Video memory needs to allow more than 256MB

[DevFingers]

Hello.

Please increase the limit of VirtualBox's video memory.

This is a required change, as multiple monitors, with the specifications of modern day computing, needs more support from the machine.

In case you've missed it, a news flash; we no longer run business programs on green screen character monitor Zenith Easy-PCs with a 10 MB hard drive.

I run on my Mac, which has a 15 inch Retina screen. I also run a second monitor, of greater resolution.

When I run my OS inside VirtualBox, the second monitor can only support 1152 x 864, effectively crippling my work in the virtual machine.

Mind you, back in the 20th century, 1152x864 was considered pretty good. If you still live in that era, good for you.

If you don't allow sufficient memory for multiple monitors, you shouldn't allow multiple monitors in emulation.

Or

If you need help programming these changes, let me me know and I can help you.

Overall, honestly, I'm very impressed by VirtualBox. Nice job. Now, though, it's time to bring it into the 21st century, ok?

Oh! - silly me - I'll just make the change myself as the source code is available...

Best Regards,

R

[noteirak]

Moved to "Suggestions"

[mpack]

1152 x 864 x 32bpp requires less than 4MB, so I don't see why you assume you are limited by VRAM set at 256MB. Come into the 20th century - learn to use a calculator!

Also, please search before posting. Both the VRAM limit and the implications of hi res displays have both already been discussed to death. Some of this work is expressed in the v5 beta.

[DevFingers]

Oh, well, I guess I miss read something.

Please answer the following: How do I run two normal monitors at 2880 x 1800 in VirtualBox?

Oh, and while your at it, why do any EOMs bother putting in graphics cards with 2 GB of ram or more?

According to your world, they're just being silly.

In the mean time, I'll check out v5.

My point was that you shouldn't put options (like multiple monitors) in a product (like VirtualBox) if you had no intention of supporting it. It's very frustrating.

[loukingjr]

Two 2880 x 1800 x 32 monitors take approx. 41.5MBs, Four would be 82.9MBs. Eight would be 165.9MBs. Sixteen would be… well if you need to run sixteen 2880 x 1800 monitors you would need more than 256MBs of VRAM.

Large graphics cards are primarily for advanced gaming which virtual machines are not suited for and wouldn't be even if you could set the video memory to 100 Petrabytes.

There are also marketing reasons due to the fact that some people always assume more is better and will pay for it.

VirtualBox does support multiple monitors.

Anything else?

[scottgus1]

As mentioned, the actual video memory required to hold the data for the pixels showing on the screen is quite small, even for high resolutions. But when calculating what color those pixels should be, a lot of data must be sampled and crunched. Ray tracing, shading, light from multiple sources, surfaces the light is bouncing from and against, etc. The extra memory in a video card gives the video processor the computing space to carry out those calculations. And the faster the video card has to get that data assembled, such as for super-high-fps games, the more computing space needed.

That said, it's high-end programs like design software and games that need those sorts of computing power which require the large video memory spaces. Virtualbox is not designed to be a gaming platform, and games don't run well in virtual machines. In fact, even if the game had the memory space required, it might still not run very well. Dual-booting would be a better solution for the game's requirements. So it's reasonable that the developers have not given tons of host memory to the video section.

[mpack]

when calculating what color those pixels should be, a lot of data must be sampled and crunched. Ray tracing, shading, light from multiple sources, surfaces the light is bouncing from and against, etc. The extra memory in a video card gives the video processor the computing space to carry out those calculations.

I would add to that... however the virtual graphics card doesn't have those functions and hence doesn't need memory for it. All it needs is enough (simulated) VRAM to hold a reasonable number of fullscreen images, say 10. So at the resolution mentioned earlier, 4MB*10 ~=40MB would be a good number.

Actual 3D rendering, when done at all, is done on the host. So it's the host that needs the memory and the GPU, not the guest.

And bear in mind that VRAM given to the guest is simulated using host RAM. It has absolutely nothing to do with accelerating host graphics performance.

[DevFingers]

So then why is my second monitor only able to get up to a dismal 1152x864 resolution? the Mac Book Pro has no issue with the monitor, and I hit full res.

I connected the second monitor via HDMI cable to my Mac Book Pro, but in VirtualBox, it can only get up to 1152x864 with Windows 8.1. (I know.. why would I want to run 8.1 on a Mac Book Pro...but I gotta do it.)

So this is crippling my work... any suggestions on how to get Windows 8.1 in VirtualBox to realize there's more juice in the monitor to be consumed??

Note! This is just the OS, not some fancy do-da game or cad program...

[mpack]

That is a different question, which I personally have answered twice in the last few days, and don't care to do it again. Try browsing the forum, or use search. One question per topic please.

[DevFingers]

I'll learn from this and ask better questions...and perhaps try to not be such an ass in the future.

Thanks for your help all