Login / Register  0 items | $0.00 New

Mulab's CPU efficiency

User avatar
Michael L
KVRAF
 
1903 posts since 25 Jan, 2014, from the End of the World as we Knowit

Postby Michael L; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:00 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

Last edited by Michael L on Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
"As the artist goes deeper into his own thing, he needs fewer tools."
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
10431 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:06 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

VariKusBrainZ wrote:
sfxsound3 wrote:. Reaper and DP have anticipative, or render ahead processing, which is why they are more effective by A LOT. You could try DP too and see for yourself. MuLab obviously doesn't have such things - you can't blame it, though, most apps don't have 'em.


Surely this only works for notes programmed into the piano roll, no Daw can predict what will be played in realtime via a controller lol

Fluffy - can you confim if youre playing back pre programmed chords from the piano roll or via a controller in realtime and can you confirm both hosts are definately using the same Asio settings.

Is there any difference if you have the synth Gui visible or not?


I was playing live, not recording.
Open or closed GUI does not make any difference.
User avatar
EvilDragon
KVRAF
 
15444 posts since 6 Jan, 2009, from Croatia

Postby EvilDragon; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:07 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

VariKusBrainZ wrote:
EvilDragon wrote:It doesn't matter if notes are programmed or not. It's a matter of taking a chunk of data in advance and rendering it ahead of time. So it will work with audio data and FX plugins on the track, for example, not just notes.

How can a note I havent yet played on my keyboard be pre rendered?


It can't, but it can be processed live over multiple cores. Reaper has that option, some other DAWs don't.
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
10431 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:12 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

EvilDragon wrote:The thing is that the fluffy doesn't have a "pro" or even a semi-pro audio interface, he has a gamer-home user Asus card. Those aren't usually known for their awesome ASIO drivers, because ASIO is not a priority for such devices.

Fluffy, you might wanna consider to upgrade your audio interface at some point, and get one that is not intended for gamers :)


I no longer use the Asus card, I use the audio of my motherboard, which I deliberately picked for that purpose.
https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/Fatal1ty% ... p#Overview

But the audio issues in Mulab were the same on the old computer when I was still using the Asus card and drivers. So, I don't think it is a hardware or driver issue. Back then I was demoing Diva, which is also said to be rather demanding.
User avatar
EvilDragon
KVRAF
 
15444 posts since 6 Jan, 2009, from Croatia

Postby EvilDragon; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:22 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

Well, same thing, motherboard audio chips aren't much to write home about as far as ASIO is concerned...


However all things being equal, this is not a hardware/driver issue. Reaper is obviously more efficient, but that's a bird song by now already :)
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
10431 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:27 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency



That was very useful, especially the part where it says that only real cores matter, not hyperthreaded ones. So, I reduced the number from 8 to 4 and there are no more num overloads in the extended CPU meter statistics, I don't hear any crackling, either :)

The meter still shows a rather high value, though.
Is there a way to see the load that corresponds to the RT load in Reaper?

Windows task manager also shows a higher load, about twice that of Reaper.
chk071
KVRAF
 
14333 posts since 10 Apr, 2010, from Germany

Postby chk071; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:38 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

EvilDragon wrote:However all things being equal, this is not a hardware/driver issue. Reaper is obviously more efficient, but that's a bird song by now already :)

The question is, how much more efficient is it. I remember making a test with Diva, and i was able to use one more voice with a very expensive patch in Reaper, than i was able to use in Cubase 6. I can't imagine that leading to crackles all over the place, when it just uses 3 % of the CPU, or something in Reaper. I'm sure there's an issue/difference with the settings.

But, again, i would in no case run ASIO4ALL with 128 samples, that's just nonsense. It isn't designed to provide the kind of latency you get with adapted ASIO drivers, AFAIK, it's rather a compatibility layer, so to say, to provide low latency on cards which don't offer factory ASIO drivers. 384 samples or more will be more than sufficient, and don't tax your CPU too hard.

I don't get why there's a need for such low latency anyway, if you're just doodling around, or you're MIDI sequencing.
User avatar
EvilDragon
KVRAF
 
15444 posts since 6 Jan, 2009, from Croatia

Postby EvilDragon; Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:50 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

I was using 256 samples with A4A on my 7 years old laptop with great success...
chk071
KVRAF
 
14333 posts since 10 Apr, 2010, from Germany

Postby chk071; Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:00 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

OK, it probably is different with different hardware anyway. For me, i could never get lower than 384, when i added some tracks to the project, or i had crackles with my soundcards. Guess you'll have to figure it out yourself, depending on the hardware you have. 128 seems low to me though. I use that with my UR22, and it works fine, 96 gave me crackles though.
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
10431 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:03 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

chk071 wrote:OK, it probably is different with different hardware anyway. For me, i could never get lower than 384, when i added some tracks to the project, or i had crackles with my soundcards. Guess you'll have to figure it out yourself, depending on the hardware you have. 128 seems low to me though. I use that with my UR22, and it works fine, 96 gave me crackles though.


Maybe ASIO4ALL never was the problem in your case, either.
That guy who wrote it seems to know a whole lot about that topic, maybe unlike Asus programmers who don't really care about ASIO, anyway.
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
10431 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:47 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

I am not so sure stating buffer sizes as such makes much sense unless you also state the sampling rate.
I use only 44.1 kHz, so maybe that's why my system does not have CPU problems as such.
How many ms of latency do 44.1 kHz & 128 samples result in? I heard that 10 ms is a recommended value...

The Midi controller quality also plays a role, some controllers have much less latency than others. Maybe a USB issue...
User avatar
Apratim
KVRist
 
348 posts since 29 Dec, 2016, from India

Postby Apratim; Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:00 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

fluffy_little_something wrote:I am not so sure stating buffer sizes as such makes much sense unless you also state the sampling rate.
I use only 44.1 kHz, so maybe that's why my system does not have CPU problems as such.
How many ms of latency do 44.1 kHz & 128 samples result in? I heard that 10 ms is a recommended value...

The Midi controller quality also plays a role, some controllers have much less latency than others. Maybe a USB issue...

10 ms is not the issue it depends what are you doing
if you wand to do something live reduce the buffer size
anf if you are using only synths or cpu heavy effect and not doing something live crank that buffer size high as much as possible (not too much like 1s or such 1024 samples will be ok)

i personally use 48khz(thats the standard) and i left the audio streaming setting to safe and the buffer size to auto in my behringer's audio setting which adjusts it automitically sometimes its 852 samples and sometime 512 samples
Last edited by Apratim on Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
a10 9600p,12gb ddr4,1TB SSD,Win 10 x64
Behringer UMC 202 HD,Behringer C-1.
REAPER,DS thorn,Mpowersynth,Tal sampler,AAS string studio,MTotalfx bundle
chk071
KVRAF
 
14333 posts since 10 Apr, 2010, from Germany

Postby chk071; Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:04 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

Most hosts show you the input and output latency, depending on the chose buffer size. Cubase, Studio One and Reaper definitely do. For Reaper, it's shown in the window title bar, or project title bar, i think.
User avatar
fluffy_little_something
KVRAF
 
10431 posts since 5 Jun, 2012, from Portugal

Postby fluffy_little_something; Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:08 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

128 spls, 7.6 ms
256 spls, 10.0 ms
chk071
KVRAF
 
14333 posts since 10 Apr, 2010, from Germany

Postby chk071; Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:23 am Re: Mulab's CPU efficiency

What happens when you set block size to 256 samples? Crackles gone, and CPU usage acceptable?
PreviousNext

Moderators: mutools, muzycian

Return to MUTOOLS