Are you sure you want to do that, Peter? [*-)]
I know if my system was working well, I'd leave it alone...! [:D]
I know if my system was working well, I'd leave it alone...! [:D]
-
Just to add fuel to the fire. I have 2 Win 98se machines and one new XP machine....both 98 machines are stable and have been for many months. My XP machine appears to be stable (it's new). All have a gig of Ram. XP will load to 99%. I am loading twice as much stuff into my 98 machines.
-
Chompy,
I can feel with you! I bought Gigastdio and my first PC 16 month ago. Up to this point I was a Mac only user. Until my first GS machine did work I nearly had a nervous breakdown. It’s only because I know that it can work from other people that I went on. I am by far not such a tech guy as the other members writing in this thread, but I know one thing: Exactly the same configuration - Gigastudio+OS - will work fine on one PC and give much trouble on another. There was so much controversial stuff written about al this that it is difficult to know who really knows all about this. To me the problems are in the hardware (mostly motherboards / how your machine is configurated etc.) I did not get my first GS machine to work until I did change the motherboard. From then on it did work fine without much tweaking. Now I have 2 GS machines which are the same except the motherboard; one works fine with 1.25 GB RAM and the other one does not even start with 1 GB RAM.....Also your drivers - soundcard/Midi interface can have some influence.
Probably the most important thing is to keep cool, because sooner or lather it will work. And then do not touch anymore.....I am not a Mac fanatic anymore. I do have a PC laptop for al my Internet stuff - I am writing on it right now- and I even can use it as an additional GS machine, it works great! But sometime and for some people, getting Gigastudio to work is not an easy task, especially because when you are impatient to make music and get the dam thing to function!
I am sorry to not being able to be of more help, but once more : it will work!
Iwan
-
A bump to the top for this thread, with some info on a changeover I've just made.
I now have 2 machines for Giga that were both until recently running Win XP. One had 1.5Gb of RAM, the other 1Gb. I took the 1Gb machine and installed Win 98. This has made a huge... vast... immense, nay, collosal difference to how much I can load into Giga.
Under XP I was maxing out my memory in the 1Gb machine, to 99% - couldn't load another thing. Under Win98, with exactly the same patches loaded, I am only using 56% of my memory! I can load a BUCKETLOAD more samples under 98 than I can under XP.
My advice to anyone thinking of using XP for Giga would be "don't do it". This may all get sorted out with v3 of Giga, but until then, 98 is your OS.
-
Hello,
I Posted this message a few weeks ago on the tascam/giga forum :
I recently made some tests to know what is the best solution to load a big set of gigs (VSL library): Win98 or Win XP
I copy the gigapiano 30 times and load it as many time as I can :
Windows XP :
512Mo : 8 Gigapiano
1024Mo : 18 Gigapiano
2048Mo : 22 Gigapiano
With 2Go of ram, and 22 Gigapiano, Gigastudio use 58% of the ram due to the 1Go barrier.
Windows 98 :
512Mo : 12 Gigapiano
If you have more than 1.25Go on your computer you can load the same amount of gig's files on win98 and winxp, and depending of you motherboard, it could be difficult to have a working windows 98 system with more than 512Mo of Ram.
So Windows 98 isn't always the best Os to use.
----------------------------------
Stéphane Péneau
http://perso.easynet.fr/~teknico/samplitude
----------------------------------
-
I have repeated your test with a Win98SE machine with 1 Gb RAM.
I was able to load 32 pianos into memory (the entire Gigs, not single instruments, so I got 64 midi programs, the light and the full piano x 32). I stopped with the memory counter at 97%. Footprint on disk: 20 Gb.
I am not sure if the difference between 512 Mb = 12 and 1024 Mb = 32 can be explained by the memory for Windows itself.
Maybe you don't have a low, fixed VCACHE setting? I have used a 32 Mb setting. I did not want to pull out memory sticks to re-run this test with only 512 Mb Ram...
I have a different conclusion: Win98SE is really more effective AND cheaper for running GigaStudio than XP, assuming the same fast CPU, memory and Mobo.
Cheers,
Peter
-
Maybe you don't have a low, fixed VCACHE setting?
I played with the MaxPhysPage settings but didn't reach to let the computer boot windows 98 with 1 Go ram. I'll make more tests asap.
BTW : you can make the test with 512Mo of Ram without unplugging memory sticks with the MaxPhysPage :
just add MaxPhysPage=20000 in the [386Enh] section.
Perhaps it could be better to move this thread to the gigastudio's section of the forum. Admin ?
Best,
-
MaxPhysPage is a different setting than Vcache.
You can use up to 1 Gb Ram without a problem if you make sure that this section is in System.ini:
[VCACHE]
MinFileCache=32768
MaxFileCache=32768
VCache is a portion of physical memory that Windows can use to "cache" file contents. This is NOT the same as the swap file, which contains memory blocks (that can contain anything). By default, Windows uses a proportion of RAM for VCache. With this approach you effectively tell Windows to reserve only a small, fixed amount.
For more information, search the NorthernSounds Forum, Hardware section(s) for the keywork VCACHE. A forum that every GigaStudio owner should visit regularly, by the way.
Your data, and problem with using > 512 Mb really must relate to this.
I am sorry I cannot do any tests today, maybe later.
Cheers,
Peter
-
Hi Syquest,
The only mention i can see of the 2-minute click bug on the updates page at nemesysmusic is the 2.53.05 maintenance patch. I'm already running 2.54. Does 2.54 not include the 2.53.05 maintenance patch, meaning I have to run the maintenance patch separately? Or do you mean something else?
Let me know.
Cheers!