You are here

Log in or register to post comments
satkinsn
satkinsn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: Aug 19 2008 - 4:23am
MediaMonkey vs. Foobar

My sense is that Foobar is the preferred player for Windows-based systems, but MediaMonkey has fans as well.

Can I get some opinions on each, especially in the area of system resources used? I'm planning on running one of them on an XP Intel Atom platform, so I need to be careful about how much of a memory footprint is involved.

Thanks,

Scott A.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 4 days ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: MediaMonkey vs. Foobar

MediaMonkey uses a great deal more memory than Foobar. Foobar is very lean.

scottgardner
scottgardner's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Apr 11 2008 - 11:35pm
Re: MediaMonkey vs. Foobar

Three Key reasons I prefer Foobar:

1. ASIO
2. VST
3. DTS

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading