M
mace2
New member
moskus said:
No, never, don't even dream about it !
Is it XP1900+ ?
Actually, It's quite powerful still, in some applications
winning P4 2.2-2.4 GHz !
No, never, don't even dream about it !
Is it XP1900+ ?
Actually, It's quite powerful still, in some applications
winning P4 2.2-2.4 GHz !
B
BenneB
New member
celron???
Celeron processors are not even worth the trouble when it comes to any multimedia applications. They are best for bussiness and home office applications and general use.
You can buy a whole brand new amd 2600 this days including monitor, keyboard, mouse, graphics card the whole deal for less than AUD$800.
I suggest you save your money and buy a decient computer.
Celeron processors are not even worth the trouble when it comes to any multimedia applications. They are best for bussiness and home office applications and general use.
You can buy a whole brand new amd 2600 this days including monitor, keyboard, mouse, graphics card the whole deal for less than AUD$800.
I suggest you save your money and buy a decient computer.
moskus
The Creator of Æ, Ø and Å
Wow, I'm pretty happy with my Athlon (yes, it's the XP1900+), but didn't know it was that strong...mace2 said:
D
dmbpettit
New member
Um yep.
Going by those bottom figures you will be in for a world of trouble. I have a 2.7 ghz celeron laptop and it can't even search the net while a cd is playing with hickups. Those requirements will work for like a few tracks with no input monitoring and very few fx.
yep
Going by those bottom figures you will be in for a world of trouble. I have a 2.7 ghz celeron laptop and it can't even search the net while a cd is playing with hickups. Those requirements will work for like a few tracks with no input monitoring and very few fx.
yep
moskus
The Creator of Æ, Ø and Å
Hmm... seems like your laptop has other issues than a poor processor. In this moment I'm playing a CD in WMP7, have 5 Word documents open, running WinMLS with some pretty heavy impulse responses loaded and I'm surfing the net and typing this.dmbpettit said:
No problems with a Celeron 2.2 GHz.
wfaraoni
ear art's not a science
I have three systems this is how they perform from worst to best for audio using Sonar 3 or 2.2
1.6 g p4 1gig ram
2.6 g celeron 512m ram
2.0 gig amd 1 gig ram
The differences are noticable but nothing to shout about. all three perform good enough for my recording needs and are stable. If I tweak the amd to run at 2.4 g it is not stable.
I have learned to save resources for real time effects and that has helped more than anything.
I was able to load sonar 3 on my amd 300 laptop with 64m ram but of course I could not do anything with it. Maybe record one track and play it back with one fx. MAYBE It was useful to get familiar with the changes in sonar 3.
almost forgot, the kids use an amd 1600 w 512 I think.. now that system is a joke because it can barely run regular windows programs without bogging down. Iwas never able to get it stable or dependable for anything processor intensive.
Peace
Bill
1.6 g p4 1gig ram
2.6 g celeron 512m ram
2.0 gig amd 1 gig ram
The differences are noticable but nothing to shout about. all three perform good enough for my recording needs and are stable. If I tweak the amd to run at 2.4 g it is not stable.
I have learned to save resources for real time effects and that has helped more than anything.
I was able to load sonar 3 on my amd 300 laptop with 64m ram but of course I could not do anything with it. Maybe record one track and play it back with one fx. MAYBE
It was useful to get familiar with the changes in sonar 3.almost forgot, the kids use an amd 1600 w 512 I think.. now that system is a joke because it can barely run regular windows programs without bogging down. Iwas never able to get it stable or dependable for anything processor intensive.
Peace
Bill
Last edited: