all the helpful replies!
I did run cinnamon on a usb drive on a 5 yr old HP notebook and on the older 9 yr old Dell Inspiron laptop. To my surprise, they both ran much faster than windows. And I'm talking like this old computer hasn't pushed pixels that fast in years. Another surprise for me was Cinnamon ran better on the older Dell than on HP. The only real difference being the HP had audio hiccups when connected to my Vizio sound bar and my JBL headphones. The Dell performed flawlessly.
I had planned on waiting until windows 10 on the Dell stopped getting updates next year before installing Linux over it but now I'm thinking why wait. Gonna check out a few more distros before committing but cinnamon seems very user friendly.
Thanks to all of you!

 

[Condobloke]

Cinnamon ran better on the older Dell than on HP

That doesn't surprise me at all....Much prefer dell to hp

If the pc is that old it likely has an original hdd (plate spinner in it

buy a SSD (soli state drive), and it will just about make your eyeballs fall out with the increase in speed.

They are not expensive

@KGIII may come along and tell you of a brand he swears by and has many of them that operate without fault etc

(nothing for you to here....KG will see this post)

 

[Brickwizard]

Gonna check out a few more distros before committing but cinnamon seems very user friendly

Cinnamon is the desktop environment, and is available in several distributions, I run both a HP desktop and a Dell laptop,
by choice, I use Mint LMDE6 as it's a tad quicker than Mint 22 [not having the Ubuntu bloat]

 

[Fanboi]

Thanks for all the helpful replies!
I did run cinnamon on a usb drive on a 5 yr old HP notebook and on the older 9 yr old Dell Inspiron laptop. To my surprise, they both ran much faster than windows. And I'm talking like this old computer hasn't pushed pixels that fast in years. Another surprise for me was Cinnamon ran better on the older Dell than on HP. The only real difference being the HP had audio hiccups when connected to my Vizio sound bar and my JBL headphones. The Dell performed flawlessly.
I had planned on waiting until windows 10 on the Dell stopped getting updates next year before installing Linux over it but now I'm thinking why wait. Gonna check out a few more distros before committing but cinnamon seems very user friendly.
Thanks to all of you!

Great decision! I also have a 9yo Dell (2015 model, 8 years in active duty) and a pair of JBLs. So I'll suggest the HP probably has a crappy bluetooth/wifi combo card.
HP tend to cut corners, whereas Dell is always worth the extra. Currently, as it is now my work machine -- yup, work computer -- I did have to upgrade the RAM to 8GB and swap the hdd out for an old SSD (as @Condobloke mentioned you do). It performs like a brand new machine, even running Edge Browser, the resource hog that it is (I have to use Edge as I, very shamefully, work for an MS-centric IT company and certain things will just not work in Chromium despite the common ancestory).

 

[bwingbob]

So I'll suggest the HP probably has a crappy bluetooth/wifi combo card.

I have an older HP Pavilion laptop and can attest that it has a crappy bluetooth/wifi card. I use a usb dongle most of the time with this machine. Except for this, the laptop is fine.

+1 for Dell laptops. I have a Inspiron 5510, it works flawlessly and is my daily driver. Runs a windows VM (for work) at native speeds.

Bob

 

[Aristarchus]

You haven't mentioned your PC's specs; CPU, RAM, storage type, etc. In any case, when running an OS inside a virtual machine using Vbox or any other similar software, performance is mostly limited by hardware, so the stronger the hardware, the better the performance, it's nothing to do with "running an OS inside another OS". For example, If your pc has a dual-core CPU and 8 gigs of RAM, the VM will use 1 core and a max of 4 gigs of RAM, which is not enough by today's standards, so performance will be poor, on the other hand, if the PC has a quad-core CPU (8 threads) and 16 gigs of RAM, the VM can use up to 4 cores and 8 gigs of RAM, so performance will be better, in other words, the more resources the host machine has (CPU cores and RAM), the better the VM will perform. That said, it'll never be as fast and responsive as running in bare metal (installed in the real machine). So your best bet is to follow @Condobloke suggestion; download, burn/write to a USB, and boot from it the system, you'll get a better/closer feeling to how really well the system performs in your PC.

No, you can configure how much or RAM or CPU is assigned to virtual machine. You can give all CPU or RAM to Vbox VM if you want though obviously this is not advisable. Because Vbox is type II hypervisor it will never reach the performance of bare metal and has other limitations e.g. does not run the latest OpenGL so some software just refuse to run. In short for max efficiency software within software (e.g. Vbox) is not the best option but just to try it this is a good alternative.

https://www.liquidweb.com/blog/bare-metal-vs-hypervisor/

Bare metal offers better performance. Software installed on bare metal has direct access to the physical hardware, significantly reducing latency and lag.

Virtual machines (VMs) must exist on hypervisors. As such, they have lower specifications compared to bare metal. This, combined with the hypervisor overhead, increases latency and throttles their performance.
Also this:

Bare Metal Vs VM: What Performs Better

Our comparison of bare metal and VM servers outlines the differences between the two hosting options and helps select the right infrastructure for your use case.

phoenixnap.com

In short software is software is a limitation though for OP it may not matter.

 

[Vektor]

I run a PorteuX LXDE with VBOX installed on an HP laptop. 8 GiB ram 4 core. Ram usage is 300 Mib without any program running.

I give 6 GiB ram and all 4 cores to VBOX. It runs everything I have thrown at it very nice.

Vektor

 

[Aristarchus]

I run a PorteuX LXDE with VBOX installed on an HP laptop. 8 GiB ram 4 core. Ram usage is 300 Mib without any program running.

I give 6 GiB ram and all 4 cores to VBOX. It runs everything I have thrown at it very nice.

Vektor

you can run more CPUs than you have because there these are virtual: I had 8 cores and run 16 CPUS because I started four VMs at the same time with 4 CPUs assigned for each VM. While Vbox limits CPU nos per VM, you can run more VM at once exceeding max number of real CPUs

 

[Vektor]

"exceeding max number of real CPUs"

I will try that.

Thanks

 

[KGIII]

@KGIII may come along and tell you of a brand he swears by and has many of them that operate without fault etc

That brand would be TeamGroup. You can find them for less money than the other brands but they've done very well in my experience. There are very cheap drives out there that don't hold up as well - some not even having the capacity they advertise. TeamGroup is a pretty solid choice, even if you're not on a budget.

You can find them at NewEgg if you'd like. I'm sure they're elsewhere but they're always having sales at NewEgg.

I'm not affiliated with either company.

 

[phreddy53]

Cinnamon is the desktop environment, and is available in several distributions, I run both a HP desktop and a Dell laptop,
by choice, I use Mint LMDE6 as it's a tad quicker than Mint 22 [not having the Ubuntu bloat]

Will definitely check that one out.

 

[phreddy53]

That brand would be TeamGroup. You can find them for less money than the other brands but they've done very well in my experience. There are very cheap drives out there that don't hold up as well - some not even having the capacity they advertise. TeamGroup is a pretty solid choice, even if you're not on a budget.

You can find them at NewEgg if you'd like. I'm sure they're elsewhere but they're always having sales at NewEgg.

I'm not affiliated with either company.

Thanks. Will definitely check it out.