|
Processor Scheduling - Programs or Background Applications? [Win XP]
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Fledz |
Ok, this is for you guys that use XP (probably works the same in Vista too).
I remember hearing somewhere that if you tell windows to give priority to background applications, it actually works much better with audio sequencers. Obviously worse with games.
Is this true and has anyone got any more info on this?
For reference, I'm talking about :
Control Panel
...
System
...
Advanced [Tab]
...
Performance [Settings]
...
Advanced [Tab]
...
Processor Scheduling
You have two options there. Now, I play games on this computer so I'm enclined to keep it on programs (wait, don't kill me yet!) but once I get a desktop in the near future I will be reinstalling windows and using my laptop for audio production only so I'm thinking if this is the way to go? |
|
|
| nephilim |
| yes, this is "preferred" because the realtime audio processing is done with the ASIO driver, which runs as a background service. but you won't notice any large performance differences on newer computers, between scheduling programs or background services, just leave things as they are if you're not having any difficulties, or if your latency is not too high ;) |
|
|
| Fledz |
Oh ok, yea mine is only 2 months old and is a beast so I think I'll keep in on the normal settings, but I guess this is an option in the future if I ever need it?
Thanks for the info :)
Digi - How's this for naming a thread title properly? :tongue3 |
|
|
| ZxZDeViLZxZ |
| intresting seeing how flp doesnt support en dualcore any better then it did in last release so might be handy... too bad windows couldnt balence the program between both core for ya. |
|
|
| daeus |
yes and Cubase supports INFINATE CPU ahaha yes
How immature was that comment . |
|
|
|
|
