#Win95 emulator for mac 32 bit#
#Win95 emulator for mac pro#

So, we had Windows 95 running on a 200 MHz Power Macintosh under Virtual PC 3.0 vs. Fair enough.ДЄs you may have guessed from the above, Windows 95 was the test vehicle this time around, vs. Hence, if anything, I was giving a bit of a handicap to the Power Macintosh.

#Win95 emulator for mac 32 bit#

the Pentium Pro, which was reported to be optimized for pure 32 bit processing. Well, given the mixture of 16 bit and 32 bit software in Windows 95, the Pentium was actually supposed to be the superior chip, clock for clock, vs.

#Win95 emulator for mac pro#

Pentium Pro difference a significant one for performance? Would the Pentium Pro have an unfair advantage? To keep it as fair as possible, I upgraded the Mac to Virtual PC 3.0, which emulates an Intel Pentium. To accomplish this, I pitted two 200 MHz machines against each other: the above mentioned 200 MHz Power Macintosh 7300/200 and a 200 MHz Pentium Pro PC. That would be an Apples to apples (pun intended) comparison and would directly measure the performance impact of PC emulation on a MacвЂ¦ now that would be interesting. What I needed to do was compare machines with the SAME clock rate, and observe those results. SoftWindows 3.0 emulates an Intel 80486, and the native Windows machine used in the testing was also an 80486, and so that much at least was fair, but the performance impact of the emulation turned out to be significantly higher than 2XвЂ¦ it was more like 6X! So, comparing machines of dissimilar clock rates was not such a good idea after all. As it turned out, this could not have been farther from the truth. My naГЇve expectation at the time I set this testing up was that the SoftWindows emulation would exact about a 2 to 1 performance hit, and so it should be a fair contest. the same apps running natively on a 100 MHz 486DX4100. Last time, we looked at Windows 3.1 apps running under SoftWindows 3.0 on a 200 MHz Power Macintosh 7300/200 vs. My last post on the shoot out between Windows 3.1 apps running under SoftWindows 3 on a Mac and the same Windows 3.1 apps running on native hardware seemed to warrant a postscript I thought.