slow graphics on XP - much slower as on Win98

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:19 pm

Hi!
I just found, that I can move mixers etc. much smoother in Win98 with much less dropouts (in heavy projects) than in WinXP... is there any tweaking I missed? Did anybody have the same problems... Graphic-movement in Scope turned out to be a real problem for me. I can directly compare it to my old Win98 installation, which I left on the computer- which is much smoother and faster (with scope, everything else is fine).
And yes, I set winXP to high performance and disabled all graphical pillepalle.

MCCY

[ This Message was edited by: MCCYRANO on 2006-04-20 14:20 ]

[ This Message was edited by: MCCYRANO on 2006-04-20 14:23 ]

valis · Post by **valis** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 4:01 pm

Scope is definately a bit more sluggish on XP than on an older OS, although modern cpu's have made this a lot less of an issue.

What graphics card, motherbooard cpu and RAM do you have?

ScofieldKid · Post by **ScofieldKid** » Thu Apr 20, 2006 10:57 pm

Some graphics cards do a lot better in 16-bit rather than 32-bit mode.

djmicron · Post by **djmicron** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:28 am

i think it depends from the hardware.

I run on win xp and i have not probs.

Aries · Post by **Aries** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:40 am

In Win 98, in large projects the graphics eventually runs slow to stop in Scope, as Win 98 has limited GDI compared to XP.

[ This Message was edited by: Aries on 2006-04-21 01:57 ]

ChrisWerner · Post by **ChrisWerner** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:51 am

I guess you do but... just to make it sure.. do you use actual xp drivers for your graphic card?

[ This Message was edited by: ChrisWerner on 2006-04-21 01:52 ]

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 1:52 am

Wow!
Thanks for all your replys! Problem is solved - graphics are much faster now (although still a little bit slower than in Win98)! Surely it depends also on hardware, but I won't buy new, because I'm quite satisfied with my oldtimer PIII933, 512MB, ATI 16MBgraphics (In addition I use a modified multitainer with UAD stuff on the MPACT graphics chip and with a 4th Pulsar-card for routing, so I can mix my PIII933/1xLuna/2xPulsarI output in 10stereo groups. The two computers are linked via VNC . Works great for me. No need of "hyper"-hardware. ;o))

Guess what it was!
I'm so stupid, I thought XP had new drivers "on board" for an old ATI Rage card, but when I updated the drivers with a fresh download from ATI the speed of graphics significantly raised !!!
Everything's O.K. now. Thanks Chris!

MCCY

Shroomz~> · Post by **Shroomz~>** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 4:10 am

I assume you're using the 'classic' start menu & theme options, as they're the least frilly in XP. If not, you'll find them in start menu properties & display properties. Everything graphics wise should be run in Classic mode on a DAW.

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 7:57 am

Standard-mode is MUCH faster for me...

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:00 am

Ah... I undestand... you talk about Windows, not SFP. SFP standard ist faster than Classik. Surely have I activated the conservative windows look ;o) I'm over 30 now... so I will stay classic if possible.

valis · Post by **valis** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 3:09 pm

Just for the record, 'classic' windows (aka win2000 look-a-like) is actually still a theme. You are saving a bit of ram if you disable the themes service in Services as well as running classic mode, but otherwise a theme is a theme...if you want a theme that performs as well as 'classic' windows mode, keep themes enabled, use the themedll hack and try a simpler theme like XPMC.

As long as you avoid themes that don't make heavy use of gradients and transparency which gives you those rounded edges on windows etc ***like the default LUNA xp themes do (and have the performance suck for it)*** you'll notice your performance is the same. Using "classic" theme (or disabling the themes service) does NOT actually change the type of calls made to render window chrome. It simply makes it render flat shaded non-transparent graphics.