Vista is released - Live Performance on Vista?

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:45 pm

So now that it's out, has anyone actually tried it with Live?

Shoma · Post by **Shoma** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 9:54 pm

ive tried it, works prefectly...but with a little (1-2%) performance loss comparing with XP. ASIO4ALL works too

simpleton · Post by **simpleton** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:01 pm

Shoma wrote:ive tried it, works prefectly...but with a little (1-2%) performance loss comparing with XP. ASIO4ALL works too

da what?

post ur specs dude

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:08 pm

Do the graphics look any different? Can you load up a live set that maximizes the CPU and tell us if the graphics engine is any better/worse. I'm curious about this vector graphics and how it impacts applications.

Shoma · Post by **Shoma** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:21 pm

simpleton wrote:
Shoma wrote:ive tried it, works prefectly...but with a little (1-2%) performance loss comparing with XP. ASIO4ALL works too
da what? post ur specs dude

performance loss compared to XP...that means if I have on XP 40% CPU, on Vista im having 38%..got it

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:34 pm

what are the machine specs and how much does it use just to run the app?

is anything 'improved' apart from the user interface?

vinkalmann · Post by **vinkalmann** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:03 pm

Shoma wrote:ive tried it, works prefectly...but with a little (1-2%) performance loss comparing with XP. ASIO4ALL works too

Have you noticed that Live loads quite a bit faster under Vista? Mine comes up in a quarter of the time. Might have something to do with Vista preloading apps that are commonly used.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:06 pm

Matt, could you load up a CPU heavy set in Live, say over 60%, and then tell me how Live's graphics respond? I really want to know if the arrange view graphics are as slow or faster with XP.

vinkalmann · Post by **vinkalmann** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:08 pm

nebulae wrote:Matt, could you load up a CPU heavy set in Live, say over 60%, and then tell me how Live's graphics respond? I really want to know if the arrange view graphics are as slow or faster with XP.

No problem brother. Can you give me an idea how to get it that high?

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:11 pm

Add 1-2 instances of Live's Reverb to every track and set the quality from Economy to Best. You should be loaded up very quickly.

vinkalmann · Post by **vinkalmann** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:12 pm

nebulae wrote:Add 1-2 instances of Live's Reverb to every track and set the quality from Economy to Best. You should be loaded up very quickly.

Ok no problem. I will try that tonight. So you're basically wanting to know whether arrangement view sort of hangs when maneuvering through it like it does under XP?

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:14 pm

Yeah, I'm trying to determine what effect, if any, the new vista vector graphics engine has on programs, and how it might affect one of the worst things about Live - the slowed graphics response in the arrange view.

Try stuff like selecting clips and moving them, drawying automation curves, points, shit like that, which we know slows down when you hit to 60% mark.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:16 pm

also, if you have a dualcore, tell live to disable dualcore support. It'll be a more accurate test.

Enots · Post by **Enots** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:20 pm

can you roll back to XP w/ no data loss if you get the online upgrade?

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:45 pm

From a close friend who's one of the main IT guys at Symantec:

Final verdict on Vista: I like it, but it’s certainly not worth the money. Stick with XP.

Interesting...