Protel DXP or Protel 99SE

[ME]

I hesitate to install DXP because of the crazy recommand hardware requirement: 1.4GHz CPU, 64MB Video Card, 512MB System Memory
My computer is too old to meet it.

Don't worry too much about the requirements. I have installed DXP on my laptop with Windows XP, 1 GHz Pentium III, 384 MB RAM, Intel onboard video chip which uses shared memory (uses some of the 384 MB for video chip). This solution works ok.
Some more RAM would be nice though, to avoid swapping to harddrive when autorouting.

 

[syzdq]

My PC is P4 1.6G,512M DDR266,64M AGP 4X,but PROTEL DXP SP2 is more slowly than PROTEL99SE SP6 in PCB design,especially at ZOOM IN an OUT.
So I still use 99SE.

 

[Asxetos]

Same here. DXP is a little slower. I still use 99SE. Maybe it will improve with future service packs.

 

[wolf69]

DXP is better (with ServicePack2).
It has new graphical features like route highligting when routing a net and some other...
And it has no more the bug that disallow you from rotate component when moving it... Only this is sufficient.
Anyway is a little slower...
Bye ALL

 

[Zenner]

On the p4 @2,4GHz / 512Mb , it works fine.

 

[jupitorcuu]

Protel DXP is a new version so User need some time to accept Integret Library,Import Protel99SE 's design into DXP is not seamlessly when you use a single schematic or PCB not a project

 

[leonqin]

Is it stable enough?
because Protel99SE is designed with Delphi(or C++ Builder),It was quite unstable.

 

[jupitorcuu]

I think DXP is as stable as 99SE.

 

[richmon74]

i think this is the continuetion of this discussion
**broken link removed**