Allocation of Processor Resources

Dear Forum:

I see that some or actually most references to Processor scheduling recommend that background services, as opposed to programs is the preferred choice.
Can you give me some information on this please?

ASIO drivers prefer background resource prioritization on some machines. Low latency recording can usually be best achieved with ASIO drivers rather than MME or WDM/KS in most cases.

As an example my project studio DAW running Vista 64 prefers being set to background process prioritization for optimum performance with ASIO drivers. My Laptop on the other hand which is an HP off the shelf with Vista 32, runs better when recording if the programs are prioritized.

My previous mobile platform was an XP based machine and required Background process prioritization to be able to record without motorboating or dropouts.

Hi Jim:

I am learning a lot of things since I starting using the DAW and as is ususal with my nature, I wish to understand as much as possible.
Jim, since I started using 8.3.1, I've had only one sonar or vista crash when using sonitus eq.
It happened so fast, that I'm not sure what happened exactly because I've used that plug-in a lot with no issue.
I was trying to save an edited eq, but nothing happened, then I clicked again -maybe a couple of times tooooo fast then the whole computer just frooze, so I hit CTRL/ALT/del to unfreeze the computer.
that sort of thing I remember happening a lot with vista in general even on my vista office machines, so who knows?

Also, the post is regarding other daw packages as well, as I have some friends who are just setting up vistax64 using cubase, Reason (as a stand-alone) and others.
When they remarked about thier experience setting-up daws/audio apps to "background" using XP, I already knew my setup is set to "programs" and they argued with me about the need to check for sure about that.
I want to know if this is a definate required setting with vista regarding all daw and audio software or just sonar, especially out of regard for the two responants above, who would be better served if this is the case.
Comments please?

Thanks for responding, I hope all is well with you.

Hi all,

I agree with Jim that trying out both options is probably a good idea. However, if I ever found that background services resulted in better performance, I would probably look further into the situation.

The reason for this, based on my experience with many O/S's other than Windows, is that normally background process, batch jobs, etc. are initially assigned significantly lower priority than foreground tasks --- things that you sit and wait to finish. If something finishes when assigned as a background process faster than it does when assigned as a foreground task based on another process's priority, I would conclude that the foreground process's priority was lowered by the O/S for some reason, and this suggests that some problem is occurring that is lowering the performance of the foreground process. That's not good....

On the other hand, Microsoft has done some screwy things, and so have applications developers, so there is really no telling what the problem is. I would just suggest looking into it a little bit to ensure that SONAR or other DAW wasn't running at some lowered priority such as repeatedly trying to access something that wasn't there and so on. Just something to think about if you see this situation.

Regards,
Dave Clark