Everyone knows that Diva is, as the u-he website puts it, "demanding". But I was wondering if over the past two years since its release, along with any updates Diva has gotten that might have reduced its initial CPU load, if it's CPU usage is more comparable to more recently released synths.
How does it's CPU load compare to Serum? Dune 2? Blue 2? Spire? Nemesis? Bazille, even.
It doesn't have to be stuff strictly from 2014, I'm just using that as a vague guideline.
How does Diva's CPU load compare with the synths of 2014?
-
- KVRAF
- 8414 posts since 4 Jul, 2012 from Alesia
I personally think the best thing is to just download the demos and find out for yourself.
This question is hard to answer since you don't specify what sort of system you are running.
This question is hard to answer since you don't specify what sort of system you are running.
Last edited by V0RT3X on Mon Oct 13, 2014 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 35436 posts since 11 Apr, 2010 from Germany
Doesn't it highly depend on the patches anyway? If you just use Diva as a bass or lead machine, i doubt you'll ever run into problems on a reasonably modern machine. Same with other "demanding" plugins.
-
- KVRian
- 1351 posts since 30 Mar, 2011
I haven't tested systematically, but the one thing which puts Diva ahead of the competition is the choice of four different audio quality options, combined with automatic HQ offline rendering - makes life rather easy for weak CPUs. Just use your demanding patches in draft mode while mixing, and then bounce on divine - that's a great solution.KingTuck wrote:Everyone knows that Diva is, as the u-he website puts it, "demanding". But I was wondering if over the past two years since its release, along with any updates Diva has gotten that might have reduced its initial CPU load, if it's CPU usage is more comparable to more recently released synths.
How does it's CPU load compare to Serum? Dune 2? Blue 2? Spire? Nemesis? Bazille, even.
It doesn't have to be stuff strictly from 2014, I'm just using that as a vague guideline.
I wish Serum and Spire had this as well.
-
- KVRAF
- 5813 posts since 17 Aug, 2004 from Berlin, Germany
Dune2 is designed around this Unison feature and where you can run about 8000 oscillators at maximum polyphony and it's still usable. Run Diva only with 4x stacking and longer release times.... 
Diva is still a big CPU hog compared to the other synth.
Diva is still a big CPU hog compared to the other synth.
| Links-
- KVRAF
- 4130 posts since 11 Aug, 2006 from Texas
And Dune 2 is a CPU hog compared to synth1. Diva and Dune 2 have completely different design principles and target markets. You can always lower the quality of Diva to draft mode and it becomes a lot nicer on your CPU.4damind wrote:Dune2 is designed around this Unison feature and where you can run about 8000 oscillators at maximum polyphony and it's still usable. Run Diva only with 4x stacking and longer release times....
Diva is still a big CPU hog compared to the other synth.
-
- KVRAF
- 8414 posts since 4 Jul, 2012 from Alesia
As much as I like dune2, sometimes more isn't always better.4damind wrote:Dune2 is designed around this Unison feature and where you can run about 8000 oscillators at maximum polyphony and it's still usable. Run Diva only with 4x stacking and longer release times....
Diva is still a big CPU hog compared to the other synth.
Diva produces some of the nicest analog sounding sounding oscillators ever.
-
- u-he
- 28065 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Well, thing is, no-one has released a polyphonic synth with that kind of analogue modelling. If you compare Diva to, say, Monark and SH-2, you'll see that Diva is actually quite nice on CPU - per voice!KingTuck wrote:Everyone knows that Diva is, as the u-he website puts it, "demanding". But I was wondering if over the past two years since its release, along with any updates Diva has gotten that might have reduced its initial CPU load, if it's CPU usage is more comparable to more recently released synths.
We do have an internal plug-in that demonstrates all common filter modelling techniques in comparison - sonically as well as cpu-wise. Even though the corresponding filter models are very simplified, the "truest to analogue" calculation takes a magnitude of Diva's CPU. Diva is much faster despite largely more complex algorithms. Therefore we can say, Diva is extremely optimised. Simply put, if you want something less cpu draining you have to forgo that kind of detail in the filter models
We might actually post this internal plug-in one day. It's quite devastating.
-
- KVRist
- 82 posts since 16 Jun, 2005
Urs wrote:we might actually post this internal plug-in one day
it is quite devastating
Last edited by NadirToZenith on Wed Oct 15, 2014 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRist
- 82 posts since 16 Jun, 2005
Urs wrote:we might actually post this internal plug-in one day
it is quite devastating
sorry for the double post, perhaps the moderator is able to delete this one...
-
- Banned
- Topic Starter
- 511 posts since 5 Jul, 2014
Interesting, Urs. I've been giving the demo a good run about and it sounds excellent. My computer is pretty powerful, seems like CPU won't be a big issue unless I had a lot of long release times and (as 4damind also says) a lot of stacking. The character of the different modules and all around sound of Diva is gorgeous.
I suppose here is as good a place to ask as any. Do u-he plan to further develop Diva? I don't own any u-he products so I don't really know about how much/often they update products post release. I looked a bit into the history of Urs and his team and was surprised to find out that Zebra 2 is 8 years old and still sometimes receives updates that add new stuff (the last update like this being in Dec 2013 I believe). That's pretty cool! Do u-he hope to support Diva in a similar manner, or is Zebra 2 something of a one-off in that way?
Quick note to Urs, thanks for keeping the copy protection user friendly! Been reading about how your copy protection is both powerful (and yet to be properly bypassed/cracked) and easy for the user (simple serial number). Much love for that.
I suppose here is as good a place to ask as any. Do u-he plan to further develop Diva? I don't own any u-he products so I don't really know about how much/often they update products post release. I looked a bit into the history of Urs and his team and was surprised to find out that Zebra 2 is 8 years old and still sometimes receives updates that add new stuff (the last update like this being in Dec 2013 I believe)
. That's pretty cool! Do u-he hope to support Diva in a similar manner, or is Zebra 2 something of a one-off in that way?Quick note to Urs, thanks for keeping the copy protection user friendly! Been reading about how your copy protection is both powerful (and yet to be properly bypassed/cracked) and easy for the user (simple serial number). Much love for that.
-
- KVRAF
- 5223 posts since 20 Jul, 2010
Diva may get extra modules in future.
http://sendy.bandcamp.com/releases < My new album at Bandcamp! Now pay what you like!
-
- KVRAF
- 25441 posts since 3 Feb, 2005 from in the wilds
Zebra, ACE and Diva have all received significant updates. For example, Diva 1.3 got new Osc and Filter models plus an Arp. That could easily have been a paid upgrade. In the time I have owned Zebra (since v2 was first available) Zebra has received at least 3 paid upgrades worth of feature enhancements at no cost to the user.KingTuck wrote: I suppose here is as good a place to ask as any. Do u-he plan to further develop Diva? I don't own any u-he products so I don't really know about how much/often they update products post release.
All the plug-ins get core improvements like the GUI resizing, AAX support and so on. One of the great things about the U-he synths is the ongoing development.
Of course, one should always buy according to what is currently available and not based on future promises, but I think it is a fairly safe expectation that Diva will get a few new goodies down the road.
-
- KVRist
- 229 posts since 1 Feb, 2013 from United States
Diva may be a bit of a selfish hog, but she's worth it!
