xp or 2000? which will give me lower latency? why?

adamgolding · Nov 21, 2005, 06:14 AM

i'm going to be making a new partition for a trimmed down OS for cubase etc.

i'll be using something like nlite or lite-xp etc. to trim down the OS, but i still don't know if i should go with 2000 or xp. low latency is the biggest priority--here is my setup:

1.14 GHz Athlon
512 MB RAM
2 SATA HDs for samples
1 7200 rpm system drive
(assorted other IDE drives not involved in sampling, etc.)
1 SBlive classic
1 MiaMIDI

TravelRec. · Nov 22, 2005, 06:58 AM

XP is fine and modern too. Disable all not-needed things and you´ll get what you want. The lowest possible latency depends on your whole hardware too, so with a good mobo and fast memory and reliable drives you are on top.

**dj_stick** · Nov 22, 2005, 03:21 PM

adamgolding: is your ram in dual channel (can your mobo support it?) because that will improve latency performance a little bit

JGSF · Feb 26, 2006, 05:50 PM

I don't think dual-channel makes any difference... any DDR is fast enough for this.

I could do 2ms in my Athlon XP with single-channel and I can't do it with my A64 and dual-channel ram.

The problem: APIC

You better use windows XP, if you tweak it right, it's the same thing in terms of performance than 2000.

If you don't have your sata drives in raid mode, make a windows installation without APIC, and make sure your soundcards get their own IRQ.

This will improve your audio performance.