Ampeg SVX vs Amplitube2 - CPU Usage
-
- KVRist
- 368 posts since 24 Mar, 2005
for those of you who have both Ampeg SVX & Amplitube 2 - are you noticing a big increase in CPU Usage between the two?
I'm using Live 5.2.2 and if I drop either in a blank project with just 1 MIDI track - I'm getting the below CPU percentages...no patch selecting, just whatever the default is in both when pulling it up:
Amplitube 2 - v2.1.0 build 6K16 (recent update): 8-9%
Ampeg SVX - v1.1.0 build 6K24 (recent update): 19-20%
* CPU bumps up to those numbers when interfaces are open; if closed/minimized but still "active"...both go down to 0%
* tried the same in LIVE 6.0.1 Demo and getting the same numbers
* also...didn't take notice until after I applied the recent updates, so no idea if it was doing that in the previous version.
I just thought that since the two are virtually the same, they shouldn't be THAT much of a difference. Anyway...just want to run it by you guys and see if anyone is seeing the same thing.
ADDED NOTE: in case anyone asks - both figures were the result of testing them *by themselves* in the project of course....not simultaneously.
I'm using Live 5.2.2 and if I drop either in a blank project with just 1 MIDI track - I'm getting the below CPU percentages...no patch selecting, just whatever the default is in both when pulling it up:
Amplitube 2 - v2.1.0 build 6K16 (recent update): 8-9%
Ampeg SVX - v1.1.0 build 6K24 (recent update): 19-20%
* CPU bumps up to those numbers when interfaces are open; if closed/minimized but still "active"...both go down to 0%
* tried the same in LIVE 6.0.1 Demo and getting the same numbers
* also...didn't take notice until after I applied the recent updates, so no idea if it was doing that in the previous version.
I just thought that since the two are virtually the same, they shouldn't be THAT much of a difference. Anyway...just want to run it by you guys and see if anyone is seeing the same thing.
ADDED NOTE: in case anyone asks - both figures were the result of testing them *by themselves* in the project of course....not simultaneously.
Last edited by woodie on Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:04 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- Sonic Reality Head Chef
- 8566 posts since 11 Mar, 2002 from Florida
Try testing out the updates of both now that they are both currently updated online to their 2.1 versions.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 368 posts since 24 Mar, 2005
oops....made a one number blunder there, squids - I meant Amplitube v2.1...not v1.2! 
fixed. also just checked the IK site and these 2 versions are the latest.
fixed. also just checked the IK site and these 2 versions are the latest.
- Sonic Reality Head Chef
- 8566 posts since 11 Mar, 2002 from Florida
So you downloaded the latest update to Ampeg SVX for this test? It was just uploaded very recently.holymoly wrote:oops....made a one number blunder there, squids - I meant Amplitube v2.1...not v1.2!
fixed. also just checked the IK site and these 2 versions are the latest.
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 368 posts since 24 Mar, 2005
yep...double-double confirmed using the latest here, squids. straight from the IK site as well:
Ampeg SVX version 1.1 (Build 6K24)
Date: 2006-11-29
AmpliTube 2 version 2.1 (Build 6K16)
Date: 2006-11-17
Ampeg SVX version 1.1 (Build 6K24)
Date: 2006-11-29
AmpliTube 2 version 2.1 (Build 6K16)
Date: 2006-11-17
- Sonic Reality Head Chef
- 8566 posts since 11 Mar, 2002 from Florida
Interesting. Maybe Ampeg SVX just requires more juice I guess then. I will test the difference myself out of curiosity. Still though... worth it eh? Ampeg SVX sounds amazing on just about every bass track I put it on.holymoly wrote:yep...double-double confirmed using the latest here, squids. straight from the IK site as well:
Ampeg SVX version 1.1 (Build 6K24)
Date: 2006-11-29
AmpliTube 2 version 2.1 (Build 6K16)
Date: 2006-11-17
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 368 posts since 24 Mar, 2005
OH YEAH - I'm thinking it's going to have to go on pretty much every bass track now! I use Trilogy for most of my bass stuff right now, so the little that I've played around on it, Ampeg definitely adds a certain oomph and character that I really like esp for the "electric" stuff, but there's SO MUCH I need to learn and experiment with though and mind you - I only have had the TSB for not too long now, so I'm still getting to know the whole package!
Ampeg is great for me as eventually I'll be getting a bass (long overdue)...too many guitars on the wall, although Santa just ordered a mandolin for x-mas so I can finally play Maggie May with the actual instrument. 
let me know how the test goes on your side.
let me know how the test goes on your side.
-
- KVRist
- 150 posts since 15 Mar, 2005 from Sweden
I think the main reason for the difference you got is that Ampeg has "high resolution" as default in the prefs, but Amplitube2 doesn't. If I uncheck "high resolution" in Ampeg, it goes down to appx. 12% If I check all "high resolution" and oversamplings in AT2, it goes to appx. 20%
So Ampeq is heavier, but not that much (and it's worth it. Sounds amazing
)
EF
So Ampeq is heavier, but not that much (and it's worth it. Sounds amazing
EF
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 368 posts since 24 Mar, 2005
ahhh!! looks like you're indeed correct, flynn. just had a minute to quickly test it and there was indeed a noticeable difference and at first go...unchecking the High Resolution in Ampeg, dropped it down to 12-13%. I'll have to do more testing later (busy now)....but that surely looks like that's reason for the differences...and yeah, Amplitube 2 was unchecked on those settings, so I probably changed the settings and totally forgot about it. 
perfect example of why forums are so great!
cheers...
perfect example of why forums are so great!
cheers...
-
- KVRAF
- 42529 posts since 21 Dec, 2005
Yeppers, after using the demo of svx on macintel I'm sold except for one thing. The bass cabs add a considerable amount of cpu usage.
To reproduce this, open one of the presets that pushes up pretty hard, and ditch the cab (bypass) and on my system I get a substantial cpu decrease. Of course alternatively, you can just load up a non-cab setup from the gound up (maybe do a comp/fx to help push up the cpu some for testing purposes) and THEN add a cabinet. The lowest seems to be the 15"...the other cabs seem to to push the cpu as much as 25 percent. Sorry, my demo expired so I don't have a way to give specifics right now.
To reproduce this, open one of the presets that pushes up pretty hard, and ditch the cab (bypass) and on my system I get a substantial cpu decrease. Of course alternatively, you can just load up a non-cab setup from the gound up (maybe do a comp/fx to help push up the cpu some for testing purposes) and THEN add a cabinet. The lowest seems to be the 15"...the other cabs seem to to push the cpu as much as 25 percent. Sorry, my demo expired so I don't have a way to give specifics right now.
-
- KVRist
- 468 posts since 5 Jan, 2007 from right behind ya
wow, I too had the same experience! I couldn't understand why the cpu useage was so high (recently seen many reviews stating how low it was) but sure enough, turned the speaker emulation off and the cpu dropped a bunch!
Sorry, can't buy this one with that isue
Sorry, can't buy this one with that isue
so what
-
- KVRAF
- 2035 posts since 6 Sep, 2005
Why would you assume that they should have the same CPU useage? They are two different applications.holymoly wrote:for those of you who have both Ampeg SVX & Amplitube 2 - are you noticing a big increase in CPU Usage between the two?
I'm using Live 5.2.2 and if I drop either in a blank project with just 1 MIDI track - I'm getting the below CPU percentages...no patch selecting, just whatever the default is in both when pulling it up:
Amplitube 2 - v2.1.0 build 6K16 (recent update): 8-9%
Ampeg SVX - v1.1.0 build 6K24 (recent update): 19-20%
* CPU bumps up to those numbers when interfaces are open; if closed/minimized but still "active"...both go down to 0%
* tried the same in LIVE 6.0.1 Demo and getting the same numbers
* also...didn't take notice until after I applied the recent updates, so no idea if it was doing that in the previous version.
I just thought that since the two are virtually the same, they shouldn't be THAT much of a difference. Anyway...just want to run it by you guys and see if anyone is seeing the same thing.
ADDED NOTE: in case anyone asks - both figures were the result of testing them *by themselves* in the project of course....not simultaneously.
I don't think that 20% CPU should be a deal breaker though.
