Are you sure it's 64 bit that is actually making an improvement. If the distros are the same then this maybe a fair comparison, however if they are different distros being compared I doubt that the performance difference is a result of 64 bit versus 32 bit. I have run both and not been able to notice any substantial difference with almost identical Gentoo installs. Even on a system with 4GB of RAM using highmem, there is no perceivable difference. My installs are tuned for audio work, I haven't had issues with latency for a number of years now.. On Fri Dec 18 15:50 , "Jonathan E. Brickman" sent: >Well. No change in Jack behavior with LXDE, no change from total >removal of Pulse. Now I really wonder. 64-bit has definitely upped my >GUI speed, often tripled my WWW speed -- but it has either not touched >audio (synth and Jack) performance and latency, or has hurt it >slightly! Anyone seen the same thing? > >J.E.B. > >>>> Should CONFIG_HPET_EMULATE_RTC be set to n on a realtime kernel? Is >>>> there something else which might invalidate CONFIG_HPET=y ? >>>> >>>> >>> the RTC device is unrelated to HPET. your kernel can have HPET support >>> but if your h/w doesn't, you don't get /dev/hpet. My motherboard, for >>> example, does not have an HPET device. >>> >>> >> That is interesting. I am interested principally because I'm seeing >> xruns and am hunting for causes, and that stood out. >> >> Checked the BIOS; HPET is there, already turned on. Running the >> vanilla-install Debian Testing (AMD64) kernel, package >> "linux-image-2.6.30-2-amd64" version 2.6.30-8, I do have a /dev/hpet. >> Running any of six or seven slightly different but very clean rtlinux >> builds (vanilla kernel source of 2.6.31.6, plus rtlinux >> patch-2.6.31.6-rt19.bz2), .config options verified and reverified very >> carefully, I don't have a /dev/hpet. Anything I should check? Do you >> think I should get on a kernel dev list? >> >> But I understand now that hpet may have little or nothing to do with the >> xrun problem. At least part of the symptomatology, is that Pulse >> talking to Jack on 64-bit Debian Testing / Gnome with GUI sound events >> off, seems to eat a whole lot more of Jack's DSP capacity than the same >> combination on 32-bit / LXDE. On 32-bit, Pulse at idle ate zero CPU; >> now on 64-bit, Pulse at idle is eating about 2%. I'm wondering right >> this minute if Gnome keeps its default sound open, delivering full-bore >> (albeit silent) audio even when it's told not to do so. >> >> I suppose I'll try LXDE. But any suggestions will be very much appreciated. >> >> J.E.B. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-audio-user mailing list >> Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user >> > >_______________________________________________ >Linux-audio-user mailing list >Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user >) _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
