I am about to get a notebook - most probably an Athlon XP 64 based Acer Aspire 1501. I was just wondering if it would be a good idea to run it under Windows XP 64-bit - anybody tried that? Are there any general problems/stability issues? Do Renoise and VST(i) plugins run as stable as under plain Win XP Pro?
Edit: I’ve just read in WinXP 64 installation notes that it’s not compatible with the .NET framework - any potential source of problems with Renoise and/or the VST(i)s? (I don’t think so, but…?)
it think Renoise will not working faster coz it’s an 32bit app not compiled/coded for 64bit … don’t know … i would’nt never by AMD and 64bit cpu’s not today coz it’s not enough supported by all software at the moment. this will not mean that the software isn’t working, but you will buy a 64bit cpu with really great power and u can’t use this power coz there is no software that uses the 64bit possibilities.
Actually, MS refused to support an additional 64bit processor standard from
intel, so intel was forced to be compatible with AMD’s standard.
I think it’s roughly like this: AMD64 runs 32bit apps just fine. It’s a newer
processor, so it might have slightly better performance. But there’s no large
gain or slowdown for 32bit programs in general. When 64bit support is more
integrated in windows, OS calls will be faster on 64bit even for 32bit programs,
and thus will make them slightly faster.
the only signifigant advantage that i’ve read about that the 64-bit architecture has over the 32-bit ones is large memory cap. this means that you can have a pc with up to 8 gigs of ram, but that really wouldn’t be something that your average PC user can take advantage of. on the other hand, if you’re a sysadmin and you just got yourself a Opteron64 based Sun Microsystems server, that 8 gig ram cap means that much more performance stability for your Java Applications.
Hey Martin, wanna port Renoise to Java so I can run it on my Sun Cluster?
I just got a new computer at work which is one of the fastest AMD 64bit processors. Without having compared it to a similar P4 I have a general feeling that it is extremely fast and believe it kicks Pentium’s ass… I’ve also heard that it actually is faster, but a good idea would to check out some comparisons at for example Tom’s hardware. Now if I only had some more time to Renoise at work…
@all:
Thanks guys, but I’ve already read about pro’s and con’s of AMD64 based computers as well as performance comparisons. What I’m most interested in is if Renoise (+VST plugs) will run without compatibility problems on such a machine, especially with WinXP 64-bit edition installed.
@Johan:
Did you test Renoise and/or VST plugins on your machine at work? What about stability and performance? Is your computer running WinXP 64bits? (I suppose not)
No I’m running Win2k. I have only played one song with VSTis, so I cannot really comment on stability nor performance. Besides it is so much more than only the processor that makes a system stable. And then I have 1.5 Gig mem and fast SCSI drives here so even with the same processor I think performance would be better here at work… sorry for not beeing able to give you a better answer.
But haven’t you just made a comment about stability? I guess you’d write if you’d encountered problems
Definitely - what I meant was if you had any processor specific trouble, like for example a plugin would hang or crash in a way it never does on a plain Athlon. But I guess you had no problems of that sort.
Yes, but mem and drives only really matter if you use plugins that make intensive use of them, like samplers or soundfont players. I think the quantity/quality of RAM/HDD space, unless really low, does not influence performance of softsynths like PolyIblit or Synth1 much - it depends mostly on the processor.
Was your test song using softsynths or samples mostly? Do you by any chance remember the CPU load difference between your home and work machines for the song? (How fast is your home machine?)
Yeah, but my first statement was about performance in general which I was really amazed with at first with AMD 64bit. I meant I cannot comment any Renoise specific stuff…
No, but I only had and tried 5 or so VSTis…
Mem & drives cause a general speed-up of Windows I believe… Virtual mem is to some extent always used on Windows even if not needed, so fast drives will also help a bit. However maybe you’re right that for softsynths mem/drives only have minor effects on performance.
Mostly VSTi’s, but not so many of them. My home machine is a P4 2.6GHz but has been down the last month. Returned it for repair yesterday so hopefully I’m back up’n’Renoising in week or so… (I have missed Renoise soooo!!! )
I can do a better test when I get my computer, if you can wait that long. With lots of effects and softsynths and so on…
I can wait a week, no prob. A CPU load comparison chart for each of the plugins / effects + preset name used would be really nice (freewares preferred). Switch off the swapfile to avoid the HDD speed influence on the test. Can’t wait to see the results!
I got my internet up yesterday and my computer the day before. In a period of a few weeks I managed to break 2 computers, 1 internet connection, 1 amplifier and 1 scanner. But now things are looking brighter again. Give me a couple of days to set up the computers and I will get going on the test.
AMD64 does not emulate the 32bit operating environment. it runs 32bit code natively, with 64 bit extensions, instructions, registers available on another mode. this is why AMD64 is a very good option right now.
renoise will run faster, not because of the 64bit, but due to other optimisations of the processor. 800Mhz FSB, shorter pipelines, integrated northbridge, larger cache, are such peformance enhancements.
i’m running on a AMD64 3000+ box with 1Gb DDR ram now… renoise works fine. much better than my XP1700+. i can’t quote exact numbers, though. it would not make sense anyway, since we all have different hardware.
64bit version of windows XP isn’t out yet, only a preview copy can be downloaded. There aren’t many 64bit drivers out yet though, and programs are still compiled in 32 bit. I’ll wait a little longer before migrating.
Glad to hear Renoise runs flawlessly on Athlon 64. You don’t have to give exact numbers, but I’m sure you’ve took the most CPU hungry track you had and checked what the CPU load is on the new machine - so? what’s the performance increase between Athlon XP 1.7+ and Athlon 64 3+, in terms of pure CPU load? I’m about to make the same jump, so that would definitely give me a hint of what to expect…
performance in renoise nearly doubles. 40% → 20-25% cpu. i’m not a heavy vsti user, though. and using the taskmanager, the renoise cpu usage does not max out at 100%. but i think cubase scales better with my new upgrade. cubase sx2 is VERY smooth now.
if you’re going to get a 64bit platform, wait a little longer for the socket 939 Athlon FX 5x chips. guaranteed to kick P4s arse. (a little expensive atm though…) mainly due to dual channel memory and for future upgrades. not that dual channel does a lot of good, but P4 has been marketing it to the grave. i got the budget 3000+ socket 754, since i couldn’t wait.
as for 64 bit performance, XP 64bit isn’t out yet, as with many drivers and even renoise isn’t compiled for 64bit (yet). but i’m quite confident of further performance enhancements once it comes in.
my specs:
AMD64 3000+
Gigabyte K8VT800
1Gb DDR 266 (yes… i know) single channel 2.5-3-3-6, T1
ATi Radeon 9600XT 128Mb
2x Maxtor 40Gb, 2x CDRW
Audigy DE w/kx project 5, 10, 00, 3537 - debug
windows 2003 server
I don’t think I’ll wait for Athlons FX as I’ll be getting a laptop and so far there hasn’t been any news about FXs for mobile computers. But even ordinary Mobile Athlon 64 will give a huge performance boost when m$ finally releases WinXP 64 and software developpers start creating 64 bit programs to keep up with the new hype. AMD says 64 bit processing can give more then 50% performance boost - we’ll see about that when the apps catch up.
?!?!?!?!?!
… and is ignoring the ohter nice girl AMD 
)