My system is an i5/8GB/120GB SSD with W7 64 and not optimised at all.
Interface is RME Fireface 400
Steinberg UR44 latency benchmarks thread
-
- KVRAF
- 8181 posts since 22 Sep, 2008 from Windsor. UK
RME is tops when it comes to latency
My system is an i5/8GB/120GB SSD with W7 64 and not optimised at all.
Interface is RME Fireface 400
My system is an i5/8GB/120GB SSD with W7 64 and not optimised at all.
Interface is RME Fireface 400
Soundcloud | Facebook |
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 737 posts since 24 Mar, 2013 from Amsterdam
Okay!! Okay...!! I'll change the name of the topic in the "RME latency benchmark thread"... 
Win8.1 64x/Live 9/Steinberg UR44/Roland HP 235/Edirol PCR-800/Eastman AC222/Washburn D12/Ch. Les Paul/Behringer BCF2000 & BCR2000/Korg Nanopad 2/Focusrite VRM Box/AT 2020/2xB5/E825s/Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro 250/Tannoy 502
-
- KVRAF
- 1929 posts since 4 Nov, 2004 from Manchester
Doubling the sample rate tends to reduce the latency of the I/O by 30% - 50%, whilst doubling the CPU load.
The RME is running at half of the sample rate of the Steinberg in these two screenshots, I'm pretty sure you'd see a reduction in I/O latency on the RME side if you used the same settings the Steinberg is running.
The RME is running at half of the sample rate of the Steinberg in these two screenshots, I'm pretty sure you'd see a reduction in I/O latency on the RME side if you used the same settings the Steinberg is running.
