DAW: OS Alter Results?

[rockerbug17]

Hello. I am comparing my current computer with one I am thinking of purchasing. I use my computer as a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) but want to move into a more mobile realm using a laptop.

Here is my current set up.

Hp m7160n Media Center PC with XP Media Center

Pentium D 2.8Ghz
1.0GB RAM
250GB Hard Drive @ 7200RPMs

And the Laptop I am thinking of purchasing:

Hp 6910P Business Laptop with XP Professional

Pentium Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz (T8300)
2.0GB RAM
120GB Hard Drive @ 5400RPMs

These three items seem to be the most important factors in a DAW, as best I can determine. I have compared my Performance Test results with the baseline provided from PassMark and am currently confused.

I initially compared my computer to a similar laptop with a Core2Duo 2.4 (T8300) with Vista. I then noticed it was Vista and found another baseline with XP close to the specs above. That laptop was had a Core2Duo 2.4 (T7700) with XP.

Basically, the T8300 laptop saw a PassMark Rating of 5.4% increase, while the T7700 laptop saw a PassMark Rating of 42.8% increase. I wonder now which comparison is more accurate given the specs of the laptop I was trying to match and if the OS is the main reason for the difference. I've heard Vista compared to XP as roughly taking twice the computing power to operate.

I've only listed what I feel is important to a DAW. If anymore information is needed I will gladly provide it. Who knows, maybe some fellow sound engineers will reply.

Thank you.

[David (PassMark)]

If you are look at the overall PassMark rating, then you need to look at more than just the CPU. For example the machine with the faster CPU might have had a slower video card, or hard disk.

If you are just interested in the CPU then just look at the "CPU mark" values.

Note that desktops machine are on average significantly faster and cheaper than laptops.

I've heard Vista compared to XP as roughly taking twice the computing power to operate

If you have enough RAM (2GB is OK), a reasonable video card, and fully patch Vista, then there isn't much performance difference. The silly UAC (user acount control) system in Vista is more of a problem for Vista than the performance in my opinion. Windows 7 looks better in both areas however.

[rockerbug17]

I see. So, if I'm interested in specifics, CPU, RAM and Hard Drive, I should look at CPU Mark, Memory Mark and Disk Mark? And in just those fields I find a 122%, 120% and a -41.5% change from my current desktop?

I'm mostly interested in the CPU's 122% increase. The specific laptop I'm looking at has 2GB loaded, not the 4GB in my baseline laptop. But I can add those 2 extra GBs so that's no biggie. Also, the decrease of 41.5% in the hard drive I'm guessing is due to the difference in RPMs. I have an external hard drive I would use though, and it is a 7200RPM.

The Hp 6910P Business Laptop I mentioned in my first post is beginning to look much more powerful than my current desktop. I've been using my desktop as a DAW for several years now with no problems. So, I'm guessing the Hp 6910P Business Laptop have would not have any problems either. Do you think this is a safe assumption based on the figures Performance Test has provided?

[David (PassMark)]

The amount of RAM doesn't really have much impact on CPU performance. But RAM is cheap and if you are editing huge files, 4GB is better than 2GB.

Laptop hard drives are slow, the 5400 RPM drives are in the process of being replaced by 7200 RPM drives of SSD drives. External (USB connected) drives are also poor compared to SATA internal drives. That 120MB, 5400 RPM drive sounds small, old and slow.