KVR Audio

warrior545 · Post by **warrior545** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:51 am

how many posihfopit EQ plugins can you run on your system until you reach 90% cpu ?
Please mention your computer type/system type.

D-Fusion · Post by **D-Fusion** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:15 am

System:
Windows XP, Amd Sempron 3400+ 64bit, 1.5gb ram, Audiophile 2496 Latency: 256Smp=(5.6Ms), Host:Sonar Homestudio 4.

24 Posihfobit = 92% cpu

.jon · Post by **.jon** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:29 am

18

Pentium-M 740, 512Mb, eXT, XP sp2, RealtekHD Audio & ASIO4ALL(!)

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:31 am

never benchmarked it.

guess it's such a high number I never had to think about it.

Majken · Post by **Majken** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:37 am

42

Athlon64 X2 4400+, E-MU 1820m (10ms latency), Cubase SX3.1 - However i doubt that I'd actually be able to playback anything at that load. Anyway, I can run more of them than I really need.

/Majken

Omnivox · Post by **Omnivox** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:40 am

Windows XP SP2, Athlon64 2800+ Sck754, 1 GB DDR400, Emu 1212, Cubase SX 3.1.1, posifhopit v 1.3.5, 50 ms latency - 22 of them at 96%

cym0n · Post by **cym0n** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:59 am

19 inserts on audio track using 86-90% cpu
pentium M (dothan)1.86 ghz
512 ram

Christian Budde · Post by **Christian Budde** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:09 am

warrior545 wrote:how many posihfopit EQ plugins can you run on your system until you reach 90% cpu ?
Please mention your computer type/system type.

It depends strongly on the used algorithm and the filters (type and numbers).

Here's an example (it's the Electri-Q, but basically similar):

1 second of Audio is processed on my machine (P4 1,4 GHz):

Code: Select all

Analog, 5 Basic Filters         : Time: 48 ms =  4,8% = 20 Instances max
Digital Economy, 5 Basic Filters: Time:  7 ms =  0,7% = 142 Instances max

Code: Select all

Digital, 5 Basic Filters         : Time: 20 ms  =  2,0% = 50 Instances max
Digital, 5 "Warm" Filters        : Time: 53 ms  =  5,3% = 18 Instances max
Digital, 10 Basic Filters        : Time: 32 ms  =  3,2% = 31 Instances max
Analog, 5 "Warm" Filters         : Time: 144 ms = 14,4% =  7 Instances max

In the last example I would only be able to run 90% * 1000ms / 144ms = 6,25 Instances on my machine (=6 Instances to be below 90%). With the first example I should be able to run about 128 Instances on my machine.

I guess that with normal usage I could get 20+ Instances on my machine without a problem.

Regards,

Christian

P.S.: The Electri-Q "Digital" Mode is optimized for performance (20% faster), while the "Analog" mode is optimized for Sound-Quality (20% slower). In the middle it should be compareable to posihfopit. (Electri-Q is available here: http://www.aixcoustic.com)

warrior545 · Post by **warrior545** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:16 am

guys you forgot latency ... what latency you use ?

D-Fusion · Post by **D-Fusion** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:21 am

Wtb. You warrior?

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:23 am

Christian Budde,

does posihfopit use only half the CPU in mono mode? I have no accurate means to measure this so I'm not sure. Also does it save the mono mode setting on presets? I seem to recall some users complaining that it forgets the setting...

Christian Budde · Post by **Christian Budde** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:35 am

warrior545 wrote:guys you forgot latency ... what latency you use ?

Now I only changed the latency. I got the idea, that latency doesn't effect the performance very much, but this was a clinic test, NO streaming audio (from harddisk). I think the load of sequencers reduces the the number of instances here.

Code: Select all

Analog, 5 Basic Filters, 92.88ms Latency (Blocksize 8192) : Time: 48 ms
Analog, 5 Basic Filters, 23.22ms Latency (Blocksize 1024) : Time: 49 ms
Analog, 5 Basic Filters,  5.8 ms Latency (Blocksize  256) : Time: 50 ms
Analog, 5 Basic Filters,  1.45ms Latency (Blocksize   64) : Time: 53 ms
Analog, 5 Basic Filters,  0.36ms Latency (Blocksize   16) : Time: 70 ms

Regards,

Christian

snooky · Post by **snooky** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:38 am

h.vox wrote:Windows XP SP2, Athlon64 2800+ Sck754, 1 GB DDR400, Emu 1212, Cubase SX 3.1.1, posifhopit v 1.3.5, 50 ms latency - 22 of them at 96%

I have the same system but with a Athlon64 3000+ and a AP24/96 ...yet I can only get to 19 poshifopits until the system fuxors.

waht have you done to optimze your system so much?

my sytem is already optimized...but only safe optimizations (ie not many processes have been removed etc etc)

Christian Budde · Post by **Christian Budde** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:40 am

Kingston wrote:does posihfopit use only half the CPU in mono mode? I have no accurate means to measure this so I'm not sure. Also does it save the mono mode setting on presets? I seem to recall some users complaining that it forgets the setting...

Yes and no.

It DOES reduce the CPU load if it is in mono mode! But unfortunatly it can not save the state. It is not possible with the (old) preset structure of posihfopit, otherwise every existing preset will get broken. Usually people will say, that the new version works unstable, because all the old presets could not be load, etc. Far more trouble then NOT implementing it. Users who'd like the EQ can buy the Electri-Q. The preset system here is up and downward compatible.

Regards,

Christian

living sounds · Post by **living sounds** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 10:43 am

Christian,

what has happened to Electri-Q between version 1.01 and 1.06? I've compared the demos of both, and they sound notably different in Analog mode (even without any faders moved the audio coming out is different).
Also, what is the main difference between Warm mode and Basic mode (it's not in the manual).
Will the overall sound continue to change in further versions (I'm considering to buy it, and would like to have backwards compability in future projects).

Really like your EQs, they sound top of line!

how many posihfopit EQ plugins can you run on your system ?