Cubase 64bit vs 32bit

and then, what’s your point??? There are still horses out there why do you use the car to move?

What do you mean what’s my point? I was addressing something you said.

Hi All,

Although my OS is 64 bit, I’m still running my programs as 32 bit. Everyone who posted here running at 64 bit seems to love it, but no one really specified what they find so much better about it. Would somebody be kind enough to tell me what they prefer so much about running everything at 64 bit? (besides access to greater ram, which I already have since my OS is 64 bit)

Thanks in advance!

Ray

More stability

I dont see how the 64-bit vers is more stable than the 32-bit vers. If anything, it’s probably the other way around. I very rarely get a crash in 64-bit, but prior to using 64-bit, I never had a crash. And there is something that the 64-bit vers has that the 32-bit vers does not, which can cause some instability - the bridge.

But I do agree the RAM is the biggest thing of all.

Cheers.

It is more stable because you don’t hit the application RAM limit for a 32 bit process.

I wouldn’t say my 64bit is any more stable than 32bit was, still bombs out occasionally.

Sometimes I used to hit RAM limits and it’s good not to have those but they never really stopped me working.

I actually updated because most of the manufacturers I use had gone 64bit and were stopping support for 32bit, but it took me 18 months to get my 64bit DAW fully up to speed and integrated into my studio, so I didn’t rush it! Actually some of that cross-over time was due to having other projects in 32bit Cb6 which I wanted to finish in the Cb6 world…

Mike.

RAM limits, particularly when using a 32 bit OS are not graceful happenings, often they can cause the audio driver to freeze operation and thus put out large bursts of noise.

Oddly enough, I ran 4GB ram on a Mac system, Cubase 6, fairly big projects, Trilian, NeoSoul keys, Halion… really did not have a lot of problems, occasional would lose power and audio would start to screech, but it held itself together pretty good, considering Cubase is not known to be efficient on MacOS, it may not be as powerful, but it can run on close to nothing.

Upgraded 64 bit, C7… only a short time so far, but on a Mac there are no such performance increases. I can not say “Oh so glad I’m 64 bit!!!” It is not like that over here, it feels a little good to be up to date, but there is no wow factor from quadrupling the memory Cubase uses. Still load up DC8C, anything with oversampling, still 50% ASIO is used, just like 4GB ram 32 bit.

Overwhelmingly, the main advantage of x64 systems is the potential to have Lots of available RAM, period. I haven’t noticed any other benefit, CPU usage or any otherwise.


Mauri.

This is W7 info, but it might help to get an idea.

This is the key. Cubase 7 is huge once loaded, leaving very few memory for the plugins. Also, when loading or releasing plugins there are peaks of memory consumption that may go beyond the limit and break the application.

“Although my OS is 64 bit, I’m still running my programs as 32 bit… (besides access to greater ram, which I already have since my OS is 64 bit)”

I’m not sure this is an entirely accurate statement?

64 bit here (v6.5.3), no problems, good times. No 32 bit plugs though.

Might be a good point. But how often do you hit the application RAM limit for a 32 bit process?

I believe that it is accurate - before 64 bit plugins were widely available, a lot of folks in these forums took the route of a 64 bit OS but installing Cubase/Nuendo 32 bit so as to have both the ram and all the plugins. As for myself, all of my 6GB of ram shows up under Windows 7 - but I couldn’t tell you whether the program is really accessing all of it since I don’t use a lot of virtual instruments and so I don’t think that I really tax it all that much. However I don’t really have many hiccups to speak of and things seem to run quite smoothly.

Depends of the projects involved. I remember having a lot of problems with XP : the RAM management of it was crippled to a point where Cubase was crashing as soon as there was 1.4-1.5 Gb used. With Windows 7, things are better but, as I purchased BFD2 (ten months ago) which uses several Gb only for loading a complete kit, I decided to use Cubase 64 since : didn’t have the choice, actually.

I even extended the RAM installed from 8 to 16 Gb in the process, just to avoid any problem. BFD2 is well known for being a RAM hog, but still : I no longer imagine working with Cubase in its 32 bits format again.

Huh - that’s odd. Never had a problem with XP. When I had 2 GB RAM, I used to push it to where usage in the the TM was reading 1.95. Never a problem. Then, when I had 4 GB RAM, I used the 3 GB switch, and pushed my projects to 2.9 GB. Never a problem.

Cheers.

Are you sure of this ? Because the RAM management with XP was well known for being a mess. As an example, I don’t remember what was its name, but even a mathematical software editor was warning all XP users about this limitation around 1.5 Gb of use with its main product which was using big tables of data, and it was also recommending the /3Gb switch at this time. I also used this switch and it allowed me 1.7-1.8 Gb free, no better. Far from ideal, even 3 years ago…

“I believe that it is accurate - before 64 bit plugins were widely available, a lot of folks in these forums took the route of a 64 bit OS but installing Cubase/Nuendo 32 bit so as to have both the ram and all the plugins. As for myself, all of my 6GB of ram shows up under Windows 7 - but I couldn’t tell you whether the program is really accessing all of it since I don’t use a lot of virtual instruments and so I don’t think that I really tax it all that much. However I don’t really have many hiccups to speak of and things seem to run quite smoothly.”

Hmmm, I was always under the impression that a 32-bit app would never access the RAM beyond 4Gb regardless of the OS (of course, if your OS was 64-bit and so were any other apps, at least it wouldn’t be competing for space as much), otherwise what would be the purpose of a 64-bit app?

But hey, as long as it works for you right?

Yes, I am sure of this.

–edit–

As I re-read everything, let me add something that I might not have made clear - it wasn’t 2.9 GB all in the project. I used jbridge to take advantage of the extra RAM. So, the project by itself was about 1.5 GB, and the rest (about 1.4 GB) was loaded into jbridge.

But still - never any issues with stability.