Page 1 of 1
Win 2000 or Win XP
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 2:51 pm
by katmeho
After some good feedback on my previous post, I now want people to chime in on this:
Which works better for running live, Windows 2000 Professional or Windows XP (home or Pro)???
Im currently running win xp home, and think that maybe I may be able to get better performance from windows 2000, but Im interested in what the forum has to say....
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 3:27 pm
by FORMAT
Oh yeah,
while we're at it: If you need even more tweaking advice, how about
http://www.bluelifeaudio.com/~pcconfig/, which also includes Win2000, saying it is probably the most appropriate for Audio.... I am not so sure, if you take a look at the Emagic Logic forum at
www.sonikmatter.com and pick out what Dave Bellingham (nick: oscwilde),
the DAW guru, has to say about Win OSs, it's: the future is XP. Which is logical, as it does away with a lot of the legacy stuff.....
Good luck!
the only advice I can give you is:
Have your machine configured by s.o. who knows his stuff. My Win98 was configured professionally and works great, the XP I configured myself and it sucks (while I still think it is the better system when done right)
Ciao
Posted: Fri May 24, 2002 3:29 pm
by Angus
Hi
I'm running Live 1.5 on a Pentium 4 1.8ghz in Win 2K. It seems to run fine with no real glitches. I occasionally get an overload ond disk activity in an unpredictable fashion so I take care to clean of and optimise my 7200 rpm audio disk regularly. The Live demo session shows 3% CPU usage when loaded.
No experience of XP though.