Fl Studio's CPU meter wrong?

Audio Plugin Hosts and other audio software applications discussion
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

FL Studio doesn't seem to be utilizing all 8 cores of my PC, even the 64-bit version. Since I've gotten some heavier plugs lately this is becoming a problem. I have an i7. Is there something I need to change in the settings or does it only ever use only some of the CPUs? Thanks!

Post

Ugg but sometimes the CPU meter goes down when I open more synths?!?! What's up with this?

Post

Nobody?

Post


Post

arkmabat wrote:FL Studio doesn't seem to be utilizing all 8 cores of my PC
You do ofcourse realise that you have not 8 but 4 physical cores with each core swapping context all the time, so it's 8 virtual cores.
Especially on heavy load it's far more efficient to let each physical core serve just one thread and not two. Saves context switching... On the monitor you'd see four cores busy and four cores idle, but that does not mean you're not utilising the full processing power of your CPU.
We are the KVR collective. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. Image
My MusicCalc is served over https!!

Post

Same thing I noticed in Orion, what's up with that?
ha, nm
High Quality Soundsets for Lush-101 | Hive | Electra 2 | Diversion | Halion | Largo | Rapid | Dune II | Thorn | and more.

TTU Youtube

Post

BertKoor wrote:
arkmabat wrote:FL Studio doesn't seem to be utilizing all 8 cores of my PC
You do ofcourse realise that you have not 8 but 4 physical cores with each core swapping context all the time, so it's 8 virtual cores.
Especially on heavy load it's far more efficient to let each physical core serve just one thread and not two. Saves context switching... On the monitor you'd see four cores busy and four cores idle, but that does not mean you're not utilising the full processing power of your CPU.
Hrm. All I know is if I run Prime95, everything goes to 100% as expected. FL Studio on the other hand, doesn't even go over 30%. I find that odd. Could it be that I have it installed in the wrong folder? Does the "Program Files (x86)" folder limit all .EXEs to x86?

Post

arkmabat wrote:
BertKoor wrote:
arkmabat wrote:FL Studio doesn't seem to be utilizing all 8 cores of my PC
You do ofcourse realise that you have not 8 but 4 physical cores with each core swapping context all the time, so it's 8 virtual cores.
Especially on heavy load it's far more efficient to let each physical core serve just one thread and not two. Saves context switching... On the monitor you'd see four cores busy and four cores idle, but that does not mean you're not utilising the full processing power of your CPU.
Hrm. All I know is if I run Prime95, everything goes to 100% as expected. FL Studio on the other hand, doesn't even go over 30%. I find that odd. Could it be that I have it installed in the wrong folder? Does the "Program Files (x86)" folder limit all .EXEs to x86?
You are kidding right?

A folder is a folder, regardless of its name. Core usage has NOTHING to do with x86 x64 etc.

Post

Hey, if it's in there it changes admin required read/write status...

Post

I'm not kidding that FL Studio isn't using all that it could be... Maybe because it's dealing with sound? I'm just frustrated tonight. FL Studio keeps crashing and I can't even log into their forums. Maybe it's time I started using my copy of Sonar more...

Post

Here is a Sound On Sound article on multi-core.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan08/a ... n_0108.htm

Post

I use FL Studio and Reaper on a quad core machine, and I've noticed that Reaper always displays CPU always as a percentage of the 4 cores as a whole, even if there not all being used, where as FL displays a percentage of how ever many cores are being used. For example, say I created a synth sequence in Reaper and it was showing 25% of 4 cores, the same sequence in FL would show 100%, but of a single core. If I now duplicated the synths, Reaper would show about 50%, and FL would still show about 100%, but now of 2 cores. Add another synth and you would get 75% in Reaper and now 100% of 3 cores in FL, etc.
I've tried seeing how many instances of Diva I can run in each, and they both pretty much handled the same amount of voices before breakup... although FL did have the SLIGHT edge.

Just my observations :wink:

Post

I would be willing to bet that most DAWs' CPU meter don't show anything close to reality.

Post

but heres the thing: When hosts don't take advantage fully of really fast modern computers with more accuracy, they spike. FL throughout history, regardless of ungodly cash spent on systems, always performs badly. I know, I try it every year. I don't care that the cpu meter shows strange over use, but if it spikes, there is nothing you can do.

I'd love to be able to use my lifetime free update. And like with studio one, I fall for it :lol: I try all the "optimizing" stuff and it just makes everything worse.

I no longer care "why" reapers works so well. I just wish that these other incredibly over-priced products would adapt it and make threads like this useless :bang:

Post

hibidy wrote:but heres the thing: When hosts don't take advantage fully of really fast modern computers with more accuracy, they spike. FL throughout history, regardless of ungodly cash spent on systems, always performs badly. I know, I try it every year. I don't care that the cpu meter shows strange over use, but if it spikes, there is nothing you can do.

I'd love to be able to use my lifetime free update. And like with studio one, I fall for it :lol: I try all the "optimizing" stuff and it just makes everything worse.

I no longer care "why" reapers works so well. I just wish that these other incredibly over-priced products would adapt it and make threads like this useless :bang:
I've never really had issues with FL spiking, with modern CPUs anyway...two posts before yours someone says they can run more instances of Diva in FL than in Reaper. I don't think the CPU usage thing is that consistent, different software will perform differently on different systems. I use FL and Renoise and have similar inconsistency, on my desktop Renoise is more efficient and barely uses any CPU, on my laptop it is nigh unusable while FL works fine(until you start using lots of VSTs). My laptop is also not a very powerful rig and really shouldn't be used for music in general, but it does illustrate my point that what's lighter on one system isn't necessarily so on every system

Post Reply

Return to “Hosts & Applications (Sequencers, DAWs, Audio Editors, etc.)”