> > If you kept upping the buffer where did you start, I mean how low > > can you go. I'm just curious because from what I gather people > > can't really get below 128 except if you work with very basic > > setup. That's how it is for me, 64 is possible but not for long. > > On the other hand I can run loads of VWs without having to go over > > the 128 buffer which I can easily work with. > > I started at 64 which I admit is too low for a whole lot of things. > But I cannot run even one instance of VW at 256 without lots of > popping and clicking which IMO is quite unacceptable performance. > > VW I or II. I find that VW is actually pretty efficient. Haven't tried VW2, but if you had the FAT enabled, I could see where it wouldn't run on your machine at 256. FAT is very processor intensive. bd