SCOPE 64 Bit beta..........?

[Polarity]

afaik the license for Enterprise Server is more expensive than a 64 bit box connected via Adat...
anyway, check out PAE for the details and/or use the search function on this board.
The topic has been mentioned before. But you can use the extended adress space in 4 GB portions per process only.
For example Kontakt with a 6 GB lib wouldn't work, dunno if several instances would be mapped properly.
cheers, Tom

I already use PAE switch on my Win XP 32bit, but I still have 4 Gb RAM only.
In theory every application (programmed to do it) can use 4 Gb of memory for himself
What I'd need is not theories, but real facts before throwing away my four 1 Gb banks and purchase four new 2 Gb banks.

If I use Kontakt inside Vienna Ensemble PRO (that I own already) can I load 4 Gb of samples in RAM and then use East West Play inside Cubase (or whatever sequencer you like) and fill another 3 Gb of RAM with its samples?!? (it's an exaggerated example)
I mean, all using 8 Gb of physical RAM...

I did some similar experiment (with less loads) and I made to get over 4 Gb of located system memory, but XP was swapping the samples onto the virtual memory pagefile (that is on HD),
and so with a long pause of Cubase/VEPRO before coming back usable again.

Is anyone actually experienced getting over the 4 Gb barrier with 8 Gb of physical RAM on XP (or Vista) 32bit?

For what I read, Windows Server 2003 should be just a bit more expensive than the XP Pro...
the problem actually would be "where I can buy one"!
And another problem is to reinstall all software by scratch (for me would mean a couple of weeks at least ...): I didn't found on the net infos about a chance of upgrading directly an installed XP to Server 2003 preserving all what is already installed.

Thanks for the answer in the meanwhile.

[manybro]

Is anyone actually experienced getting over the 4 Gb barrier with 8 Gb of physical RAM on XP (or Vista) 32bit?

I used to experiment with it but found most programs (even memtest apps) used to operate only within the memory "footprint" of the kernel.

RAM is quite cheap, but bear in mind that the Kernel in a Server app is a different version that as for Clients, and could cause issues of its own.

It's only intended as a idea for those who:

a) have the time

and

b) can afford to muck around with an alternative system and/or hardware

and

c) are intelligent enough to pull it off and determine tangible results

[kwild]

Im just testing XP Server 2003 R2 Enterprise (32Bit) right now.
Scope seems to work well you can see all the ram installed on your system but...a major problem remains!
The major problem is that WIN can not allocate more than 2 GB (or less more) per process!
So for example when the Cubase process exceed the memory allocation of 2GB you can have strange sidefx (graphical corruption in the GUI for example) and after that your system crashes.
I've tryed enabling /PAE /3GB and even tweaking /USERVA but the limit of 2GB per proces it's still there.If anybody knows some workaround please post here.

[kwild]

I think that was more the point of what homeboy was saying, that he wants the full virtual address space for his DAW so he can run other things.

If scope was made to properly run on Enterprise servers, then that would be cool, I remember this topic was also discussed at studionu.com and it was said it would never happen because the resources required to make it fully compatible only to have to go and do it again for a full 64 bit system was a waste of time but for something like scope that is more than just a math co-pro, it might be of benefit even if not officially supported plus germans being generally smarter might be able to implement it quite easily.

Try by yourself,Scope 5 works very well with Win Server 2003 R2 Enterprise 32Bit.

[Polarity]

I've tryed enabling /PAE /3GB and even tweaking /USERVA but the limit of 2GB per proces it's still there.If anybody knows some workaround please post here.

Strange. On XP Home I made Vienna Ensemble PRO surpass heavily the 2Gb limit.
Want to try it?
In free demo mode it works for a month.

Or.... /3Gb /PAE /AWE
Have you put the /AWE option too?
How many GB of RAM are you trying with?

[kwild]

I've tryed enabling /PAE /3GB and even tweaking /USERVA but the limit of 2GB per proces it's still there.If anybody knows some workaround please post here.

Strange. On XP Home I made Vienna Ensemble PRO surpass heavily the 2Gb limit.
Want to try it?
In free demo mode it works for a month.

Or.... /3Gb /PAE /AWE
Have you put the /AWE option too?
How many GB of RAM are you trying with?

I have 4gb but please what is that /AWE switch???????????????????????

What it does?Never heard before!

[Polarity]

AWE stands for Advanced Windowing Extensions

I don't remember exactly, bu it should allow applications (that are written to use it of course) to access to the RAM beyond the 4GB and reserve a part for themselves.
More or less.

Usually I always found written about AWE too when talking about the /3Gb and /PAE switch.

[electrolover]

i've received this message:

welcome to Sonic Core.

64 Bit drivers are in internal testing at the moment and
will come out in about one month.

OSX we may have in about 6 months.



--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards
Dipl.-Ing. Ralf Dressel

[Janni]

OSX we may have in about 6 months.

YYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!

[Jerome]

i've received this message:
OSX we may have in about 6 months.
--

Is that for real/official?
Still waiting to upgrade to a new macbookpro. But if I'll have to wait for another 6 month I'll buy a cheap pc laptop for the time being.
I really don't want my xite to be an expensive dustcatcher

Jerome

[kwild]

One month...one year...one century,we know that time is just an opinion for sonic core.

[MMC]

And now...
The last info was this month will the 64 Bit 4 Win 7 ready...
Any other News?

[menno]

Apparently the latest news is that pigs have been spotted above the Sonic Core office flying in a formation that spells out the number 64!

[bosone]

i asked them again!


Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:59:25 +0100


Scope 64 Bit is in internal testing. ASIO and Wave are working on XITE
already, PCI version is in work.


Release is hopefully in about one month.



--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards
Dipl.-Ing. Ralf Dressel

[katano]

thanks bosone, good news

[saskija]

It's funny how the 64 bit drivers are always one month away...

[garyb]

well, if you can do better, you should definitely head over to the offices and volunteer to take over the project. my guess is that you have no idea the enormity of the task. the problem with estimates of time in this situation is that with literally 100's of thousands, possibly a million lines of code between the program itself and the os, one could think it was all well in hand, to find a bug that takes weeks to track down. it's very difficult to make an accurate prediction. i'm sure that one month seems like a very safe guess, and if nothing disasterous pops up, we'll likely see the product then. you can believe that no one wants it finished more than S/C.

[saskija]

I want to remain positive because I want and need 64-bit drivers, but I'm also getting exasperated by the false promises. Four months ago Holger promised us the 64-bit driver before Christmas:

"Also the next version of the SCOPE software is almost done. This is 64bit compatible (for Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7) and has more new features. SCOPE 5.1 should be available shortly! "

Those drivers never showed up. 18 days ago Ralf wrote that the drivers would be released within a month. Yesterday we get the same message: within a month. This constitutes a pattern to me. I know that software development is difficult but is it too much too expect that the programmers can give reasonable estimates when they're able to release the product?

[astroman]

well, without intending to be disrespectful, but that pattern you refer to has become a defacto standard in information technology...
there's even a nasty proverb about project estimation from software engineers:
whatever figure they five you, take the next bigger unit and multiply at least by five...

cheers, Tom

[saskija]

I know, I know. But still, when you're in the finishing stages of a beta software product and you're expecting the whole thing to be finished in 4 weeks, it shouldn't take 5 months instead. That's just incompetence.