[ardour-users] Athlon 64-X2 - slightly different question than the FAQ

Kevin Cosgrove kevinc at doink.com
Mon Feb 20 00:49:24 PST 2006

I read this in the jackit-devel list archives:


I have an Athlon 64-X2 machine, which I'd intended to use at the
main machine in my studio.  I also have a Celeron machine, which
is still in use, having started out as my proof-of-concept for
a Linux studio box.  One person commented that with their 64-X2
machine, that a larger period size, 256 versus 128, seems better.
This is generally true for avoiding xruns.

I'm wondering, is an even larger period size 1K or 2K going
to make a 64-X2 machine usable.  I primarily use ardour,
rosegarden4, and audacity for my audio work.  What factors impact
the timing problem that I might exploit to minimize it?  I'm
not too adverse to trying newer versions of a kernel and jack.
Right now I'm running kernel 2.6.12 jackit 0.100.1.  I remember
something about there being a pervasive udev change starting in
the 2.6.15 kernel.  I'd like to stay under that rev., if that's

Related to this is that I'd like to retire my 200MHz Pentium
I machine in our office - 10 years old this month.  Would you
recommend avoiding the 64-X2 machine for now with my audio work
(OK, so it's play)?  If so, then I'll keep using the Celeron for
music, and move the 64-X2 into the office.  We'll be able to
compose emails faster than anyone on the block; sigh.  It sounds
like I really just need to be patient and let the kernel & jack
development teams sort this all out.  But, if I can make some
adjustments and get useful results, then I'd move that direction.


P.S.:	If you think I should subscribe to jackit-devel and take
	my question there, then I'll do that.


More information about the Ardour-Users mailing list