bl1pbl0p, stuck in 64bit world…hey it´s 21th century, time to move on?! 
guess i’d be up on par with your rig if i’d get my 2.8@3.8… but 3.5Ghz is the absolute limit on air-cooling, so i guess i guess that 5% gap gotta be okay.
still curious about your Athlon FX rig, richard 
OK, exactly the same settings as you except:
Latency - set to 50ms
Resolution: 1280x1024
Soundcard: SB Audigy 2 7.1 ZS Plat Pro
CPU usage: 63-64%
Full system specs:
AMD Athlon 64 FX53 @ 2.52GHz, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (to be replaced by X800XT), Corsair TwinX 1GB 3200XLPro (2,2,2,5), Asus A8V Deluxe, Western Digital Raptor SATA 10,000RPM 74GB, Soundblaster Audigy 2 ZS 7.1 THX Platinum Pro, Creative Gigaworks S750 7.1 THX speakers, Logitech MX cordless mouse & keyboard, 19" monitor, LianLi PC65, Sony DVD RW, WinXP Pro SP1, 3DMark2001 score - 21864.
LOL 64% is definately nice, but looking at your system specs, you obviously don’t seem to have any money problems… 
i’d really love to have two of those 10k RPM raptors in RAID-0 
but oh well… i should be allright with the crap i have here, allways makes me wanna cry to see the value of my recently bought hardware decaying so damn fast… wasted so much money just for some few more mhz here and there…
btw, how much ya gonna charge for that 98pro as soon as your X800 card has arrived? 
Heh, they’re hardly worth £100 these days.
I’m gonna sell it as part of my “old” Athlon 3200 system to pay for these upgrades.
It is very sad how hardware gets old so quickly though, about 5 months ago I paid around £1000 for my 3200 system, now it’s only worth about £500.
I did consider RAID 0 because I wanted the ultimate PC but I decided against it because the write performance wasn’t all that good compared to a normal IDE drive.
I’d recommend to anybody that they buy a single 74GB Raptor though, Windows loads up in seconds!
By the way, if any of the developers want to use me for compiling 64-bit test builds of Renoise I’d be glad to help because I’m due to install XP 64-bit edition in the next few weeks. 
yea, that’s exactly the reason why i stopped buying top-notch hardware.
my hercules radeon 9700 pro for example, cost me 210EUR about a year ago (was a steal back then) and it’s after all still worth around 70% of that nowadays, as those cards get sold for around 150EUR these days (2nd hand). i’m glad i didn’t go for the way more expensive 9800pro back then, as it’s only marginally faster than the 97pro.
oh and i heard the raptors would do quite well as a striped array, so i’d definately RAID’em up - i got 2x120GB 180GXP Hitachi’s in raid0 and really love the performance boost by sequential reads and writes. (well noticable when editing “larger” audio data with wavelab or similar).
sigh
I can only manage to get <100% if I reduce the sample rate: 22KHz.
Sample rate: 22KHz
Fullscreen 1024x768x16b
Latency: 40ms
Buffer size: 256
Result: 80%
If I change only the sample rate (to 33KHz, for example), it get’s 100%.
My computer: Athlon XP 1500 (that’s 1333MHz), 512 MB DDR RAM, GeForce 3, Sound Blaster Live Player 5:1
I have to test it in my notebook, when it arrives (there was a problem with it): P4 2,8 GHz, 512Mb DDR RAM, Radeon Mobility 9000 64MB.
Ok, here goes my second benchmark (on my home computer)…
53% @ 22kHz
100%+ @ 44kHz (can almost play it, but get some crackles and awful UI lag)
My system is a P4 2.6Ghz HT (800MHz FSB)
512Mb 400Mhz RAM
Waveterminal 192M, ASIO
Geforce 2 MX
Win XP
The UI takes a lot of CPU, so I would really like to get a new gfx card. Also I plan to get 512Mb more mem. But seeing all the results I would really like to replace the P4 with an Athlon 64
Hmpf…guys, did you notice that the benchmark-tune shows that Athlon XP’s (e.g. my 2500+) can’t keep up with a P4 2,6 Ghz at all?
Like XP I experianced that my PC can’t take it at 44khz. I tried various buffering settings with RNS 1.281 . ASIO4ALL with maximum buffer-size still caused stuttering as for DS with max. buffer-size and max. delay.
On Renoise 1.5 it worked much better, though.
Anyways, do I have a reason to be disappointed about those Athlons now?
Uhm no, because Athlons are more value for money and also it depends on how the program is coded. Some programs or operations run better on Athlons some on Intel…
With all hardware you are always dissapointed. After a few months your previous-coolest-superspeed setup is rather slow, the new games won’t run perfectly and it is half the prize now.
No,no…I mean the 2500+ vs 2,6 GHz . Before I got me the Athlon, I had my doubts into AMD. Splajn is right with the price&quality-thingie.
But do you remember that benchmark-pic on that forum which showed that Athlons are faster when it comes to sound?
Renoise is a sound programm. And the benchmark-song showed that the Intels were faster. Somehow it’s like comparing the real AMD-clock to the real Intel-clock. However, Renoise 1.5 runs much better now. But I’m not sure if this happens because of a better AMD-compatibility. Probably it’s just general optimization which works better on both CPU’s.
But well, I try to stay happy with what I’ve got…
But Gilli, didn’t you say that you can run the test song in 44.1kHz on 1.5? For me it still only almost possible…
But didn’t you say that you had a load of 77% @ 48khz?
And you said you can’t play it at 96khz. I can’t play it at 48 already.
And you reported your values from Renoise 1.281 while I’m reporting from 1.5. Some things seem to be strange however. First thing is that Wet tells me that his Athlon runs better though it’s a slower one. And the other thing is that my PC is almost dieing but Renoise 1.5 shows a CPU load of <20% !? Maybe it really depends on my soundcard?
No, 77% was my first benchmark on an Athlon 64 bit. On my usual P4 @ 2.6 I cannot play (well, almost…) the song at 44.1kHz in neither 1.281 nor 1.5. 48kHz is just impossible! So if you can play it in 44.1 it beats my P4 and you can still be happy with your system 
Tried both. It’s a bit better in 1.5 but no huge difference. But apart from the test song v1.5 feels much quicker. I get the feeling it can take more CPU load before it starts to crackle plus the UI seems more resposive.
In that case i hope Renoise Developers are testing Renoise in a 300Mhz 128MB environment 
Renoise 1.281
Latency: 9ms (buffer size 384 samples), 11 ms(512 samples)
Resolution: 1280x1026x16
Soundcard: M-Audio Audiophile 24/96
CPU usage: 77,9% 78,6 %
Processingbuffer: 1024
Hardware:
P4 2.6 @ 3.2 HT (Prescott)
ASUS P4P800 Deluxe
Kingston Hyper-X CL 2 434 Mhz (2x256) in Dual Mode
HDD: 2x Hitachi 120 GB
M-Audio Audiophile 24/96
Speaking of benchmark tests, wait till you get to mastering of music. 30 x 32 bit float audio tracks multi-tracked in Sony Vegas with 90 or so DX effects takes over 3 hours to render on my P4 1.6 GHz machine, also using around 1.50 Gb of RAM. And that’s only at 44,100 Hz - I wouldn’t even think of stepping up to 96,000 Hz or it could take close to 7 hours. 
Is there some kind of way I can find out how much faster this could be on a 3 GHz machine, for example? Like if I went 3/1.6 I’d get 1.875, so the clock speed would increase by 1.875 when stepping up from a 1.6 GHz machine to a 3 GHz one, but does that also mean the render would take 1.6 hours instead of 3 (roughly speaking)?
The only way would be to let us download your song and “master” it to see how long it takes.
Quite a few of us have fast CPUs.