Multi processor support differences in various hosts

[Benjaminjo]

Hi,
since when I've jumped into multi-processor cpus and x64 os I think I've tested all the sequncers/host available on the market hoping to find a nice program to work with, which could also take advantage of all the processing power available in my machine (double xeon).
Well of all the hosts tested the only one actually using all of my cores at the max was Reaper. With that software I'm able to open something like 50/60 nebula instances before starting to ear cracles and drops, while in Studio One only 7 and the same for Ableton Live (9/10). Sonar comes second with around 25/30 instances of that same plug in. The other ones varies a lot.
This is very frustrating to me, because I've got a super computer but I cannot use it as I want it (for me the ideal workflow is with Ableton Live). I would really like to ask the developers of those softwares if they are aware of those differences, in the way theirs apps exploit multi-cpus in a very different manner. I mean Studio One in the cpu meter reads over when the task manager only reads 15% of cpu-power used. And almost the same goes for Ableton. At least Ableton tech in a mail said that their approach to multi cpu is track dependant, this means every track uses one processor, so you open 5 plug ins, you saturate that processor and all the system starts to cracle. Not to mention x86 limitations in ram and other issues. Its a no go for me
Back to Reaper, on this side of things, its like magic, I mean 60 instances and the cpu meter reflect exactly the task manager, no cracles or drops of any sort! Anyone knows what the hell is going on? Is there anyone facing the same problems? Thoughts, suggestions?

all the best

-Glitch

[SQ4]

I have exactly the same results.

Reaper is by far the DAW that works best with multicore.

I've been programming my own DAW (RaXnTraX) and I can't find any solution that matches Reaper's performance

I did find that FLStudio is second.

But like you said, StudioOne/Ableton is not on par with those 2 DAW's...

[dalor]

I have 2 x Intel Xeon CPU's E5440 (8 cores total) and only used Cubase, StudioOne2 and Renoise (Win7x64). I get the most instances in Studio One, Cubase, then Renoise. Never tried Ableton or Reaper. I think being a minority with a multicore setup in the DAW world, no developer really cares.

For rendering in 3D or Video editing/post production like in AfterEffects, thats when it really kicks in.

[Fritze]

Very interesting that Reaper's competitor's mostly still didn't manage to get something similar going. If everything in Reaper would be on that level it would be very very easy to stay with Reaper.

[Richard_Synapse]

When plugins start to use multithreading, you'll benefit from 4 or more cores, no matter what host you use. Hosts can assign plugins to individual cores, and also balance the load to some extent, but they cannot split up the processing going on inside the plugins.

Richard

[Fritze]

When plugins start to use multithreading, you'll benefit from 4 or more cores, no matter what host you use. Hosts can assign plugins to individual cores, and also balance the load to some extent, but they cannot split up the processing going on inside the plugins.

Richard

Yes, same situation for all hosts so far. Some do it better than others as it seems. So how is your's playing with multicore CPUs compared to the rest?

[jancivil]

I host all my instruments and most FX in Vienna Ensemble Pro, which determines 'threads per instance' and performs fantastically.

[Benjaminjo]

I host all my instruments and most FX in Vienna Ensemble Pro, which determines 'threads per instance' and performs fantastically.

In which host?

[kelldammit]

I host all my instruments and most FX in Vienna Ensemble Pro, which determines 'threads per instance' and performs fantastically.

In which host?

In the case of VEP, it IS the host. It runs outside of the daw, and the daw simply connects to it via network, so the daw is only sending midi and receiving audio across a network connection. At worst, the daw would split each VEP connection to its own thread.
I also use VEP as a bit bridge into studio 1 x64 for the 2 plugins i own that aren't x64 yet.

k

[kelldammit]

It's a tricky time for host cpu schemes.
Kontakt supports multithreading. Independence Pro does also.
In those two, it's a switchable option.

In the RP synths, multiprocessor capability is provided by a specific installer.

But, in the scheme of things...there are few such plugins (at least that I'm aware of). Granted, those plugs are multithreaded for a reason...they can hammer one core pretty easily...they're multi-core enabled to spread that load out, which would conflict with most daw threading schemes.

so, aside from the option of running each plug as its own process, how much in terms of resources (i.e. their time) should the DAW devs be expected to devote to such a small number of plugs?

k

[jancivil]

I host all my instruments and most FX in Vienna Ensemble Pro, which determines 'threads per instance' and performs fantastically.

In which host?

it connects to the sequencing host as though a vsti, or AU, or RTAS. VST3 gives you up to 32 midi ports of 16 channels. AU but the one [port. regardless of host]. It's a mixer paradigm with channel strips that can be populated by instruments, with audio inputs to handle multitimbral instruments' separate outputs, and busses for sends.

VEP 4 won't let you write to parameters for FX or other than MIDI instructions that can be learned; the only FX I plug into Cubase is something I need to write automation to its parameters, that need to change during the track. That changes with VEP 5.

My octocore would be wasted on Cubase. Though it did improve at some point in C5. It's a world of difference. Say I instantiate it 4x, assign 4 threads per, and balance the load somewhat...

Obviates the 32 vs 64 problem completely.

[dalor]

...

[hibidy]

Oooo, Oooo, (hand up in the air)

Now remember, I've used all the hosts and like powerful plugins

So far, reaper has been RUNNING AWAY the best at handling this. What I find from most hosts I've tried/owned is that they are NOT optimized correctly past the first core. Reaper is basically inline with the task manager, which means it's working within the confines of the computer.

-Cubase did this to a certain extent. It's been a while since I've used it though so others can chime in better than me.
-Sonar doesn't do it the way you'd hope. BUT there is a "magic" something that allows it to start spreading before catastrophe. Still, it's scary to see that first cpu meter so high after let's say one instance of AT3
-It's been years since I've used logic/mac, but logic suffered from the "one core" tragedy worse than anything else I've used.
-DP was pretty good overall.

The worst I've encountered lately? Studio One Seriously, I have a kick ass computer and it's actually scary using it I see others happily using it without the cpu bogging it down and think "wat?" But here, it's awful. And please....no tips or tricks.......I've got the other hosts I use as a benchmark

[alvfaria]

The Windows "user account control" is the responsible for most of those issues

[hibidy]

The Windows "user account control" is the responsible for most of those issues

Most of what issues? BTW, mine is off