When I used Tri-X a lot, it was using it the classic zone system way explained in "The Negative". For me, the 320 variety ended up being shot at EI 200 in D-76 1:1 at 72F (seemed to be my average water temperature at the time of the testing, so I stuck with it) in both 4x5 and 120/220. I used a time-temp chart if the water was not 72F. I used the combo for everything black and white, pretty much, except sometimes I used FP4 when I wanted its different contrast and color response characteristics. (Strangely enough, it also tested as an EI 200 film for me, so Tri-X had no real speed advantage - just a malleability advantage and less contrast.) For Tri-X 400, it was in 135 format, so I would be hand held 99.9% of the time, often without a meter, and often with an incident meter rather than a spot meter. Thus, I used EIs 125, 250, 500, 1000, etc. to conveniently match shutter speeds (or 100, 200, 500, 1000 for the Leica or similar cameras with the old shutter speeds). I considered 250 normal for a normal contrast situation. I would rerate and alter development depending on contrast, though it was never tested in a detailed manner like with the 320 film. This was also in D-76 1:1 used at ambient temperature.
Then I started messing around with HC-110 and HP5. My school had HC-110 for free, and my box of photo paper had come with three rolls of HP5. I found HP5 a better film for most of my pix, though Tri-X certainly has its unique look that is great for some things. Tri-X opens up the shadows and lightens plants and skies slightly more than HP5. So, I ended up retesting HP5, FP4, Pan F, and Delta 3200, all in Ilfotec HC, and that is where I have been for a few years now. I still shoot Tri-X when I want a 220 b/w film or when I want that Tri-X look. I use D-76 and all my times from before, but do a quick combined EI/normal development test for every new batch that I get. After everything, I highly prefer the HC to D-76. It is extremely convenient (though D-76 is a bit cheaper if used to its full capacity - but I used it diluted one shot), and most of all, more consistent and versatile than D-76. One I tested everything with it, I got almost no variation batch to batch, and also got better results with my litho film. It is ever so slightly more contrasty in the highlights than D-76, and this affect the midtones as well. I usually like this, but if ever I don't want it, all I have to do is dilute the developer so I have more fine control during development. D-76 can do anything and do it well, but I prefer HC as an all around developer.
) etc...
