512mb RAM to 1024mb. Is there a big difference?

[Jayman#9]

I'm planning on doubling my RAM to 1024mb. Will there be a noticeable performance increace with PT 5.3.1 for XP? Or will I just have a huge overhead of RAM. Or am I better off to get a second hard drive for audio? I'm looking for smoother recording when recording RTAS plugins direct to disk at a 128 sample buffer size. Sometimes PT will stop without warning in the middle of a take. [img]images/icons/mad.gif[/img]

Athlon XP 2000+
Asus A7V333 MB
512 RAM PC2700
IBM deskstar HD 40 gig
Geforce 4 440mx video
PT 5.3.1
Windows XP

[Stone Knife]

For sure get a second hard drive to which you can write your audio files. The Maxtor DiamondMax is a very good one, and quiet, too.

[Jayman#9]

Thaanx ST. So your saying a second HD will give me a better performance boost rather than RAM? If that's the case, DONE. A 60 gig HD is cheaper than 512 mb of RAM anyway.

[NoviceDollars]

I was told to stop at 512 by some folks on this board about a year ago, because I'm runing WinMe and it allegedly can't make use of anymore after 512.

Might be worth looking into for XP.

sean.

[vonbleak101]

XP will fly with 1024mb of ram but, the perfomance jump wont be like it was from 256 to 512, there will be a jump in performance but not a huge one. A second hard drive for audio is a better option. With all your audio files on one drive and all your programs on another you system will be alot more stable. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[vonbleak101]

I agree Pro Tools wont benifit from 1024mb but other apps will, who in this day and age uses only Pro Tools? I regualy use LE, Fruity Loops and Soundforge. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[QuikDraw]

Originally posted by vonbleak101:
XP will fly with 1024mb of ram but, the perfomance jump wont be like it was from 256 to 512, there will be a jump in performance but not a huge one.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Performance jump? Have you seen this yourself?

Last week I was running 256MB. I am now running 512MB. My performance is identical to what it was before. As far as I can tell (for what I do with my PC) the extra RAM was a complete waste of money! I'm sure it would make a difference if I were running more apps simultaneously, but just for PTLE alone it doesn't make a difference at all as far as I can tell. This is with WinXP Home.

I did similar tests a year or two ago with Win98se and WinME and PTLE. In those OSes the jump from 128MB to 192MB was a huge improvement. From 192MB to 256MB was a slight improvement. And anything above 256MB was a waste of time.

Seems to me that 256MB is the magic number for RAM with PTLE whether in Win9x or WinXP.

But a dedicated audio hard drive is definitely the way to go. You'll fill it up in a couple of months and be buying yet another hard drive before you know it!

Mike

[vonbleak101]

Yeah i have, i have 512 my freind have 1024. Windows loads faster, apps open faster, soundforge opens files faster and in general XP is faster. Like I said its a huge jump but its there. Also if you use your comp for other things, i also do computer graphics, the extra ram will help render times. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

But for LE alone the extra ram would make little if any difference and the money would be better spent on a second hard drive for audio. [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[vonbleak101]

"Like I said its a huge jump but its there" is meant to be

"Like I said its not a huge jump but its there" [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]