PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Hi

I've been working with win98se and vst5.1 and using loads of VSTi's with no
problem.

I'm now using winXP pro and SX and am finding that my computer now cannot deal with as many Vsti's. I was wondering if I need to upgrade my mobo/system ram/processor for XP+SX.

Does XP+SX need a faster computer ? or is it the pulsar 3.1 drivers ?

Current setup:
athlon 1ghz 200fsb
msi k7t pro2-a (via kt133 chipset)
384mb pc133 ram
pulsar2 sfp 3.1

Thanks

Yes. XP gives much less performance that SE. Upgrade your machine...

Sub! Is this the first time I see you admitting to this in public ?!

Kim.

Possibly? But I never said anyone should upgrade to XP. I also have always known XP is going to require more resources (protected memory, etc), and specifically went from a P3 to a P4 to accomadate for the difference in performance. I will tell you straight up, if you compile anything on your machine in C or do any development work, that an NT-based OS (or *ix..) is an absolute must - unless you enjoy rebooting your machine often.

For me personally, the performance hit is acceptable for the increased stability I get. For pure audio, I think ME or SE is totally fine, I also had that very stable as long as I stuck with Logic and Pulsar...

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2002-06-26 12:41 ]</font>

Thankz for your advice, I am now planning an upgrade. I really do prefer SX to vst5 r1.

I have now tried the 'SX crack in win98' / 'XP with SX' (legit) with the
same project and it seems that it has nothing to do with what operating
system etc I use. It is in fact SX which needs more power. In SX you can
only do half of what you can in 5.1 with the same amount of computer power.
Sx is too resource hungry. If I want to use it I have to buy a new computer
just to do what I can do already in vst5.1. What a joke !!!

Back to vst5.1 for me for the mo