KVR Audio

braj · Post by **braj** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:12 am

Yeah that is a big concern for me too, Amplitube uses like 20% of a powerful new i7 for one instance. There really is something majorly wrong with Studio One's CPU use and/or reporting.

Echoes in the Attic · Post by **Echoes in the Attic** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:14 am

hibidy wrote:
Echoes in the Attic wrote:Looks like a nice update
Did I miss something? Is it announced am I not seeing it?

Watch the video a few posts up from this one I'm quoting.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:48 am

got it now, thanks!

braj · Post by **braj** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:07 am

I have to think the one big improvement that would garner them more users would be performance optimization. I figure since we didn't hear of it in the video it is highly unlikely that we'll see that in 2.5.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:29 am

I think they think "well, many people use it and like it" so.......

Takes in sonar is divine so far. It's been a joy moving and editing takes in X2. So nice to be able to groove quantize or simply quantize more than one clip!

pc999 · Post by **pc999** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:06 am

Where are the new features!

Personally not much for me...

(how do you embed yt videos?)

Good instruments a better plugs overall, a no linear mode (ableton, blocks) and cheaper it would be a very nice DAW IMO.

standalone · Post by **standalone** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:12 pm

pc999 wrote:(how do you embed yt videos?)

Don't use youtu.be, use youtube.com

firepile · Post by **firepile** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:34 pm

braj wrote:Yeah that is a big concern for me too, Amplitube uses like 20% of a powerful new i7 for one instance. There really is something majorly wrong with Studio One's CPU use and/or reporting.

Note that performance monitor in Studio One shows the overall performance for the thread with the worst load.

http://forums.presonus.com/posts/list/17672.page

The CPU usage reported by Windows Task Manager is usually much lower.

For example, I loaded a preset in Amplitube with two amps and ten effects. The CPU usage shown in Studio One's performance monitor was 24%, while Task Manager reported 4%.

(On an i7 machine with Win 7 64 bit.)

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:41 pm

firepile wrote:
braj wrote:Yeah that is a big concern for me too, Amplitube uses like 20% of a powerful new i7 for one instance. There really is something majorly wrong with Studio One's CPU use and/or reporting.
Note that performance monitor in Studio One shows the overall performance for the thread with the worst load.

http://forums.presonus.com/posts/list/17672.page

The CPU usage reported by Windows Task Manager is usually much lower.

For example, I loaded a preset in Amplitube with two amps and ten effects. The CPU usage shown in Studio One's performance monitor was 24%, while Task Manager reported 4%.

(On an i7 machine with Win 7 64 bit.)

With the problem being that it chokes in S1. Sonar has a funky setup where the first cpu meter reports very high at first but then spreads out.......not sure why that is but at least when adding plugs it DOES spread to some degree.

I liken S1 to Maschine. Maschine has no mulitcore support and that is what S1 seems like, no multicore support (yes of course I have all the cores available in S1

)

braj · Post by **braj** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:42 pm

firepile wrote:
braj wrote:Yeah that is a big concern for me too, Amplitube uses like 20% of a powerful new i7 for one instance. There really is something majorly wrong with Studio One's CPU use and/or reporting.
Note that performance monitor in Studio One shows the overall performance for the thread with the worst load.

http://forums.presonus.com/posts/list/17672.page

The CPU usage reported by Windows Task Manager is usually much lower.

For example, I loaded a preset in Amplitube with two amps and ten effects. The CPU usage shown in Studio One's performance monitor was 24%, while Task Manager reported 4%.

(On an i7 machine with Win 7 64 bit.)

Well in that case an improved performance monitor would be very welcome.

braj · Post by **braj** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:46 pm

hibidy wrote:
firepile wrote:
braj wrote:Yeah that is a big concern for me too, Amplitube uses like 20% of a powerful new i7 for one instance. There really is something majorly wrong with Studio One's CPU use and/or reporting.
Note that performance monitor in Studio One shows the overall performance for the thread with the worst load.

http://forums.presonus.com/posts/list/17672.page

The CPU usage reported by Windows Task Manager is usually much lower.

For example, I loaded a preset in Amplitube with two amps and ten effects. The CPU usage shown in Studio One's performance monitor was 24%, while Task Manager reported 4%.

(On an i7 machine with Win 7 64 bit.)
With the problem being that it chokes in S1. Sonar has a funky setup where the first cpu meter reports very high at first but then spreads out.......not sure why that is but at least when adding plugs it DOES spread to some degree.

I liken S1 to Maschine. Maschine has no mulitcore support and that is what S1 seems like, no multicore support (yes of course I have all the cores available in S1 )

Yep, I have to agree, it isn't just a matter of reporting but actual performance is much worse in Studio One than say Reaper. Hopefully this is being addressed. I can live with it because I upgraded my hardware but for the sake of Studio One it needs to be improved. I think starting with more coherent reporting though would at least give us a better idea of what is going on in each of our systems.

LawrenceF · Post by **LawrenceF** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:55 pm

I think starting with more coherent reporting though would at least give us a better idea of what is going on in each of our systems.

I'm the last person to dismiss anyone's cpu issues with S1. Really, I know they're real for some people for whatever reasons, no doubt about that, if it's unusable for some, it's unusable.

But as to "reporting" what's using what (for better or worse), the performance monitor gives you performance feedback of everything. Not that it changes efficiency in any way, but not sure how much more coherent reporting can be done.

What you seem to be asking for (with the reporting) is for them to fundamentally change the way the main cpu meter measures load and I really don't think that's gonna happen. If they changed it to show the overall cpu load like with the main system cpu meter, it wouldn't change anything else except what you see on that meter anyway.

firepile · Post by **firepile** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:57 pm

hibidy wrote:
firepile wrote:
braj wrote:Yeah that is a big concern for me too, Amplitube uses like 20% of a powerful new i7 for one instance. There really is something majorly wrong with Studio One's CPU use and/or reporting.
Note that performance monitor in Studio One shows the overall performance for the thread with the worst load.

http://forums.presonus.com/posts/list/17672.page

The CPU usage reported by Windows Task Manager is usually much lower.

For example, I loaded a preset in Amplitube with two amps and ten effects. The CPU usage shown in Studio One's performance monitor was 24%, while Task Manager reported 4%.

(On an i7 machine with Win 7 64 bit.)
With the problem being that it chokes in S1.

No problems here. A project with 24 instances of Amplitube uses only 33% CPU (46% in SO performance monitor).

braj · Post by **braj** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:59 pm

LawrenceF wrote:
I think starting with more coherent reporting though would at least give us a better idea of what is going on in each of our systems.
I'm the last person to dismiss anyone's cpu issues with S1. Really, I know they're real for some people for whatever reasons, no doubt about that, if it's unusable for some, it's unusable.

But as to "reporting" what's using what (for better or worse), the performance monitor gives you performance feedback of everything. Not that it changes efficiency in any way, but not sure how much more coherent reporting can be done.

What you seem to be asking for (with the reporting) is for them to fundamentally change the way the main cpu meter measures load and I really don't think that's gonna happen. If they changed it to show the overall cpu load like with the main system cpu meter, it wouldn't change anything else except what you see on that meter anyway.

Well, if Amplitube is reporting 20% load but it isn't actually, 20% then there is something wrong. Also it doesn't tell you much really, see Reaper's performance monitor for example, it is incredibly more helpful.

LawrenceF · Post by **LawrenceF** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:05 pm

braj wrote:Well, if Amplitube is reporting 20% load but it isn't actually, 20% then there is something wrong. Also it doesn't tell you much really, see Reaper's performance monitor for example, it is incredibly more helpful.

I would agree if that's the case. Are you saying Amplitube reports 20% on the S1 CPU meter but when you also look at the system cpu meter at the same time and no single core is at 20%?

When I view it like that, they match up. If the cpu meter says 40% and I look in task manager, one of my cores is at 40%. As far as I know, the cpu is always showing the highest single core load. If it's not doing that, that's probably a bug... but every time I checked it does exactly that.

So load Amplitube - all by itself - and check. I say "by itself" because obviously you can't know with multiple tracks which threads are going to which cores. If a core is showing 60% it could be from 4 different threads. The only way to know that it's only Amplitube is to only load one Amplitube... and look at the performance monitor for Amplitube, and compare that to the cpu meter and the task manager meter.

In that case, they should all be roughly the same.

Upcoming Studio One 2.5 release