|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
DriverHeaven Newbie
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 8
Rep Power: 0 ![]() |
xp or 2000? which will give me lower latency? why?
i'm going to be making a new partition for a trimmed down OS for cubase etc.
i'll be using something like nlite or lite-xp etc. to trim down the OS, but i still don't know if i should go with 2000 or xp. low latency is the biggest priority--here is my setup: 1.14 GHz Athlon 512 MB RAM 2 SATA HDs for samples 1 7200 rpm system drive (assorted other IDE drives not involved in sampling, etc.) 1 SBlive classic 1 MiaMIDI |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Alternative Audioproductions
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Germany / Sachsen-Anhalt
Posts: 1,710
Rep Power: 56 ![]() ![]() |
XP is fine and modern too. Disable all not-needed things and youŽll get what you want. The lowest possible latency depends on your whole hardware too, so with a good mobo and fast memory and reliable drives you are on top.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Apple Fanboy?
|
adamgolding: is your ram in dual channel (can your mobo support it?) because that will improve latency performance a little bit
__________________
Chris - The Aussie Super Mod
Hardwareheaven Rules - Sig Request Thread How you can help HardwareHeaven by using Digg! Hardwareheaven Super-Moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
HardwareHeaven Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 452
Rep Power: 0 ![]() |
I don't think dual-channel makes any difference... any DDR is fast enough for this.
I could do 2ms in my Athlon XP with single-channel and I can't do it with my A64 and dual-channel ram. The problem: APIC You better use windows XP, if you tweak it right, it's the same thing in terms of performance than 2000. If you don't have your sata drives in raid mode, make a windows installation without APIC, and make sure your soundcards get their own IRQ. This will improve your audio performance. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|