which is better performance

Where one has the choice (for example Photoshop) of running a Mac version of an application but via Rosetta， or running the Windows version via Parallels， since this is: (a) using all your processor cores (b) using the full processor instruction set (c) using full graphics acceleration (d) using all of your RAM I don't think that either Rosetta or Parallels can tick all of those boxes (e.g. ISTR Rosetta only emulates a G4?). I hope people will supply you with some figures，。

there are lots of other issues such as which user interface you prefer， is there any general consensus on which gives the best performance ? Click to expand... Neither. The best performance will almost certainly come from using BootCamp， which are both fantastic for many applications - but both of them trade performance for convenience. ， what other software you're using at the same time and whether your employer is going to shell out for CS3 anytime soon or if you're stuck with CS2 for the foreseeable. P.s. I'm not knocking Parallels or Rosetta， but I suspect it will be a bit of string depending on which of the above is the bottleneck for a particular task (e.g. different Photoshop filters make varying use of multicore processors; editing large files will always be constrained by RAM). Of course。