Computer specs - can I do this???

  • Thread starter Thread starter noisedude
  • Start date Start date
I'm sorry to rattle on like this but I know when something is in my head it's there for a reason.

That memory upgrade I done was about 2 years ago, before I built this daw. I was using cubase VST 32 v5.0. I'm now using a much faster system with a gig of dual channel DDR400.

SoI'm thinking.....maybe it was the old cubase as older audio engines had a mention. So here's what I done (without being idiotic enough to take the daw out the rack, remove the lid and fish out a stick of the ram :rolleyes: )

I boot up my stripped out xp pro..... 141meg of ram I'm using

I start up cubase .....I'm using 167meg

I open a default 24 track session at 24/44.1 with no wave files loaded into the session........ I'm up to 182 meg at this point

I close the empty session and load up a 34 track song........WOOF! 264 meg. There's no software synths and no instances of drumagog in the session....funny or what? Well, I had a little giggle about not having to crawl around taking equipment out of racks and fishing about in the DAW to remove ram.

Now I know one knucklehead in here for sure is going to call me a liar because I've pointed out a few times in the past he makes up his version of events and sticks to them. So I ask you......open up your recording software and make a blank default session like I did and have a wee look at how much ram you are actualy using. Then load up a session with actual wav files in it and we'll see what happens.......just for shits n giggles :D

peace
 
Half your RAM then open your session and see what happens.

Guess what? Just like for everybody else, it will play back JUST FINE.
 
Ford Van said:
Half your RAM then open your session and see what happens.

Guess what? Just like for everybody else, it will play back JUST FINE.
Click to expand...


You said having one track or 100 tracks in a session would use the same amount of ram. You, as usual were very wrong. :D

And now you want everyone else to waste their time like you did by ripping out ram just to make you feel better about yourself.

You, I and everyone else in here knows you were talking out a hole in your arse......as usual. Come on, time to invent a new excuse or smokescreen to cover your tracks wisearse
 
and another thing......

The 34 track session opened up at 264 Meg so just a for instance...what if I only had 512 meg to start then halved it to 256.......... the 264Meg session would play just fine? :rolleyes:
 
LemonTree said:
and another thing......

The 34 track session opened up at 264 Meg so just a for instance...what if I only had 512 meg to start then halved it to 256.......... the 264Meg session would play just fine? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

My "test" session that I did my real life test with has 1.43 GB of audio data that is all being used in the project. So, I was able to open, playback, adjust stuff, in a project with almost a gig and a half of audio, with only 256mb of RAM. Nice try though.

You should quit work in the 8bit/22.05 world. ;)
 
And the other thing you dumbass is that Windows will use at least 128mb of RAM that it ain't going to give up. So, you never WOULD have a full 256mb of RAM available anyway.

Just admit that your a stupid dumbass who doesn't have a clue because you haven't actually TRIED it. It is okay. You are only ignorant until you learn.

Since I actually DID remove a stick of RAM and ran a test, with a project that is over 7 times as big as your little lo-fi crapola you do. I have PROVEN my point. You just keep relying on numbers that don't mean anything until you physically remove the RAM.
 
Ford Van said:
I have PROVEN my point.
Click to expand...

You haven't proven anything. All you've done is demonstrated to yourself that in one particular instance removing ram made to difference to the performance of your project.

It is fallacious to extrapolate that and assume that the same conditions will apply to everyone else's daw configuration when you consider all the other variables of h/w & s/w involved.

In my case my sequencing s/w is one of around 30 processes running and competing for ram resource. Generally speaking, less ram means more liklihood of paging and swap file activity resulting in reduced performance.
 
And AGAIN I ask what the swap file has to do with the number of tracks you can play back/process at one time?

Nobody can seem to offer any insight into that because there is no correlation between RAM/Swap File and track/plugin counts UNLESS you are using softsynth's.

So, when you got a good answer to how RAM is somehow going to increase track count and plugin count in a DAW, and can PROVE THAT with a test that includes physically changing the amount of RAM on the same project, then I will believe that any of you have clue 1 about this.

;)
 
Granted, I'm no expert, but I'm skeptical. Ford Van, please try working with half the RAM for a month and then come back and tell us you noticed no decrease in performance. You might be right, but it hardly sounds like you have done a thorough test.
 
Be skeptical all you want. While windows may be a bit slower opening/closing, and opening .tif files might be a lot slower, less RAM is NOT going to hurt my DAW's ability to play back and process audio tracks because these processes have LITTLE to do with RAM. They have to do with UDMA/Drivers/CPU.

Why don't YOU go and work a month with less RAM.

If your idea was somehow valid, then when I removed half my RAM, like I did in my earlier test, my project, which was almost at MAX cpu usage, should have not be able to play back! Also, the audio folder contrains 1.4GB's of audio tracks, so, there is FAR more audio data flying around than what you could even load up into 1GB of RAM. So, obviously, RAM isn't effecting two things, track counts and plugin counts.

I suppose plugins put SOME hits on RAM, but ulitimately, you can't run enough plugin's to use up all your ram before your cpu would crap out!
 
Ford Van said:
Be skeptical all you want.
Click to expand...

It's not being scepticle, it's called having an open mind, looking at both sides of the coin. Not just the side you've heard about and run with and have tried to convince everyone of with your bullshit.


Ford Van said:
I suppose plugins put SOME hits on RAM, but ulitimately, you can't run enough plugin's to use up all your ram before your cpu would crap out!
Click to expand...

So now you're starting to doubt your initial claims of RAM havong "no effect what so ever" with the amount of plugins used


give us a break! You make my sides hurt with laughter. I offered up actual figures of what RAM was being used under what circumstances and you chose to be narrow minded enough to dismiss that, not because you know you are right, but because it obviously pains you to have someone like me with a different opinion and factual evidence without being idiot enough to go pulling RAM from my DAW to prove it.

Why don't I send you the dollar? :p
 
Ford Van said:
My "test" session that I did my real life test with has 1.43 GB of audio data that is all being used in the project. So, I was able to open, playback, adjust stuff, in a project with almost a gig and a half of audio, with only 256mb of RAM. Nice try though.

You should quit work in the 8bit/22.05 world. ;)
Click to expand...


And this I think you totaly misunderstood. The 264 Meg was the actual RAM used when I loaded the session, not the size of the combined wav files in the project. That would have been 1.37Gig of audio data for the 34 tracks.....again, obviously not 8bit files recorded at 22.05.

There's nothing like watching a newly caught fish squirm on a riverbank.
 
LemonTree said:
There's nothing like watching a newly caught fish squirm on a riverbank.
Click to expand...

Yes , you DO look funny.

You keep changing the story LemmingTree.

OF COURSE opening a plugin is going to use SOME RAM, but, again, I don't think you can open enough plugin's to effect ram enough to cause the system to stall. LONG before that, the cpu would crap out. The hit of plugin's on RAM is almost not even worth talking about.

Just face it, you are too lazy, and probably too drunk on any given day to do any "real" tests.

You know how I KNOW for certain that if you halfed your RAM that your same projects are going to play just fine? Because not only have I tested that, but many others who were around here long before your dumbass was.

It is old new. RAM DOES NOT EFFECT TRACK AND PLUGIN COUNTS!
 
LemonTree said:
and another thing......

The 34 track session opened up at 264 Meg so just a for instance...what if I only had 512 meg to start then halved it to 256.......... the 264Meg session would play just fine? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Yes, it will play just fine.

Of course, since you spend more time drinking, and being a lazy engineer, you won't know that like I do because you probably don't even KNOW how to remove your RAM.
 
I love it when you post LemmingTree, because it is a constant comedy show with the things you say. You are like a preacher who only quotes PARTS of a whole to somehow try to bend things to sound like you even even half a fucking brain!

You are one of the stupidest people I have met here, yet, you keep trying so hard to show how smart you are.

What a shame. You are a shame.
 
Is that the best you can come up with to wriggle out of this one? A personal attack about the drinking habbits of someone you've never met on the other side of the world?

Doubting if I know how to remove the RAM is a classic! I managed to fit it ok when I built the DAW from scratch. You sir are a joke. Seems like we've both been entertained.

Are you not entertained?
 
LemonTree said:
Is that the best you can come up with to wriggle out of this one? A personal attack about the drinking habbits of someone you've never met on the other side of the world?

Doubting if I know how to remove the RAM is a classic! I managed to fit it ok when I built the DAW from scratch. You sir are a joke. Seems like we've both been entertained.

Are you not entertained?
Click to expand...

Talk about wiggling out!

Oh well, go ahead and live in your world of ignorance. It seems to fit you well.
 
I'll leave the ignorance thing to you.

You made a mistake.

I corrected you without mallice

You took a long way round to try and prove me wrong

you failed

everybody had a laugh at you

Then you started with personal insults

I didn't rise to the bait

and you said I wriggled out

What part didn't you get?

Why can't you just ignore my posts if my opinion is different from yours?

Why can't we just get along?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top