64-bit audio engines are on the way !

[GeminiSun]

AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.

The biggest bigest advantage of 64bit it's the memory addressing. in 32 bit you can have max 4Gb ram in the system, and in 64bit you can have 16 exabytes of RAM!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_address (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_address)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit)

[koolkeys]

I'm running Athlon64 3500+, 1GB RAM, with an ATI XTSY 256MB graphics card with it's own fast CPU. So that may have something to do with why I'm getting slightly better performance.

Have you optimized Vista yet? Like setting it to give background processes priority? If you don't do that, I know the graphics will have a higher priority in your system. Even more then XP, I believe.

I'm not saying that it's running the same resources as XP. It's just not too much different for me.

Brent

[Stupid American Pig]

I will say that in Win XP x64 and Sonar 5 I can run MUCH more audio and efx than in 32 bit. It really is 20% performance bump for free. you cant beat that...

20% isn't MUCH more at all, it's just 20%. And 20% speed increase is so easy to get when you bother a little optimizing your code.


There's only 1 true point in all this marketing stinking bullshit, 64bit app = access to more than 2GB = huge audio in RAM.

64bit mixing (wait.. 'summing') is just abusing people's credulity.

Thats crazy talk man. Sonar already performs on par with FL studio in terms of Softsynths and sightly better than FL with audio(which is FINE since I use FL as a very fancy drum machine). So to get 20% more for free without having to overclock or shut down services *is* a nice feature. I dont really care so much about 64 bit mixing(though I do enable it). I dont want to start debating how sonar compares to flstudio, but I dont see how you could think that a "free" 20% gain is not useful. Are you saying you could modify FL studio to be 20% more efficient than it is currently?

[sQeetz]

Have you optimized Vista yet? Like setting it to give background processes priority? If you don't do that, I know the graphics will have a higher priority in your system. Even more then XP, I believe.

I have adjusted almost anything, but did not try that one yet. thx.
I will give it a go tommorow.

[tony tony chopper]

but I dont see how you could think that a "free" 20% gain is not useful

simple, you're certainly using third-party plugins, and the CPU spared by 5 well-coded plugins can easily be wasted by a single poorly-coded one.
CPU usage of most hosts is minimal anyway, since most hosts don't do much than mixing (almost CPU free these days), and running plugins.

[Stupid American Pig]

but I dont see how you could think that a "free" 20% gain is not useful

simple, you're certainly using third-party plugins, and the CPU spared by 5 well-coded plugins can easily be wasted by a single poorly-coded one.
CPU usage of most hosts is minimal anyway, since most hosts don't do much than mixing (almost CPU free these days), and running plugins.

I see what yer saying, but I still dont think that its pointless.

[Brandon Ryan]

but I dont see how you could think that a "free" 20% gain is not useful

simple, you're certainly using third-party plugins, and the CPU spared by 5 well-coded plugins can easily be wasted by a single poorly-coded one.
CPU usage of most hosts is minimal anyway, since most hosts don't do much than mixing (almost CPU free these days), and running plugins.

And if I was using a poorly coded plugin, then the 20% saved by my host and native plugs would be even more useful then, no?

And what about 64-bit native plugin effects? Some of these get a CPU boost as well. To not want this because a poorly coded plug can use up some of my savings seems like throwing the baby out with the bath water. I'm still left with more CPU than before, right?

[Jason Brian Merrill]

actually, i understand what gol is sayin too ... i mean, projects normally consist of a number of plugins and synths.... having 48 tracks with heavy edits and no plugins or synths on any host will perform fine on even low end computers...

[tony tony chopper]

To not want this

It's not about not wanting this, I'm saying it's overhyped.

You will deny this officially, but you know it's true. 64bit OSes are there/coming up, and being one of the first to support that is a big marketing point.
How to promote this? Telling users that it's only about having access to more RAM (and it's quite true) isn't enough, you need half-lies like improved CPU usage (what eats so much CPU in a host anyway?) and the 'benefits' of 64bit mixing, knowing that the user will be impressed by any technical gibberish anyway.

*I*'m expecting to code for 64bit CPU's, because more registers, more comfort, it's all easier for me. But the user doesn't need 64bit (except for RAM access), we (programmers) do, and marketing does.

[Brandon Ryan]

To not want this

It's not about not wanting this, I'm saying it's overhyped.

You will deny this officially, but you know it's true. 64bit OSes are there/coming up, and being one of the first to support that is a big marketing point.
How to promote this? Telling users that it's only about having access to more RAM (and it's quite true) isn't enough, you need half-lies like improved CPU usage (what eats so much CPU in a host anyway?) and the 'benefits' of 64bit mixing, knowing that the user will be impressed by any technical gibberish anyway.

*I*'m expecting to code for 64bit CPU's, because more registers, more comfort, it's all easier for me. But the user doesn't need 64bit (except for RAM access), we (programmers) do, and marketing does.

Are you contending that virtual effects and instruments do not get any CPU benefit from native x64 compatibility?

[tony tony chopper]

Are you contending that virtual effects and instruments do not get any CPU benefit from native x64 compatibility?

You're trying to change my words, but yes, they do. Just like 64bit mixing is 'better' than 32bit. Both are better, but it's neglectable.
I haven't seen, in the past, any host or plugin hyping a 20% CPU increase that much.

[Stupid American Pig]

Are you contending that virtual effects and instruments do not get any CPU benefit from native x64 compatibility?

You're trying to change my words, but yes, they do. Just like 64bit mixing is 'better' than 32bit. Both are better, but it's neglectable.
I haven't seen, in the past, any host or plugin hyping a 20% CPU increase that much.

What flavor is that haterade yer sipping on


seriously tho, I think 20% is a pretty nice jump, and it *is* a perfectly valid selling point...

[sQeetz]

20% performance gain? But worth ALL the periphery upgrade needed?
If you already have all of it, ok. but...

[Stupid American Pig]

20% performance gain? But worth ALL the periphery upgrade needed?
If you already have all of it, ok. but...

I was pretty lucky, all my parts had 64 bit drivers.

[sQeetz]

Not everyone is that lucky...
And since the topic is about 64bit 'mixing engines' I do not really think it does matter all that much, does it?