thuggjuice
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4
- Joined: 2004/09/01 11:07:18
- Status: offline
ACPI or Standard Mode
Here's my system,
Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe
X2 4200 +
1GB DDR400 RAM (Crucial Ballistix)
Win XP Pro SP2
ATI X300SE Video Card
Sonar 5.1
EMU 1820m
I'm trying to tweak my system for stability foremost and sppeed secondly. In the past, my system ran best in STANDARD mode. This is a new system and I'm looking for some advice on the best tweaks and which mode is most likely the best.
Thanks
|
bthompson
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 227
- Joined: 2005/03/28 11:04:56
- Location: Rochester, NY USA
- Status: offline
RE: ACPI or Standard Mode
2006/06/27 13:04:06
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: thuggjuice
This is a new system and I'm looking for some advice on the best tweaks and which mode is most likely the best.
Any newer system like this running Windows XP should perform perfectly, in fact probably better in ACPI mode. The provided interrupt handling in ACPI mode almost assures freedom from interrupt sharing conflicts that were so much an issue in the past. --Bill
|
AndyW
Max Output Level: -45.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2956
- Joined: 2005/10/06 17:13:00
- Status: offline
RE: ACPI or Standard Mode
2006/06/27 13:10:35
(permalink)
I am not even sure that system will run properly(if at all) in "Standard" mode...multiprocessor(multicore) requires ACPI to work. I am running ACPI with the same CPU with no issues. I would install Windows with defaults and then only turn off the Windows services and options you don't want(like "no sounds" and all the display enhancement options...personally I use all the display options because I like them and it doesn't seem to cause me a visible performance hit...YMMV). Low level tweaking is really a waste of time these days IMO with processor speeds so high and most of the bugs worked out of the OS.
|
eikelbijter
Max Output Level: -70 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1002
- Joined: 2003/11/13 22:23:52
- Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
- Status: offline
RE: ACPI or Standard Mode
2006/06/27 18:07:38
(permalink)
Forget about Standard mode. Pretend it never even existed.
Rico
Xeon E3-1231V3, 16GB RAM, 480GB 840EVO SSD, MOTU 2480MK3, 424PCI w/ Sonar PlatinumDell XPS 18, i5, 12GB RAM, 500GB SSD+128GB SSD, Roland VS-100 w/ Sonar Platinum
Dell XPS 13, i5, 8GB RAM, 256GB 840EVO SSD, Zoom UAC-2, Sonar Platinum
http://www.RicoBelled.com/
|
OldGeezer
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 686
- Joined: 2005/07/17 11:51:44
- Status: offline
RE: ACPI or Standard Mode
2006/06/27 19:16:02
(permalink)
When my PC was a game machine, I ran Standard. With XP, you actually have to hit F5 (or was it F4) at the right time during the start of the install and tell it to install a stardard uniprocessor PC...at least I did, and that's with multiprocessors and ACPI disabled in the bios (and be ready to phone microsoft when you activate windows, coz now it's a different computer).
It was a waste of time...a placebo. I actually got a better score in 3Dmark with ACPI (go figure), but it got rid of stutters in a couple of games for me if I recall. Plus, it really sucks not having your computer turn itself off when you shut down, and there are other things you give up. I'd leave it.
|
krizrox
Max Output Level: -35 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4046
- Joined: 2003/11/23 09:49:33
- Location: Elgin, IL
- Status: offline
RE: ACPI or Standard Mode
2006/06/28 09:37:19
(permalink)
chiming in...
I am running my DAW in standard mode because at one time Creamware (the mfg of my Scope soundcards) recommended installing WinXP in standard mode if you used more than one of their cards in the same PC. There was a lot of discussion and debate about all this on PlanetZ way back when. There didn't seem to be a right or wrong answer and people seemed to be getting acceptable results running it one way or another. I choose to install WinXP in standard mode because the Scope cards are supposed to share a common IRQ and standard mode seemed to be the only way to make that happen on my PC.
I did try it in normal mode though for a time and don't recall having any problems. It was just an experiment. Ultimately I decided to follow Creamware's advice and installed WinXP in standard mode and have been running that way ever since. So I would maybe check with whoever makes your audio hardware and see what they have to say about it and then follow (or at least consider) their advice.
I'm perfectly happy running my DAW in standard mode. It seems to run flawlessly for me. But that might not be the case for you based on what you have installed. Let us know what you decide to do and how it turns out for you.
Larry Kriz www.LnLRecording.com www.myspace.com/lnlrecording Sonar PE 8.5, Samplitude Pro 11, Sonic Core Scope Professional/XTC, A16 Ultra AD/DA, Intel DG965RY MOBO, Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4GHz processor, XFX GeForce 7300 GT PCIe video card, Barracuda 750 & 320GB SATA drives, 4GB DDR Ram, Plextor DVD/CD-R burner.
|
Genghis
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 827
- Joined: 2003/11/09 16:09:17
- Location: Huntington Beach, CA
- Status: offline
RE: ACPI or Standard Mode
2006/06/28 12:03:35
(permalink)
Standard mode was useful several years ago when the PIII processors and the BX chipset were popular. At that time ACPI and the APIC standards were pretty new and didn't always work as well as they were designed to work with older hardware. If you installed in ACPI mode on most of those systems, the PC would assign most of your PCI devices to IRQ 9... which wreaked havoc on audio systems. This was due to hardware limitations within the motherboard, and not on the operating system. On newer generations of motherboards ACPI allows you to go beyond the old limitation of using only IRQs 0-16 assigning IRQs up to 23 with a limited amount of sharing. (You still have control over what devices share IRQs by switching which slots you use on the board.)
If you are using a newer system... say... maybe one that is fast enough to meet the recommended specifications for running SONAR in the first place, ACPI is the way to go.
There may be some special cases, such as Larry mentioned with the Creamware card, but I would bet that even then it's not as much of a necessity as it was with the older chipsets. (UAD cards are similar, in that you generally would like them to share if possible, but mine have been working flawlessly... well, except for that CPU munching thing that Cakewalk and UAD are trying to solve for all of us.)
|