2500k graphics vs 2500 virtualization

I want the 3000 series graphics that the 2500k provides, but I also plan on using virtualization. How big of a deal is the lack of hardware support for virtualization? Is it possible to use 3D acceleration in a virtualized OS without hardware support? (I believe virtualbox allows 3D acceleration.) From what I've read, it appears that hardware support for virtualization is mostly related to I/O.

Here's a link to charts showing the virtualization availability on the new processors (it's a little bit farther down on the page): http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/2

[edit]

2500k
VT-x: Yes
VT-d: No
[strike]TXT: No[/strike] (probably not relevant)

2500
VT-x: Yes
VT-d: Yes
[strike]TXT: Yes[/strike] (probably not relevant)


[edit2]
(My knowledge of virtualization is very limited, so please feel free to correct any misunderstandings.)

Hi White Tree I am in the same boat as you
(Can someone please give us an answer)

Right now I have a Asrock Z68 Professional Fatal1ty Motherboard with a 2500K and tried to install ESXi, but it kept erroring (so I went and brought a 2500, but have not opened it), Should I send the 2500 back or open it and sell the 2500K.

Need options soon, my first virtual server will be a WHS2011 for media sharing (including live TV, Security CCTV, and other media & file sharing), which is why I brought the K version for the HD3000 Graphics (to help with encoding etc).
If I cant share the media with the WHS2011 I will virtualise a WMC in there too.

I also don’t know enough about any of this new stuff (gone are the days of higher clock speeds or more cores being the important factor for my decision making)

....White Tree, if someone has PM you an answer can you forward it on, Cheers.

i don't think that the virtualization will be that big of a factor, i'm not too familiar with this but still, but for aussiematt, i the virtualization as far as i know has nothing to do with encoding, that part is straight cpu, nothing to do with that other stuff from what i know, which is a limited amount so this may not be right, but the 1 thing i do know is that the only real diff from the 2500 to the 2500k is the addition of an unlocked multiplier on the k, allowing for overcklocking, meaning going from the 3.3ghz or whatever, to (with the addition of a good aftermarket cpu cooler) ~4.5ghz, but this stuff wouldn't matter anyways if you got a gfx card, the hd 3000 igpu isn't terrible, but for like 60 or more dollars you can get a better gpu, plus vram and shaders and all that good stuff (that my comp lack with its sh**y gpu).

WhiteTree said:

I want the 3000 series graphics that the 2500k provides, but I also plan on using virtualization. How big of a deal is the lack of hardware support for virtualization? Is it possible to use 3D acceleration in a virtualized OS without hardware support? (I believe virtualbox allows 3D acceleration.) From what I've read, it appears that hardware support for virtualization is mostly related to I/O.

Here's a link to charts showing the virtualization availability on the new processors (it's a little bit farther down on the page): http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/2

[edit]

2500k
VT-x: Yes
VT-d: No
[strike]TXT: No[/strike] (probably not relevant)

2500
VT-x: Yes
VT-d: Yes
[strike]TXT: Yes[/strike] (probably not relevant)


[edit2]
(My knowledge of virtualization is very limited, so please feel free to correct any misunderstandings.)

Click to expand...

Wow, I'm surprised the 2500k doesn't have virtualization support. Dang. The only issue with that when using virtual machines is that you need the support to install 64bit operating systems. There are a couple quirks (the 3d acceleration), but that's the biggest thing. Without that support you can only use 32bit OS's. Though virtualbox (unless they've finally updated this. Though that wasn't planned for the near future) uses a virtual graphics driver, so really what you have in your system doesn't matter.

Troncoso said:

Wow, I'm surprised the 2500k doesn't have virtualization support. Dang. The only issue with that when using virtual machines is that you need the support to install 64bit operating systems. There are a couple quirks (the 3d acceleration), but that's the biggest thing. Without that support you can only use 32bit OS's. Though virtualbox (unless they've finally updated this. Though that wasn't planned for the near future) uses a virtual graphics driver, so really what you have in your system doesn't matter.

Click to expand...

VT-x = virtualization

And 2500K support this. What 2500K lacks is VT-d which means Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O