Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

64-bit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • STORMDAVE
    replied
    Enable then disable Aero and watch the memory usage :)
    ~300MB in use.

    Leave a comment:


  • THoff
    replied
    Vista isn't significantly more memory-hungry than XP was, the reason why a Vista system is using more memory immediately after booting is because Vista caches much more aggressively. If the memory is needed by an application, Vista will free it up.

    Leave a comment:


  • STORMDAVE
    replied
    Yep, I recommend at least 4GB with any flavor of Vista. It eats 1.6GB idle after a fresh boot (Vista x64) and it's probably hitting your cache if you launch EDIUS.

    Leave a comment:


  • redgum
    replied
    Put 4Gb of RAM in and try Vista x64 again. If you can't get Edius to work faster (4 or 5) than XP then your Vista setup is incorrect. And I mean noticeable faster.

    Leave a comment:


  • MegaNLE
    replied
    Hello everybody!

    I recently download the new Demo of EDIUS 5 and I tested with XP SP3, Vista Ultimate x86 SP1 and with Vista Ultimate x64 SP1.
    I create a test project with several clips and filters on it. I save them in the video HD.

    The PC specs are: Intel DG33FB, C2D E8400 (3Ghz, FSB 1333), 2Gb DDR-2 800Mhz in dual channel, GeForce 8500GT 512Mb, 250Gb SATA System HD, 320Gb SATA Video HD and DVD-RW unit.

    The measure method that I use was the real time. I play the timeline until the buffer down to 0 and stops.

    In my tests Windows XP with SP3 was the winner in all of them.

    I don't use the Windows's factory defaults. I quit everything that use more resources of the system.

    So, my questions are:
    Is XP SP3 better than Vista 32/64bits in the edition?
    There is some "good" configuration for Vista?

    Somebody have any experiences like that?

    Thank you all!

    Leave a comment:


  • shueardm
    replied
    There's no XP 64 drivers, either of the others will work.

    Leave a comment:


  • lajci
    replied
    I have edius nx express + edius 5
    on
    quad core 2.4
    4gb ram
    p35 msi motherboard
    ...

    which OS???
    xp32/xp64/vista32/vista64 ?

    first of all i need stable system for editing hd footage (sony xdcam ex)

    Leave a comment:


  • Mr Bill
    replied
    Thanks to everyone who commented here :)

    I think I'll get Vista 64-bit, even if Edius isn't true 64-bit yet.
    At least when things start to slowly move towards 64-bit hardware/software etc...I will already own a 64-bit OS.

    Thanks to all :)

    Leave a comment:


  • GrassValley_KH
    replied
    Folks, I would prefer we (again) not go into debate on operating system platform efficiency (32 vs 64).

    To the long-time followers of our products, this release represents a huge step forward in contemporary computing. Yes, it'd be lovely to have a fully 64-bit native application, but for now...baby steps.

    At the end of the day, the choice is left to the consumer. There's no place for elitism here. I don't really care who you worked for in a previous life..

    Leave a comment:


  • Jerry
    replied
    Originally posted by swsw1550 View Post
    That's right Mark, people just don't seem to understand 64bit systems, I will say that they think they do and maybe just leave it at that, I didn't waste years of working for Microsoft and in the development side of 64bit XP and Server 64bit, and Vista 64bit for NOTHING. People who want to use 64bit systems my advice is go and do a computer course please.

    Steve

    With CS4 shipping in October, and being 64bit, I will probably move to Vista 64bit Ultimate. Granted, Edius 5 is not 64bit. But, will work within that environment. My understanding is the entire CS4 package will be 64bit.
    At that point, I believe moving to the new OS would be worthwhile for me.
    (If that turns out to be false, I will just go 32bit Vista Ultimate)
    Edius and the CS3 package is pretty much all I have on my main system.
    Moving for the sake of moving, I agree is not a smart move. However, moving to a 64bit OS with 64bit programming is.

    Is that faulty logic?

    Leave a comment:


  • swsw1550
    replied
    I thought I better explain it a little bit more,There are essentially two reasons why a 64-bit Windows should be faster: Compilers have more options for code optimization and all 64-bit CPUs support the so-called SSEx-instructions, a command set that is supposed to be more efficient.

    Some 32-bit CPUs support SSEx, too, but most 32-bit apps don’t use them because that would prevent them from working on older 32-bit processors. Hence it follows that only applications which were optimized for 64-bit will show performance gains. Unfortunately, this isn’t the case for most Windows programs, nowadays.Said in a very simple way, 32bit CPUs process data in 32-bit chunks, while 64bit CPUs process data in 64-bit chunks. Perhaps the main advantage is that with a 32-bit register one can address 2^32 memory addresses (about 4 GB of RAM), while 64-bit registers can address 2^64 addresses (17.2 billion GB of RAM). Also, a 32bit CPU must process 64-bit numbers in two steps, while 64bit CPUs only require one step.
    The processors run in two modes: 32-bit and 64-bit. In the 64-bit mode, the memory pointers are larger than in the 32-bit mode. While this gives the 64-bit applications access to more memory, the execution contexts and data are incompatible with 32-bit applications. As a result, 64-bit and 32-bit code cannot be mixed within a single process. For example, if a 64-bit process loads a 32-bit Dynamic Link Library (DLL), or vice versa, an error results, saying that the DLL format is incorrect. Consequently, 32-bit applications cannot use the 64-bit system DLLs. Also, in-process Component Object Model (COM) objects must have the same “bit-ness” as their clients. But the standard 32-bit registry does not distinguish 32-bit and 64-bit DLLs. This is one reason why 64bit Vista has WOW86, also try your IE 64bit some sites don't like it, flash player doesn't work in it either, Anyway have fun guys.


    cheers
    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • swsw1550
    replied
    That's right Mark, people just don't seem to understand 64bit systems, I will say that they think they do and maybe just leave it at that, I didn't waste years of working for Microsoft and in the development side of 64bit XP and Server 64bit, and Vista 64bit for NOTHING. People who want to use 64bit systems my advice is go and do a computer course please.

    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • shueardm
    replied
    For Bill, :)

    Mate, if you want to access more system RAM when using multiple programs at once, it is worth going to Vista 64 Ultimate. If you simply want more performance out of EDIUS and don't run other big programs at the same time, then there is no need. The SP card should have 64 bit drivers included in the installer (KH is that right?) while the HDStorm doesn't as of yet as pointed out. Regardless the 64 bit drivers only makes the card work in a the 64 bit OS, it does not make EDIUS run 64 bit native, it won't be any more powerful.

    Leave a comment:


  • redgum
    replied
    I'd agree with that, Thoff. And if you go the whole hog and link up with a HDStorm card you would be silly not to move in that direction. The HDStorm will have 64bit drivers early next year. I've had Edius 5 for about a week or so now and it runs fine on Vista x64 Ultimate. See my website...

    Leave a comment:


  • THoff
    replied
    I'm well aware of the differences, I'm a software engineer who works on software that is available in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions.

    I was merely trying to point out that unless there is a compelling reason not to transition to a 64-bit OS (such as a lack of drivers), there is little reason to build or buy another 32-bit box.

    In addition, 64-bit Vista is far more robust and usable than 64-bit XP. The latter has never been supported well by third-party driver developers.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X