DIGITAL PERFORMER 9.02 Even less effective than DP9.00 and still far less than DP6 on the CPU !!!

[studioinsomniac]

MAKE TEST: I just updated my system to DP9.02 and my session is 98% of DSP / CPU with this new version (What the Hell, When I mixed, It was lot lower ...)! I open the same session in DP9.00 and, surprise, the CPU is 85% !!! Yes 85% for the same thing !!! Then I open an older system with DP6.03 and CPU for the same session, the same plugins is 70% !!!! Each time, Motu made updates for DP, it is less effective for the CPU, it becomes Ridiculous (for my system, and you ???) To push the test even further, I added 60 plugins (average consumption between 0.1 and 0.3 each) in the session DP6, it rolls right and what is not in the red ...

MOTU knows all this (there have been several complaints from DP8, DP9 and for the significant loss of DSP / CPU) compared to DP7 and DP6 and that's why I think they advertise large DSP management changes supposedly 4x more efficient (but in 3 to 6 months ...)! And I really doubt that will be the case, except maybe for some MAC computers! So will probably spend $ 5000 on MAC Bomb to take advantage of 4x in 2016 ... And all the others, who do not have the latest model of the year ... I can not wait to see it and test! Anyway, for me, they were nice to add some new plugins in their updates, But it's not worth the cost of losing 30% of processors ...

DP9.02 kills my 8 processors and my 12GB, squarely!

Thank you for doing TEST on your side and compare YOUR preceeding versions of DP in your Mac!
*** Please do Test, do not come back with comments, without testing ...

[Robert Randolph]

There's no option in your poll for 9.02 NOT consuming more CPU.

I did check, and it's fine here. It's also better than 8.07 for sure.

[trimph1]

Oh, don't forget. If you have any issues with DP9 it must be your hardware that is doing it.

[bungle]

This is a very common place thing to happen now, the best developers leave these companies and they hire people that are this generation of developer that have never had to optimise for crappy hardware, so they do what they do and expect you to have the fastest beast of a computer ever built, NI do this with Maschine, any new version will always use more RAM and more CPU, obviously it is more extreme in NIs case than any other company because they no longer make software, they just make sample sets, so the last few remaining developers are not as talented as the guys who left and they have less time on their hands on any single product.
But it is all the same thing, new developers working in different times with different priorities, optimising not being one of them.

[Robert Randolph]

Oh, don't forget. If you have any issues with DP9 it must be your hardware that is doing it.

That goes for any DAW. If you have issues that the large majority of folks don't have, then it's on you to demonstrate a reproducible bug.

Otherwise... it's your hardware.

[studioinsomniac]

There's no option in your poll for 9.02 NOT consuming more CPU.

I did check, and it's fine here. It's also better than 8.07 for sure.

Hi, Robert! Sorry (I'm French), I thought it was clear the 5th option : "Not on my system: I tested it" So in other words : DP9.02 is more efficient than all other versions, on your system! I would not even ask the same three questions in reverse for all versions! But I will try tomorrow to change that!

PS. In my opinion if you test a song for example at 50% on DSP, the difference will be smaller than a song at 90%, between versions (I try and its not the same apparent results)! So If your test was done with medium DSP load, could you try with more Plugin, around 85% and compare again DP8 and DP9 ? And if it was your test, can you confirm that and give some Info please! Its not only for me, I'm sure concern my test, that big difference (I try with others songs and its the same), but I don't test DP8…

* I will test on my system too About DP8 and DP9, I will come back with result… A big Thanks Robert for your time!

[studioinsomniac]

This is a very common place thing to happen now, the best developers leave these companies and they hire people that are this generation of developer that have never had to optimise for crappy hardware, so they do what they do and expect you to have the fastest beast of a computer ever built, NI do this with Maschine, any new version will always use more RAM and more CPU, obviously it is more extreme in NIs case than any other company because they no longer make software, they just make sample sets, so the last few remaining developers are not as talented as the guys who left and they have less time on their hands on any single product.
But it is all the same thing, new developers working in different times with different priorities, optimising not being one of them.

Priority Issues and goals, yes, this can vary! I can read in the "ReadMe" of updates DP9.02, there was video optimizations for Retina and visual optimization, but I think, to the detriment of audio (and this is what I ask you in your systems)! In this update, they might be too diverted to the visual or too privileged the latest Retina computer model at the expense of others? Yes it seems more effective and more responsive to the visual, with less latency and a little more fluid, but personally, this is a Software Audio and that's the key, audio and audio efficiency would be priority! Perhaps, saying the audio enhancement, will be in the next update (they claim improved 4x more powerful audio in 2016 ...)

With you Bungle, in your system with DP9, can you compare with others versions?

[EvilDragon]

obviously it is more extreme in NIs case than any other company because they no longer make software, they just make sample sets, so the last few remaining developers are not as talented as the guys who left and they have less time on their hands on any single product.

Lots of incorrect assumptions there. NI development team actually increased in the past few years. And yes, they still do software just as well.

[studioinsomniac]

Oh, don't forget. If you have any issues with DP9 it must be your hardware that is doing it.

That goes for any DAW. If you have issues that the large majority of folks don't have, then it's on you to demonstrate a reproducible bug.

Otherwise... it's your hardware.

Hello Robert and Trimph! I don't know about PC, but Its not the same game with Mac! Here, I'm talking about Mac, no PC, Mac is plug and play! What I am talking here, Its only with Digital Performer updates, not with Logic or Protools updates! In this sessions, I'm running 122 plugins for 98 tracks, including 26 reverbs/fx and Impulses responses, if I have a problem, I can't do all of this, and the system is stable…

Thats Ok, I know you want to suggest me (and for others) solution or a kind of problem (and in some case its possible) Tanks for that, but I don't find solution, I didn't have any problems of system or hardware and any of my software either! It is not a question of malfunctioning hardware, I can assure you, my systems is in perfect condition is really Optimized and In top shape! I didn't have any problems with Digital Performer too, in any version, every things work fine, stable, without glitch or real bugs… Its only a question of DSP efficience between updates versions and i'm sure i'm not alone!

YES, I expect small differences with updates and additions in some cases, but many differences DSP from one version to the other, not at all, no more than 10% in each! For many software and plugins, Quite the opposite occurs, they Optimize, It's faster and lighter (often version 2 is more effective than the first in many case, but ok not all)! I Keep active in my systems All my previous version of DP, from DP6 (I have a studio and I have to recall some past projects and I prefer to recall my mix in exact same conditions)

Yes they resolve bugs and many things in the last two updates (and make Good Job for that), in addition to optimizing the visual effectiveness and this is perhaps what explains the difference? And yes, it is also possible that depending on the computer séries and OSX versions, the updates react differently and that's what I ask you, on Your Systems?

For the other post : In my particular case, we can still not reach a conclusion with only one person who actually did the tests and conclude that I'm the only one and I have a hardware problem !

Please everyone, Takes 5 or 10 minutes and make a real test, with the same song and the same plugin (and up plugins to +-85% for a better compare test)! I know probably couples computers will have better reaction and others like me! Its impossible I was alone in this case! Its incredible the difference between DP6 and DP9, 30% more DSP for DP6!!! Important Info : for all versions of DP I'm in 32bit!

[ObsoleteAcc99]

im curious, is 9.02 the one that has supposedly increased performance by 10x or is that still coming?

[machinesworking]

im curious, is 9.02 the one that has supposedly increased performance by 10x or is that still coming?

That's still coming. 9.02 just introduced larger vertical tracks and track selection for the Tracks Overview, plus a few bug fixes and new bugs. IMO it's the testing ground for the under the hood stuff that will give better CPU in the coming update.

OP needs to learn to use an older version when things don't work and check the new version after updates. They might end up being less dramatic about it. I'm not seeing any drastic CPU drop in 9.02.

[kelldammit]

@ the OP, You might want to open your background processing window and make sure nothing's being processed in the background. Also, double-check your bundles.
Sometimes, there can be some hiccups when opening projects done in older versions. What happens if you create a fresh project in 9.02, and move stuff into that, or create a roughly equivalent project from scratch in 9.02?