VMware Workstation and Windows report different CPU speeds

[Pieter-Jan_de_V]

I'm using VMware Workstation 6.0.0 build 45731 on a PC running Windows Vista 64 bits and equipped with an Asus P5K3 DeLuxe motherboard, an Intel Dual Core2 Quad CPU and 4 Gb of DDR3 1066 MHz memory. I used VMware Converter to convert my old workstation into a virtual machine, which succeeded after a few initally failing attempts.

The Windows XP virtual machine seems to work fine. However, when I boot it, VMware shows the following warning:

VMware workstation has measured your CPU speed to be 2405 MHz, but Windows reports that it is 2394 MHz. This may mean that ........ etc.

For a workaround, please refer to the VMware knowledge base article at: http://www.vmware.com/info?id=97[/i]

So I read the knowledge base article and, as it suggests, checked my CPU speed in Windows (My Computer - Properties). It appears that VMware and Windows are both right, because Windows reports: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU @ 2.40GHz 2.39 GHz[/b]. This confuses me and I don't know which value to put in my global configuration file, as the knowledge base article suggests.

Is there anybody out there who can help me solve this dilemma?

Message was edited by:

Pieter-Jan de Vries

[irishcopster]

What dilemma? I have the exact computer and Vista Ultimate you do and

as yet nothing has changed. The times for all my guests are the same as

host. I can't figure out what needs changing? Because some screen is

telling me to??? Nothing is broken and when the times come up different

(and I have 35 guests now with tons of software) then I will worry.

I put a special atomic clock that breaks down the seconds into every

quest and the host and nothing is wrong. The atomic clock in the

quests have never changed the time yet. I have been watching very carefully.

I have left some guests run for days at a time and nothing has

changed the time yet.

[Pieter-Jan_de_V]

Thanks for the feed back. I have to admit that I usually do[/i] take serious notice of application warnings and prefer to try to prevent possible problems before they cause any trouble, instead of trying to solve clean up the mess afterwards. My guess is that those warnings are not issued without reason.

So I hope someone can shed some more light on this issue. Until that time I'll just have to wait and see what happens and only take action when an actual problem arises.