I understand the on paper aspect of using all ram.

In practice, has anyone noticed an actual boost in performance?

Was it an anticlimax? 

Recently, I posted about some audio issues I noticed while using BitBridge. I'm sorry to say I can't remember who, but someone posted back that I could be hearing some timing artifacts while using it. At least freezing is becoming a non-issue,so far, with my rig. I am concerned about the bitbridge issue. I was advised to use JBridge. They use a different approach that is not supposed to have the timing issues. I would have hoped there would be more audio tools coming out in 64 bit by now.

It really depends on what you're doing. The question really is, is what you're doing currently straining your machine, and if so, is that because of memory issues? If the answer to both of things is no, then there's probably nothing to be gained.

To put it another way, you don't see a general across the board performance improvement. It just means the ceiling for certain kinds of stuff gets a bit higher. If your projects are working fine with 4gb RAM, then there's nothing magical about more RAM that you will notice.

Paul Russell

 that's because you haven't used it

Unfortunately I have, and the reality is there is no noticeable improvement when going from Sonar x86 to x64 and the Teleport Server crashes are just one more annoyance on top of the many confirmed bugs in X1 so I just don't even waste my time with it anymore.

There is absolutely no need for Sonar x64 on any DAW ... period. If you have fallen for the marketing hype and feel the urge to play with it by all means go right ahead. You're just another one in a long line of beta testers who got duped in to thinking x64 is better.

Hmm. I've got projects that I can't play in 32 bit because the sample sets I'm using are too large. But I can play them in 64 bit. How this is a marketing gimmick I've been duped into, I can't figure out. It's not useful to everyone, no, but what is?

aleef

i would have thought by now we would be through with bitbridge/jbridge.. and freezing tracks.

Can't tell by your statement if you're pro or con on bitbridge and freezing. There's two ways to read it.


All I can say is bitbridge has been buggy ever since it was introduced so I just completely avoid it which means ... no more x64. It's just not worth the aggravation on top of everything else.

John T

 Hmm. I've got projects that I can't play in 32 bit because the sample sets I'm using are too large. But I can play them in 64 bit. How this is a marketing gimmick I've been duped into, I can't figure out. It's not useful to everyone, no, but what is?

Well, if you actual gave specifics such as what samples, who put them out, etc etc ... I would be inclined to believe you. Unfortunately, I have to call b******t on this as your comment currently stands.

John T


Hmm. I've got projects that I can't play in 32 bit because the sample sets I'm using are too large. But I can play them in 64 bit. How this is a marketing gimmick I've been duped into, I can't figure out. It's not useful to everyone, no, but what is?

Here it matters 100%, as it means the difference between showtime and a project not loading.

It opens the door to much more complex projects and even older projects I can have more stuff available for editing at once, i.e I don't have to bounce down intermediate submixes to keep everything spinning along.

Basically whether you already hit them or not it has removed some limits.

Does that matter?  I'd say to the same extent 32 bit Windows 95 did over 16 bit Windows 3.1.

So yes.

What motivation could I possibly have to lie about it?