Does Cubase SX require more computer power than VST 32?
 

I'm currently running cubase vst 32 under windows 98 which works pretty well. Now I've got the chance to buy some second hand software, including windows xp and cubase SX.
Does anyone have a cue about how much more computer this combination will require? Is there a big difference? Both windows xp and cubase sx seemes to have an better architecture and use computer power more effective though. But yes they are more advanced and bigger programs...

(I've tried the steinberg forum but can't find anything about this topic)

Minimum requirements: PC

*Pentium III 500 MHz, 256 MB RAM
*Windows 2000, Windows XP
*USB Port required
*Supports ASIO 2 spec for high end multi channel audio cards
*Supports Windows MME Spec for standard sound cards

The rule of thumb is this: The faster your computer the more simultaneous tracks you can run, and the more plug-ins you can use. The more RAM you have, the better aswell.

SX is a BIG improvement over VST32.......you will love it.

Cheers,

Jason

Thanks. But I already knew that. Maybe I'll have to specify my question a bit...

Will I be able to run as many audiotracks and inserteffects under xp and cubase sx on the same computer? Or will the programs stell a lot of extra computer power, more than win 98 and cubase vst?
I wont upgrade if I'm only able to use for example half as many tracks and effects due to hardware limitations.

Well....Im guessing that the answer is yes, XP and SX combined will probably use up more resources than Win98/VST32..... But I have heard that XP is a far more stable environment than 98, and as I said before, SX is just awesome. If you lose some track count/plug-ins.....it is a small compromise. You will be working far more efficiently and effectively. SX has alot more to offer. And, if you stick to ONLY running audio related software and data (ie NOT internet/word processing/movie making etc..) then you will have a capable system.

Im not much of a pro computer guy, but I think I am correct in my assumptions.....Have fun!

Jase

Thanks again! I'm currently trying out xp and sx and so far I it works very well! There dont seemes to be a problem yet with how many tracks i can use, neither any greater problems with plugins either.

Cubase SX should work at the same level as VST on your PC. They both essentially perform the same operations in terms of recording and playback of the tracks.

SX has a much better user interface, appearance and features and this will just mean that you will require more storage space on your PC for SX than VST.

Interesting faq... Sx takes a lot more time to load though, I've just tried. But it don't seemes to require much more capacity of the processor and RAM.

SX1 takes a lot longer to load as it runs checks on every plug-in to test latency allowing it to compensate for the plugins latency. This is the cause of the delay.

On SX2 however, the first time a plug is added to the system it runs this test and then stores the results and only retests when a new plug is added to the system. This results in a much faster load time for SX2.

On my system with about 60 plug-ins (all legit!) SX2 loads in about 6 or 7 seconds!

That sounds amazing! I must ask, what computer do you use? I'm expecting a Pentium 4 2,5 Ghz with 756 MB RAM to arrive next week. Hope that will do... My currently load time is about 40 seconds :D

I would highly recommend upgrading your RAM from 756 to minimum 1.5-2.0 GHZ......And also run two hard drives.....one for your OS and apps, and the other for your audio.

The amount of RAM you have will have a big impact on the speed that calculations are made.

Cheers,

Jase