I run a dell laptop - Inspiron8600: centrino 1.7, 1gig ram, 60gig hdd

had no worries whatsoever running this software, i can put the usb-buffer to its minimum size and it still works fine, but since I can't feel the difference in response time i keep it a bit above the minimum for safety.

btw i don't think centrino is any cheaper than p4, it just uses less power. i've read that future desktop chips will be based on centrino

thanks!!.....another question, is this RAM hungry software?....can I get away with 512 ram? or will it be scetchy?

any thoughts people?

any other dell model numbers that work well?

ps (im looking to spend between 900 and 1500 tops!)

another question (for Rane in particuliar)...

why aren't any detailed computer requirements...(ie min sys requirements and reccomended system requirements for this product?

It seems some users are having great luck with slightly older systems as well....mabye a short article on the website might be helpful!

Scratch LIVE is not particularly hungry for RAM, 512 would be fine IMO, what it really likes is lots of CPU cycles. If at all possible get the most powerful cpu you can, bear in mind that clock speed and power are NOT the same thing.

As for the minimum spec, that's all over the avaiable literature...

Hi frankie,

512mb RAM are fine. DON´T buy a Celeron-Machine, the reduced internal cache is no good idea for audio-applications.
If you buy some pc-laptop have a look at some hardware-reviews/benchmarks. Have a closer look on bus-transfer-rates, usb/firewire-benchmarks if you plan to play from external HDs like I do and chipset-stability.
I think an older but well tested and stable chipset is always the better choice then using the newest stuff where you can´t find any reviews/benchmarks yet.

Mart

Thanks for the info...
does anyone reccomend a particuliar dell or hpo laptop in particuliar?....

would a p4 2.2 be fine ? or do i need to get in the 2.8 area to play it safe?

honestly you won't really see a difference between a 2.2 and a 2.8 in my opinion, but there is not muc of a price difference these days either. So why not just go with the 2.8. :) The more juice the better!

Every prospective user will probably want to know this for their system, but what kind of latency figure can I expect for my:

G4 PowerBook 1.33Ghz, 768mb RAM, latest OSX.

I'm running MsPinky at the moment and I have no problems running it at a latency setting of 128 samples (about 3ms). guess this figure has to be doubled to account for both input and output latency, but either way I can't feel it.

Well there's no guarantees even with the same hardware these days, but I'm pretty sure there's guys with similar spec as you getting very low latency with Scratch LIVE.

lo-fi, the smallest buffer size you can run on that machine is 2ms = 88 or 89 samples. The total latency of the system (from when you move the record to when the pitch of the output changes) for that buffer size is 8ms. The extra latency comes from fixed delays in transporting the data across the USB bus, DMA'ing in and out of memory etc.

Steve, the buffer size which you can adjust in SSL's setup, whats the unit of it? Number of buffers of a fixed size, or simply ms?

It is in USB frames, which are nominally 1 ms each.

Thanks for the info. So basically SSL has at least a latency of 6ms, independent from the hardware specs (cpu, what kind of ram, HD etc.)?

7ms is the minimum.

Steve, my question on another post

scratchlive.net