In the quest for lower CPU % , it has been suggested that I check whether my computer is running too hot. I'll be using Speccy to check the temps (thank you, Pete Kaine!).

What I was wondering about was what the target temps should be. I haven't finished trawling through the Intel page ... is that the place to look?

Thanks -

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Edited by alexis (14/06/12 05:41 PM)

http://ark.intel.com/

Any idea what chip it is?

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

Hi - Yes, Pete, thanks.

It's a Prescott 3.4GHz P4. And, (though I could not navigate with certainty to the specific processor on that page of Intel's) I believe it's running HOT: The mother board system temp per Speccy is now 84 degrees C after running a "Challenging" project (just 3 VSTi's and 5 audio tracks - Ha!). The Processor zone temperature goes up to 78 degrees and the System Zone 1 and 2 temps go up to 41 or 42 degrees. All 3 fans are running by my visual inspection with the case open.

Also, my Graphics card, a Radeon ATI X300SE (128 MB) does poorly. New drivers do keep the CPU down, but minimally, with no real important difference (99% with a few crashes, vs. 85% with fewer, when I drag things around the screen with the project playing).

I've been in contact with a nice gent on line who runs Cubase 6 on XP SP2 with many audio tracks and multiple VSTi's and does well enough to make a living off it, so I still cling to hope that I can improve my system significantly to let me put off buying its replacement.

It's been suggested I find someone competent to remove the CPU cooler, remove the thermal paste and replace new paste and the cooler - competent because apparently if done wrong, things could go worse. I don't inhabit the computer world, so I'm going to have to think about how to increase my odds that I wouldn't hire a Yahoo to do this.

I'll probably also take the opportunity to buy a 512MB graphics card, and upgrade RAM.

I've back up imaged!

Thanks -

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

If you haven't already done so, get in there and brush out and dust from the fans/cooler.

I can't find the specs for the old Prescotts but this thread might have some links in it that do http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/161612-11-intel-prescott-core-temperat ure-issues (sorry, a bit short on time today).

From memory through the Preshots as they were more commonly known were legendary for running stupidly hot at the time, so I'm not all that suprised to see the temps your getting at the moment and it might be more nothing than something.

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

If you haven't already done so, get in there and brush out and dust from the fans/cooler.

I can't find the specs for the old Prescotts but this thread might have some links in it that do http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/161612-11-intel-prescott-core-temperat ure-issues (sorry, a bit short on time today).

From memory through the Preshots as they were more commonly known were legendary for running stupidly hot at the time, so I'm not all that suprised to see the temps your getting at the moment and it might be more nothing than something.

---

Thanks, Pete. I've done a fair amount of looking, including computer forums, and have not actually been able to see Temp specs for my processor (detailed specs below).

I'm going to get a new vid card, and RAM. I know there are several people that run reasonable size projects in Cubase 6.5 on XP SP2 without problems, so if my CPU remains pegged at 90%+ with small projects, I guess I'll have to assume it might be a matter of cooling off the processors.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Intel Pentium 4 550
Cores 1
Threads 2
Name Intel Pentium 4 550
Code Name Prescott
Package Socket 775 LGA
Technology 90nm
Specification Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.40GHz
Family F
Extended Family F
Model 3
Extended Model 3
Stepping 4
Revision D0
Instructions MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3
Virtualization Unsupported
Hyperthreading Supported, Enabled
Fan Speed 2470 RPM
Bus Speed 200.0 MHz
Rated Bus Speed 800.0 MHz
Stock Core Speed 3400 MHz
Stock Bus Speed 200 MHz
Caches
L1 Data Cache Size 16 KBytes
L1 trace cache 12 Kuops
L2 Unified Cache Size 1024 KBytes
Core 0
Core Speed 3399.9 MHz
Multiplier x 17.0
Bus Speed 200.0 MHz
Rated Bus Speed 800.0 MHz
Thread 1
APIC ID 0
Thread 2
APIC ID 1

---

Ah! I think I found the right page for the processor: http://ark.intel.com/products/27469/Intel-Pentium-4-Processor-550-supporti ng-HT-Technology-%281M-Cache-3_40-GHz-800-MHz-FSB%29 . Or possibly this one, I don't know how to determine which from the Speccy data: http://ark.intel.com/products/30767/Intel-Pentium-4-Processor-550550J-supp orting-HT-Technology-%281M-Cache-3_40-GHz-800-MHz-FSB%29 .

As near as I understand things, with the "Tcase" spec of 72.8 degrees for the first one (and 67.7 degrees for the 2nd processor), mine IS running hot at 78 degrees no matter how I look at it. What I don't know if that is a significant amount hotter, or not to worry about it. With the high CPU %s ... I'd guess I do have a problem. Anyone with knowledge/thoughts in this area?

Thanks!

Edited by alexis (15/06/12 05:08 PM)

If your CPU runs beyond a certain temperature its built in thermal throttling will kick in which will reduce the clock speed and possibly also voltage; depending on when that feature was introduced by Intel. Obviously performance will drop off noticeably when this happens.
You can run a utility that will monitor whether your CPU is throttling from which you can determine what the safe temperature is for your CPU.
You could run a CPU stress test utility which might well push your system into throttling and you then monitor the CPU temp when that happened. Some utilities will record the maximum CPU temperature reached which will be the figure to use.
The temperature readings from older CPUs are less accurate so the values you see may not be accurate in absolute terms but it doesn’t matter as it gives you an offset to use.
E.g. if throttling occurs at an indicated 85C then you need to decide what you feel is a safe margin to use and then keep an eye for a while to make sure that your CPU’s maximum temp stays below that.

I can’t recommend which utilities to use especially in regard to monitoring throttling but if you wish to pursue this I’m sure myself and others can help out.

Quote Agharta:

---

If your CPU runs beyond a certain temperature its built in thermal throttling will kick in which will reduce the clock speed and possibly also voltage; depending on when that feature was introduced by Intel. Obviously performance will drop off noticeably when this happens.
You can run a utility that will monitor whether your CPU is throttling from which you can determine what the safe temperature is for your CPU.
You could run a CPU stress test utility which might well push your system into throttling and you then monitor the CPU temp when that happened. Some utilities will record the maximum CPU temperature reached which will be the figure to use.
The temperature readings from older CPUs are less accurate so the values you see may not be accurate in absolute terms but it doesn’t matter as it gives you an offset to use.
E.g. if throttling occurs at an indicated 85C then you need to decide what you feel is a safe margin to use and then keep an eye for a while to make sure that your CPU’s maximum temp stays below that.

I can’t recommend which utilities to use especially in regard to monitoring throttling but if you wish to pursue this I’m sure myself and others can help out.

---

Thank you, Agharta, that is very helpful. I will likely wind up doing just that, but I suspect it would be for academic purposes only - my most recent reported processor zone temps (via BIOS) were up to 80 degrees, so throttling or not, I think I've got to get those temps down.

I've done most/all of the other things I can, so I suspect these high temps are the reason I get such very high CPU activity with simple actions. I successfully increased RAM up to 4 GB installed, and changed out the graphics card from a 128 MB Radeon X300SE to to 1 GB Radeon 6450, with only marginal improvement in performance.

Interestingly, the problems can be made MUCH smaller by reducing the amount of moving graphics on the screen. I can get my CPU load down from 100% to 40% just by minimizing Cubase off the page. And I can add about 40% to CPU in a Cubase project by grabbing a window and dragging it back and forth across the page (admiring the white "trail" that lags behind the window as it's being dragged, which takes a moment or two to fill in).

All fans are on, and no smell of burning rubber yet. It's been suggested I get the "cooler paste" removed off the processors and reapplied, since it's been on there about 7 years. I'm running out of other things to do instead, so I am trying to become resigned to the idea I'll just have to get that done as the only alternative to an entirely new computer which really isn't budgeted for quite yet.

Thanks again -

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Quote alexis:

---

[
I'm going to get a new vid card, and RAM. I know there are several people that run reasonable size projects in Cubase 6.5 on XP SP2 without problems, so if my CPU remains pegged at 90%+ with small projects, I guess I'll have to assume it might be a matter of cooling off the processors.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Intel Pentium 4 550
Cores 1
Threads 2
Name Intel Pentium 4 550
Code Name Prescott
Package Socket 775 LGA
Technology 90nm

---

---

I'm going to take a guess that those other people working on XP are not working on a machine that is 8 years old!

If you buy ram and gfx (if you can find a AGP gfx card, as I suspect it will be) you'll get a very, very small fractional increase for that system for 1/3rd the price of picking up a new motherboard/memory/cpu/cooler/psu/drive which in itself would give you 10X more performance over the current spec instantly.

System performance has come a long way in 8 years and the programs are trying their hardest to keep using it up, I'm all for using stuff as long as it's life cycle permits and as long as the workflow is smooth and productive, but the does come a time when its pointless to keep throwing cash at fixing a problem, when solving it properly will have a far longer lasting result.

*edit*

Oh and Tcase (hadn't realised they had started using that now on ask.intel) works out for that CPU to be about 105 degrees roughly. The i7's 9 series has a slightly lower T value and real world is fine to around 100 before throttling. The Prescotts as I said above can take an astounding amount of heat so as long as it ain't dusty I wouldn't be worried, and even so it wouldn't explain the gfx tearing in use and that would be a lack of resources in the system.

Oh and to check the onchip values we use "Coretemp" which you can download via Google. Not perfect, but short of ramming a diode into the cpu casing, it'll do the job.

Quote alexis:

---

Thank you, Agharta, that is very helpful. I will likely wind up doing just that, but I suspect it would be for academic purposes only - my most recent reported processor zone temps (via BIOS) were up to 80 degrees, so throttling or not, I think I've got to get those temps down.

---

I'd suggest you go evidence-based on this! The academic bit is that you're getting a temperature readout of 80 deg. This may or may not be accurate, and doesn't seem wildly out-of-range for a Prescott. Now, what's the evidence?

High CPU usage may well cause heat, but it's difficult to see how it would be the other way round! IS your processor being throttled?

This is 32-bit Windows XP? The 1GB video card might not have been such a good idea. There's no need for powerful graphics on a DAW, and that's a big chunk of the memory map. A £20 512MB card with passive cooling (who needs another noisy fan on a DAW?) could be a better choice.

Gentlemen -

Thank you as always!

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

I'm going to take a guess that those other people working on XP are not working on a machine that is 8 years old!

---

Pete, this and your comments about being at a point where noticeable performance increases just aren't going to happen on an 8 year old machine (at any cost) are very well taken. I'm hoping Santa might have something quiet and powerful in his bag for me this year! Until then, I have developed a workflow that compensates for Old Betsy's creakiness (basically by minimizing the graphics load, which allows me to work at half the CPU load), which I'm OK with in the meantime. My main concern is to be reasonably sure that it's not likely I'll start smelling burning plastic/ceramic after a long session ...

.
.
.
.

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

*edit*

Oh and Tcase (hadn't realised they had started using that now on ask.intel) works out for that CPU to be about 105 degrees roughly.

---

Pete - would you please point me to the reference you found that information in for this chip ... I have looked and looked, but was never sure I was referencing the right chip. Thank you!
.
.
.
.

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

Oh and to check the onchip values we use "Coretemp" which you can download via Google. Not perfect, but short of ramming a diode into the cpu casing, it'll do the job.

---

Downloaded - will load up tonight. Speccy reports the motherboard (orange for me ) and hard drives, but not chip. I get SO nervous having to go into BIOS everytime to look at the core temps. I do believe even looking at my BIOS causes bad things to happen, LOL ("Can XP come out to play ... Mrs. Heisenburg?").
.
.
.
.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

I'd suggest you go evidence-based on this!...

---

You're right, Exalted, I'm getting away from my principles! I will download some throttling-detection software as Agharta also recommends, then I'll know.
.
.
.
.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

This is 32-bit Windows XP? The 1GB video card might not have been such a good idea. There's no need for powerful graphics on a DAW, and that's a big chunk of the memory map. A £20 512MB card with passive cooling (who needs another noisy fan on a DAW?) could be a better choice.

---

Yup, 32-bit XP. I have 14 days (12 now) to return the graphics card. Interestingly/surprisingly in terms of performance, I noticed little (if any?) improvement in performance compared to my 128 MB graphics card, and Task Manager did not report a decrease in "Physical Memory Available", or "Commit Charge Limit" with the larger card. I wonder if I don't understand the Task Manager display as much as I think I do? I can save about 15 pounds by ordering a 512MB card on line.

Thanks again everyone!

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Some confusion is creeping in here.

Coretemp (and equivalents) actually monitor a value called Tj (junction temperature). This is read from internal diodes within the CPU.

For any given value of Tj, Tcase - the temperature at the IHS - will be considerably lower. As Pete Kaine rightly suggests, measurement of Tcase can only be made by milling a channel in the IHS and inserting a diode.

For a demonstration of this, follow the link below to HardOCP. They not only measure Tcase as described above, but also run Coretemp, allowing you to see the difference.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/17/thermalright_true_spirit_cpu_air _cooler_review/

Having said all that, I agree with Pete: time for a new PC

Sorry, Pete, I meant to add this to my post above but too much time has elapsed:

This page http://ark.intel.com/products/family/581/Intel-Pentium-4-Processor/desktop indicates (if I'm reading it correctly) the Prescott has several entries, with Tcase ranging from 66.6 to 73.5 degrees. Is the +/-105 degrees you mentioned something I can reference somewhere else? Maybe it will become more clear when I take a look at CoreTemp in my system ...

Thanks!

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Edited by alexis (18/06/12 12:07 PM)

Just spotted another misapprehension:

The memory on your graphics card has nothing to do with system memory, and is not part of the system memory map in any way. It's entirely seperate, and entirely under the control of the GPU.

512MB, 1GB - makes no odds.

System memory IS used for integrated solutions and low-end cards (ATI - oops, I mean AMD - and Nvidia both have proprietary names for this, but frankly I can't be bothered to look them up. I think Nvidia call it something like "Turbo Memory", neatly suggesting the opposite of the truth, ie, that it's faster!)

Quote alexis:

---

Sorry, Pete, I meant to add this to my post above but too much time has elapsed:

This page http://ark.intel.com/products/family/581/Intel-Pentium-4-Processor/desktop indicates (if I'm reading it correctly) the Prescott Tcase of 73.5 degrees. Is the +/-105 degrees you mentioned something I can reference somewhere else? Maybe it will become more clear when I take a look at CoreTemp in my system ...

Thanks!

---

See my post above the one quoted here.

It seems that you have installed an unnecessarily powerful graphics card. Can you put the old one back? It probably did everything your DAW required.

You've found some numbers for temperature and CPU usage. Forget the numbers. What's the actual practical problem? While running your DAW software, where are you hitting a limitation?

Some temperature/performance monitoring software is known to get in the way of audio applications. I suggest you run it only during a testing session.

Quote Johnsy:

---

Quote alexis:

---

Sorry, Pete, I meant to add this to my post above but too much time has elapsed:

This page http://ark.intel.com/products/family/581/Intel-Pentium-4-Processor/desktop indicates (if I'm reading it correctly) the Prescott Tcase of 73.5 degrees. Is the +/-105 degrees you mentioned something I can reference somewhere else? Maybe it will become more clear when I take a look at CoreTemp in my system ...

Thanks!

---

See my post above the one quoted here.

---

Johnsy - well understood, I think - reported Tcase values on ark.net will be lower than what CoreTemp and similar programs report.

How does one use the CoreTemp-reported data then - is a "conversion" to allow comparison to the (lower?) ark.intel-reported temps needed?

I'll bug off for now until I download CoreTemp - maybe the answer will be more obvious to me then (need ... more ... coffee...).

Thanks!

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

It seems that you have installed an unnecessarily powerful graphics card. Can you put the old one back? It probably did everything your DAW required.

---

Can do, and probably will - $70 saved there.

Quote Exalted Wombat:

---

You've found some numbers for temperature and CPU usage. Forget the numbers. What's the actual practical problem? While running your DAW software, where are you hitting a limitation?

---

Great question - this all started with audio dropouts with just a few audio tracks and 2 VSTi's. Also, I noticed herky/jerky graphics when Cubase 6.5 was "playing", and the white "trails" when I dragged a window around with Cubase open/playing. I've since done oodles of maintenance (defragg, registry cleanout, etc.), added more RAM, and done the infamous graphics card update.

After all that, I'm able to do much more, enough in fact for me to be reasonably happy until upgrade time - I can run 3-4 VSTi's simultaneously while playing 8 audio tracks AND recording.

So at this point, I just want to be sure I'm not doing something that will fry my computer if I keep using it like this, hence the concern about the temps. If it's "safe" - I'm OK for now.

Thanks -

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Quote alexis:

---

Until then, I have developed a workflow that compensates for Old Betsy's creakiness (basically by minimizing the graphics load, which allows me to work at half the CPU load), which I'm OK with in the meantime.

---

Fair statement. I just don't want to see you spend $100 not to fix a problem, and then have to spend a further $350 and waste the inital $100 in the process as the parts won't be usable in a new setup. As long as we're clear on that, it's all good

Quote alexis:

---

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

Oh and Tcase (hadn't realised they had started using that now on ask.intel) works out for that CPU to be about 105 degrees roughly.

---

Pete - would you please point me to the reference you found that information in for this chip ... I have looked and looked, but was never sure I was referencing the right chip. Thank you!

---

The reason is because you won't find it on there!

They appear to have replaced the old temp limit (that was in plain English) with the Tcase number which whilst far more accurate from a technical point of view, it doesn't help the average user!

Basic explanation of Tjunction temps are is the temputure of the chip after allowing for ambient tempture of the room. It's far more acurate from a techie point of view, as the enviroment tempture is the variable in testing.... but the is no automated test here that can judge that currently, hence of no real pratical use to anyone who isn't in the postion I mentioned up top involving a diode.

I know from personal experiance that the i7 920 has a 99 degree limit and then throttle. I remember the Prescott not throttling until somewhere around the hundred degree mark as well, and according to the Intel site CPU has a Tjunction around 5 degrees higher than the 920 chip, so I'm just working off that.

I do all my temp monitoring in Coretemp, so whilst each test can calibrate slightly differently I'm comfortable with saying 105 degrees in thory given the information on the page... and the fact all the mid - highend Intel Chips since the P4's have had maximums of around 80 - 100 degrees and that one is known for running hot.

Quote alexis:

---

Downloaded - will load up tonight. Speccy reports the motherboard (orange for me ) and hard drives, but not chip. I get SO nervous having to go into BIOS everytime to look at the core temps. I do believe even looking at my BIOS causes bad things to happen, LOL ("Can XP come out to play ... Mrs. Heisenburg?").

---

I don't know how accurate Speccy is for temps, if at all as I only use it for collecting hardware data on unknown machines, rather than system monitoring.

Coretemp/Realtemp/ADIA64/Openhardwaremonitor are my choices for those sorts of tasks, depending on just how much realtime info I need.

Quote Johnsy:

---

The memory on your graphics card has nothing to do with system memory, and is not part of the system memory map in any way. It's entirely seperate, and entirely under the control of the GPU.

---

XP used to shaddow some of the video card memory on fully expanded systems, which meant loosing some of the extra memory. I can't remember exactly how or why at this moment in time, just that it was annoying and fitting a card with less onboard memory would help reduce the how much was used up in windows.

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

From memory DTS was introduced with Core Duo so Prescott doesn’t have it. DTS isn’t perfect but it’s generally accurate especially as the temperature gets close to Tj Max which is the important end of the scale.
So CPU temp readings will be based on the diode on the motherboard I presume which are much more prone to inaccuracies.
I still recommend testing to see if your CPU is thermally throttling.

Quote Agharta:

---

I still recommend testing to see if your CPU is thermally throttling.

---

From memory I think Intel TAT should show it underload, but then I don't think Intel TAT supports anything prior to the Core2Duo... other than that, whilst i'm sure the is stuff out there, I can't recall anything right now.

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

Quote Agharta:

---

I still recommend testing to see if your CPU is thermally throttling.

---

From memory I think Intel TAT should show it underload, but then I don't think Intel TAT supports anything prior to the Core2Duo... other than that, whilst i'm sure the is stuff out there, I can't recall anything right now.

---

RMClock should work under XP: http://cpu.rightmark.org/download.shtml

Quote Agharta:

---

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

Quote Agharta:

---

I still recommend testing to see if your CPU is thermally throttling.

---

From memory I think Intel TAT should show it underload, but then I don't think Intel TAT supports anything prior to the Core2Duo... other than that, whilst i'm sure the is stuff out there, I can't recall anything right now.

---

RMClock should work under XP: http://cpu.rightmark.org/download.shtml

---

Brief report here - rmclock says I am throttling. More to come. Thanks.

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

Quote Johnsy:

---

The memory on your graphics card has nothing to do with system memory, and is not part of the system memory map in any way. It's entirely seperate, and entirely under the control of the GPU.

---

XP used to shaddow some of the video card memory on fully expanded systems, which meant loosing some of the extra memory. I can't remember exactly how or why at this moment in time, just that it was annoying and fitting a card with less onboard memory would help reduce the how much was used up in windows.

---

I'm afraid not.

Video RAM shadowing refers to the copying of video bios code stored in relatively slow ROM into RAM, from which it would run more quickly. Once the code is mapped into system RAM, the ROM is disabled. If you saw differences in the amount of system RAM used,it simply reflected the size of the bios code.

Quote Johnsy:

---

Quote Pete Kaine:

---

Quote Johnsy:

---

The memory on your graphics card has nothing to do with system memory, and is not part of the system memory map in any way. It's entirely seperate, and entirely under the control of the GPU.

---

XP used to shaddow some of the video card memory on fully expanded systems, which meant loosing some of the extra memory. I can't remember exactly how or why at this moment in time, just that it was annoying and fitting a card with less onboard memory would help reduce the how much was used up in windows.

---

I'm afraid not.

Video RAM shadowing refers to the copying of video bios code stored in relatively slow ROM into RAM, from which it would run more quickly. Once the code is mapped into system RAM, the ROM is disabled. If you saw differences in the amount of system RAM used,it simply reflected the size of the bios code.

---

Yeah, I knew it was somthing do with that but its coming upto half a decade now since I've looked at anything to do with XP and gfx so excuse the rustiness. Not quite sure how a bios used to wipe out close to half a gig of allocatable memory through...

*edit*

In fact in the case of loosing the best part of half a gig it was always SLI'd cards so that kinda makes sense now I think back if it was trying to shadow both cards bioses.

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

Hi -

In trying to understand what is and is not possible with my sytem (as many of you have been helping me do - thank you!), I noticed that a project that played with less than 50% CPU load on the 17th maxes out the CPU last night and this morning (Cubase 6.5). It throttles now per RMClock, I didn't have that program loaded up on the 17th. I even restored my system back to what it was on the 17th, but that didn't change things - still the same project that ran fine then can't now.

Is there anything in the dim recesses of you expert's XP memory banks about why that might happen?

Thanks much once again -

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Have you installed any plugin's since the 17th or are the any demo plugs now gone over the testing time period. I've had a few demos in the past which have then expired and gone on to do crazy things with my processor load.

--------------------
ScanProAudio & 3XS Audio Systems
ScanProAudio Blog

No new plug-ins, but interestingly UAD-1 has yelled at me in the past few days.

Is there a way I can disengage it temporarily without having to take the PCI card out? I don't see anything in task manager that looks like it's UAD-1 related, and my .CMD index doesn't have that nice command that lets me check them one-by-one.

I'll run the next without any UAD-1's loaded up in the project, that at least will get me started.

Thanks -

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1

Quote alexis:

---

No new plug-ins, but interestingly UAD-1 has yelled at me in the past few days.

---

Could you clarify this statement?

Quote alexis:

---

Is there a way I can disengage it temporarily without having to take the PCI card out? I don't see anything in task manager that looks like it's UAD-1 related.

---

You need Device Manager (Start -> Control Panel -> System) rather than Task Manager here.

Might I suggest that you consider starting a new thread for this. We seem to be a long way from your original post here.

Quote Johnsy:

---

Quote alexis:

---

No new plug-ins, but interestingly UAD-1 has yelled at me in the past few days.

---

Could you clarify this statement?

Quote alexis:

---

Is there a way I can disengage it temporarily without having to take the PCI card out? I don't see anything in task manager that looks like it's UAD-1 related.

---

You need Device Manager (Start -> Control Panel -> System) rather than Task Manager here.

Might I suggest that you consider starting a new thread for this. We seem to be a long way from your original post here.

---

Thank you Johnsy, I will disable the UAD-1 temporarily and see.

In response to your question for clarification about the UAD-1 message: When I tried the 3GB switch without USERVA=abcd the UAD-1 said it couldn't run for memory, and interestingly that my "trial" had run out (I've been using them for 5 years+!). When I went back to normal Windows boot up, or added userva, they worked just fine.

Re: new thread - I wasn't sure whether to start one or not ... I'm learning it seems two things a day about my old XP system, and I didn't want to flood the board with a new thread for every set of questions. Of course you're right though, the alternative (as here) makes the title of any given thread incomplete at best.

I appreciate yours and everyone's help - thank you!

--------------------
Alexis -Cubase 6.5.0/SX3.1.1.944, XP SP2, 4GB RAM (1GB not accessible, but used just to balance the computer so it doesn't tip over); Delta 66 in Omni i/O Studio; Motif8; UAD-1