| Author
|
2GB Ram vs Windows XP
|
Aiyro
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
26
Posts :
69
Posted : May 16, 2006 22:11
|
I am the idiot here, or should an increase in RAM, Increase performance in Cubase?
Going up from 1GB to 2GB I insured that i Bought the exact same type of RAM as I had in the first place. (1024 MB DDR2 - Kingston. Trust me its exactly the same)
Does anyone know how i can allocate more RAM to Cubase , it seems it only uses a max of 337mb during playback of a project.
Any suggestions, advice.
Thx |
|
|
cytopia
Cytopia.org
Started Topics :
61
Posts :
329
Posted : May 16, 2006 22:37
|
Last week i bought a new system disc, and an extra 1GB RAM, for total 2BG RAM.
Just becuase you have more RAM to use, doesnt mean cubase will use more to run the same project, it uses what it needs. I notice things load faster, in XP and loading plugins in cubase SX with the extra RAM.
You might notice the difference in plugins that are memory intensive, like stylus RMX.
 Cytopia.org
Psychedelic & Progressive Downloads
Mp3 / WAV CD Quality Downloads
Full Streamed Previews |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : May 16, 2006 23:24
|
Increasing RAM will only make the system faster if the the RAM was the bottleneck. If your CPU or disks are the limiting factor, adding more RAM won't help.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
sideFXed
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
22
Posts :
430
Posted : May 17, 2006 00:47
|
|
It will certainely help in combination with drumkit from hell, dfh, large samplelibs and extensive use of audio tracks.
soundcloud.com/epsylohm |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : May 17, 2006 02:11
|
sideFXed: Errr ... in which case it becomes a bottleneck.  As his Cubase only uses 337MB, I guess memory wasn't the bottleneck.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
pH_
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
154
Posted : May 17, 2006 05:00
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-05-16 23:24, UnderTow wrote:
Increasing RAM will only make the system faster if the the RAM was the bottleneck. If your CPU or disks are the limiting factor, adding more RAM won't help.
UnderTow
|
|
well said.. i upgraded from AMD XP 2200+ 1gb ram 40gb PATA drive to AMD 3800 X2 dualcore 2gb ram with 2x250 SATA raid0.. huge huuuuge difference. projects that would choke my old DAW barely use 10% in this new box
so what he said is true. cheers |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : May 17, 2006 10:55
|
upgrade the cpu, 1 gb is enough. especially if your cubase uses only 300 mb 
|
|
|
|
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
46
Posts :
1142
Posted : May 17, 2006 12:42
|
windows memory management is crap. if memory usage is bigger than 60%/70% you should upgrade.
remember than cubase uses 300mb, OS another n mbs, every VST and VSTi another n mb, etc
btw, IT WILL NEVER BE FAST ENOUGH 
mine is... ,) roll a joint or STFU :) |
|
|
|
z1P^
Megalopsy
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
535
Posted : May 17, 2006 13:33
|
hey there brother! hope this clears your view about memories a little bit,
think about 2 differnt things, the physical size and the memory speed, most of production applications, at least the ones i've tried, such as Cubase, A.Live or Logic, use between 300 and 500 mbs of physical memory. If you think you u'll probably need a little bit more than 512 but less than 1gb. In most of the cases, is the speed what makes the diference, how fast does your ram write and read data from and intro his modules. So... if you don't have dual channel architecture, you can think on moving to this technology (which will double your cpu/ram bandwidth) and if you already have it, you should start looking for faster memory sticks, some good brands are OCZ, Kingston HyperX, Corsair, Patriot, and more. I can explain more if you want, but if you ask me, try getting a 2x512 kit with the tightest latencies you can get.
Cheers!
(www) DarkPrisma.com.ar/ ~ FranticNoise.com.ar/ ~ Megalopsy.com.ar/ ~
providing shamanic euphoria until the end of the days! |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : May 17, 2006 17:43
|
|
A kit with the tightest timing will cost like 4 times a regular kit with "ok" timings. Unless you won the lottery, stick to cl2.5 memories (if we're talking about PC3200 that is - no idea how it works with DDR2).
|
|
|
|
Aiyro
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
26
Posts :
69
Posted : May 18, 2006 09:47
|
THX for ur replies.
Am still wondering whether i should send the RAM back to the store... Yeah the computer is running faster, and no I didnt expect it to run twice as fast but there is really no difference as to the performance of the tracks which eat 80-90% cpu.
Its a pentium 4 3.24 processor, and the RAM is (2X) Kingston KVR533D2N4/1G (PC2 4200 CLA 240).
Z1P^, what do u say to this.
Man im so close to taking a loan in the bank to buy a G5 Quad. But Ive been told to wait until the new intel Mac comes out... |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : May 18, 2006 12:22
|
|
A G5 Quad is like the best thing ever. Wait for the new intel so the G5 prices drop, not to get an Intel since it'll cost like 2 Quads I think
|
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : May 18, 2006 12:42
|
Aiyro: The only reason to get a G5 Mac is if you use Logic or another sequencer that only runs on Macs. PCs are cheaper and faster than G5 Macs.
Fastest boxes currently on the market: Multiprocessor AMD Opteron boxes.
The new MacIntel boxes should probably be a bit faster than similar machines running Windows as OS X should be a more efficient. That is ... untill AMD leapfrogs ahead of the new Intel Conroe chips. I reckon sometime next year but this is speculation.
Still, the fact that the new MacIntels can boot both OS X and Windows give them a definite advantage.
Buying a G5 to run Cubase? You must be crazy.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
Mike A
Subra
Started Topics :
185
Posts :
3954
Posted : May 18, 2006 13:36
|
|
z1P^
Megalopsy
Started Topics :
28
Posts :
535
Posted : May 18, 2006 14:36
|
Quote:
|
On 2006-05-18 09:47, Aiyro wrote:
THX for ur replies.
Am still wondering whether i should send the RAM back to the store... Yeah the computer is running faster, and no I didnt expect it to run twice as fast but there is really no difference as to the performance of the tracks which eat 80-90% cpu.
Its a pentium 4 3.24 processor, and the RAM is (2X) Kingston KVR533D2N4/1G (PC2 4200 CLA 240).
Z1P^, what do u say to this,
|
|
hey there brother! forget about changing the memory modules, Mike A is right, there is no need to buy ultra low latency memories which are in fact much more faster but also for more advanced users, those kingston modules you've got will do the job perfectly.
now that youve writen system specs you've got i can tell you, theres no need for any cpu/mem change, you've got a s755 intel, with dual channel ddr2 sticks, that should give you the performance you need for produce almost any kind of music....
there must be another thing 'bottlenecking'...
maybe mixing too much wave blocks could the issue,
please describe a little bit more how is the project formed? how many and which plugins, vts's and audiochannels you've got loaded and stuff like that. also check with your mother soft or bios, the temperature in which the cpu is running and which one it reachs when it is fully loaded. cauz its very common that the cpu is overheated and starts working slower to maintain the temp.
(www) DarkPrisma.com.ar/ ~ FranticNoise.com.ar/ ~ Megalopsy.com.ar/ ~
providing shamanic euphoria until the end of the days! |
|
|
|
