SCSI, Anyone?

tolerpro wrote on 8/3/1999, 2:06 AM
I've noticed that most of the users who comment on their
hardware seem to be running Windows 9x with IDE hard
drives. I'd be interested if anyone is using Windows NT
with NTFS on a wide/ultra SCSI drive and what sort of Vegas
performance they're seeing.

I'm putting together a PIII 600mHz system with an ultra2
Seagate Cheetah. When all the parts arrive, I'll stick it
together, load up Vegas and let you know what I find...

Comments

alex wrote on 8/3/1999, 9:01 AM
I have PII 400 256 MB RAM ADAPTEC 2940U2W and 9.1 GB Cheetah
10000 rpm, Windows 98, Sound Cards: Sound Blaster compatible
and Creamware Pulsar.

Windows 98 has been tuned based on creamware specs, all caching
is off, there are instructions on Creamware web site:
http://www.creamware.de/Seiten/support/The_Basics.html



I used Vegas for playback of 12 stereo tracks and HD is less utilized
than in Cubase VST or n-track ( I can tell that disk is much less
noisy ). I have not seen any problems with this, however if I play
video and let's say 2 aidio tracks s very short pause will be appier
every 3 to 4 seconds.


I like Vegas as a product, however I do not like the price $700.00
is too much.


Alex


Brian Woodard wrote:
>>I've noticed that most of the users who comment on their
>>hardware seem to be running Windows 9x with IDE hard
>>drives. I'd be interested if anyone is using Windows NT
>>with NTFS on a wide/ultra SCSI drive and what sort of Vegas
>>performance they're seeing.
>>
>>I'm putting together a PIII 600mHz system with an ultra2
>>Seagate Cheetah. When all the parts arrive, I'll stick it
>>together, load up Vegas and let you know what I find...
>>
tolerpro wrote on 8/3/1999, 11:26 AM
Alex,

It's not surprising that video puts a significant load on the
system. Even with a good codec you can probably figure smooth video
playback will cost you about 8 tracks worth of bandwidth. Poorer
codecs make this even worse. I would be all for playing video on
another machine and locking Vegas to that source. Using a hardware
MPEG codec for playback would be a tolerable second choice.

The price (actually around $600 retail) may be steep but it's a
heckuva lot less than ProTools!

Thanks for the feedback.

Brian

---

Aleksandar Jovanov wrote:
>>I have PII 400 256 MB RAM ADAPTEC 2940U2W and 9.1 GB Cheetah
>>10000 rpm, Windows 98, Sound Cards: Sound Blaster compatible
>>and Creamware Pulsar.
>>
>>Windows 98 has been tuned based on creamware specs, all caching
>>is off, there are instructions on Creamware web site:
>>http://www.creamware.de/Seiten/support/The_Basics.html
>>
>>
>>
>>I used Vegas for playback of 12 stereo tracks and HD is less
utilized
>>than in Cubase VST or n-track ( I can tell that disk is much less
>>noisy ). I have not seen any problems with this, however if I play
>>video and let's say 2 aidio tracks s very short pause will be appier
>>every 3 to 4 seconds.
>>
>>
>>I like Vegas as a product, however I do not like the price $700.00
>>is too much.
>>
>>
>>Alex
mastering wrote on 8/3/1999, 2:29 PM
Hello,

I'm running Vegas Beta 3 on a Win 2000 machine with 2 400Mhz PII
chips in it. I've got three Ultra2Wide SCSI discs (7200 RPM). Off
of one disc, Vegas can play 46 mono tracks. This is great compared
to Cakewalk's 34 and Samplitude's 24-26. I'm using FAT32 on the
audio discs, though. Vegas plays these tracks with a 25% CPU usage.
This leaves plenty for EQ, comps, and all sorts of FX in the mixer.

Later,

Ty Christensen
Master Mind Productions
www.mastermindpro.com
(425) 836-0327

Brian Woodard wrote:
>>I've noticed that most of the users who comment on their
>>hardware seem to be running Windows 9x with IDE hard
>>drives. I'd be interested if anyone is using Windows NT
>>with NTFS on a wide/ultra SCSI drive and what sort of Vegas
>>performance they're seeing.
>>
>>I'm putting together a PIII 600mHz system with an ultra2
>>Seagate Cheetah. When all the parts arrive, I'll stick it
>>together, load up Vegas and let you know what I find...
>>
tolerpro wrote on 8/3/1999, 4:19 PM
Ty,

Thanks! This is very reassuring.

I don't think there is an appreciable difference in performance
between FAT32 and NTFS, however, I find NTFS to have better integrity
over the long haul.

What SCSI controller are you using?

Thanks again!

Brian

---

Ty Christensen wrote:
>>Hello,
>>
>>I'm running Vegas Beta 3 on a Win 2000 machine with 2 400Mhz PII
>>chips in it. I've got three Ultra2Wide SCSI discs (7200 RPM). Off
>>of one disc, Vegas can play 46 mono tracks. This is great compared
>>to Cakewalk's 34 and Samplitude's 24-26. I'm using FAT32 on the
>>audio discs, though. Vegas plays these tracks with a 25% CPU
usage.
>>This leaves plenty for EQ, comps, and all sorts of FX in the mixer.
>>
>>Later,
>>
>>Ty Christensen
>>Master Mind Productions
>>www.mastermindpro.com
>>(425) 836-0327