I'm currently running on:

RAM: 256mb
Speed: PIII, 933Mhhz
Sound card: some integrated Intel thingy
OS: Windows 2000 Pro


So anyways, I'm gonna be doing some upgrading, but just so I can run FruityLoops better. Can you guys maybe post what you think would be some good uprades?:)

Obviously, I'm gonna need a good audio card, so if you could maybe recomend a good one of those that would be awesome.

Previous comp was a 667mhz celeron 2 /w 128mb of ram. I frequently got so much static that I couldn't make out any sound. I had to limit myself to using one or two effects and very few instruments at one time. Now my new comp is a 2400+ 1.8ghz AMD athlon /w 512mb of ram. I still occasionally get bits of static when my ressources are low and the song is exceptionally complex (as in, 50+ instruments at one time, each with four effect channels).

Your sound card won'd change much. Fruity mostly depends on your CPU.

I try to recommend at least 512mb ram for doing music. This will reduce buffer under runs as you'll be able to increase sample rate/size dramatically over 256 mb ram. The more ram, the better.

Soundcard is also a big factor, although not so much until you get into more advanced recording things (external hardware dealing with midi latency, external samplers throwing large audio files around quickly etc). Still, though, on a low quality soundcard, you're going to get alot of buffer underruns (static/clicking/pops) when using alot of samples simply because your card isn't built to allow such a quick transfer of audio.

Also, simply making sure that your settings are configured correctly (again, dealing with the sample size under the audio settings) will go a long way in increasing performance.

Your processor is ok, but a 1.5ghz will suit you much better. I don't know what your budget is, though.

As far as soundcards are concerned, it really depends on what you need personally. Do you have external hardware at all? Do you require 5.1 or any other specifications?

What do you really use fruity for? If I get a better idea of exactly you're doing, then it'll be easier to help you out with specifics

To be quite honest, for this kinda thing, Intel would probably do you better. AMD will just be a lot easier on the wallet.

I've spoken with quite a few professional producers, and been in quite a few studios and most are using AMD actually. I'm not sure on why at all, though. I'm definetley not a pc hardware guy, I just make music

I don't see why. I don't think FL doesn't use anything particularly optimised for the P4.

A "quick" Athlon (2400-2500 and higher) would be more than enough for FL. I've got some songs done with 10-11 tracks, plenty of effects, 200 megs of samples loaded, and everything runs great in real-time. An Athlon XP 2500 costs next to nothing. I used to track on a P3-750 until last May, and even THAT wasn't so bad. Save some money on the CPU and get plenty of RAM, you'll need it when you want to load up a drumkit alongside all your other samples.

I personally do all my music on a amd 1800+ with 512 mb of ram. I can have between 10&20 channels running each with 1-4 effects vsts on them max. After that, though, you just bounce your audio down and clear up more processor cycles and memory.

Another efficient way to work around memory issues is to leave all your channels plain (no fx) and then go through bouncing each channel down then do all your mastering afterwords. This could easily allow another 5+ channels of audio if you needed them.

I just said that because Intel is renowned to work oh-so-much better on non-gaming non-server applications.