I still have that 1 machine on hyper-v Bluestacks 4 with 8 instances, and it happens to fall on a sweet spot, so I rather keep it that way unchanged for as long as possible. So when bluestacks hyper-v crashed, it's often really hard to recover, and you can't even migrate your instance elsewhere. I ended up switching 3/5 machines back to the normal versions, when all or a few of the instances failed to start up, even after turning off/on hyper v, backup and restore, etc. Sometimes instances fail to startup and stuck on the loading screen, and you don't know whether the instance is corrupted, or just hyper-v itself is messed up somehow. The shitty part: started from Bluestacks 5 version after 4.2, hyper-v is more prone to error. BlueStacks Hyper-V is the version of BlueStacks which allows you to use BlueStacks with Hyper-V enabled (Using our other versions and Hyper-V concurrently will cause a conflict.) Most users wont need this version but there are some which require Hyper-V enabled on their system.
Performance-wise, there are little differences between the 2 versions, hyper-v can be extremely stable if you can find a sweet spot in your setup, and the in-game screen sometimes feels a bit smoother.
For the 32-bit version, that number will have to scale down to 6 and 12. Hyper-v: On a 960 MB per instance setup, I can run 8 instances just fine on a 12 GB ram machine, or 16 instances on a 16 GB ram.
If all you need is 1-2 instances these numbers are not matter. From my experience, Hyper-v seems to boost on faster and use a bit fewer resources, when comparing to the 32-bit version. I run bluestacks in 4-5 servers with 24-35 instances depend on the time.
0 kommentar(er)
