sometimes i forget what i really have. thanx for reminding mechk071 wrote:I'm still on a dual-core from 2008... i'd already be spoiled with a quad-core.
does zebra only use 1 core?
-
AstralExistence AstralExistence https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=265049
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2276 posts since 19 Sep, 2011
-
AstralExistence AstralExistence https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=265049
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2276 posts since 19 Sep, 2011
AstralExistence wrote:sometimes i forget what i really have. thanx for reminding mechk071 wrote:I'm still on a dual-core from 2008... i'd already be spoiled with a quad-core.people can become so spoiled.
- KVRAF
- 1617 posts since 11 Dec, 2008 from Minneapolis
Have there been cases where certain combinations of DAW and plugin create conflicts? Generally the tools for distributing computation across cores operate closer to the OS and the hardware, the DAW and plugins have similar access to these tools. I think something would have to be a little off for this conflict to occur.murnau wrote:isn't it a general rule that if your DAW deal with multi-core you should turn off the multi-core support of the single vsti anyway?
-
- Pick Me Pick me!
- 10257 posts since 12 Mar, 2002 from a state of confusion
Then it is not multi-tasking. It just schedules time between them but even then it isn't multi-tasking, it gives the allusion it is multitasking (since, after all it is processing one thing at a time). Besides, A computer processor (even a single core using context switching) doesn't make additional errors when it has to process multiple items.chk071 wrote:Actually, the human brain CAN multi task. But it won't be doing 2 things at the same time, with the same concentration, and dedication, as it would be doing one thing at a time.
The human brain appears to process in a serial fashion consciously. But is, for most people, terrible at context switching which is crucial to even simulated multi-tasking.
In any case, I think my point about serial and parallel processing is still accurate for the topic.
Last edited by VitaminD on Thu Mar 06, 2014 1:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
- u-he
- 30247 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
There are conflicts, unfortunately. Diva (as well as ACE/Bazille) leaves the multithreading to the OS. It can be very efficient with little overhead. Some hosts are but too smart to do this. They profile the plugins on the various tracks and the distribute them in an "intelligent" way across threads. This however never takes into account that the operating system might balance the processing load from other threads and processes all by itself. The threads owned by the plug-in are invisible to the host, they're only visible to the OS. And then those hosts cause problems, because they're unaware of the other things that are going on.xh3rv wrote:Have there been cases where certain combinations of DAW and plugin create conflicts? Generally the tools for distributing computation across cores operate closer to the OS and the hardware, the DAW and plugins have similar access to these tools. I think something would have to be a little off for this conflict to occur.murnau wrote:isn't it a general rule that if your DAW deal with multi-core you should turn off the multi-core support of the single vsti anyway?
Thing is, as long as plug-in formats have no concept of a threading model, there will be conflicts. Plug-ins can't tell hosts, they can only rely on the operating system as a best case scenario. Hosts that try to be smarter than the OS will always work against that.
We therefore think that it's best to leave multithreading to the operating system, not the host.
(or give us a hook to ride with the threading model of the host)
-
AstralExistence AstralExistence https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=265049
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2276 posts since 19 Sep, 2011
still a bit confused urs. so will my i7 be able to spread out the cpu as more synths are added? laymans terms urs none of this dsp genius mumbo jumbo 
- KVRAF
- 1617 posts since 11 Dec, 2008 from Minneapolis
The hardware is fine. Do you know which host? I'm not aware of any that give u-he stuff problems, but I'm sure you could confirm that for a particular DAW.AstralExistence wrote:still a bit confused urs. so will my i7 be able to spread out the cpu as more synths are added? laymans terms urs none of this dsp genius mumbo jumbo
- u-he
- 30247 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
As people say, any i7 is sufficient to run Zebra. Any modern DAW will run instances on whichever core is free. There's no problem running 4 Zebras on 4 cores in parallelAstralExistence wrote:still a bit confused urs. so will my i7 be able to spread out the cpu as more synths are added? laymans terms urs none of this dsp genius mumbo jumbo
- KVRAF
- 5564 posts since 13 Jan, 2005 from the bottom of my heart
so the general rule is exact the opposite? to turn off multicore support in your host and keep it on for single plugins which support it?Urs wrote:We therefore think that it's best to leave multithreading to the operating system, not the host.
Whoever wants music instead of noise, joy instead of pleasure, soul instead of gold, creative work instead of business, passion instead of foolery, finds no home in this trivial world of ours.
- u-he
- 30247 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Not necessarily. Some hosts let you switch off their "improved load balancing". That may still mean that they support multiple cores, but it may also mean that they leave the thinking to the OS.murnau wrote:so the general rule is exact the opposite? to turn off multicore support in your host and keep it on for single plugins which support it?Urs wrote:We therefore think that it's best to leave multithreading to the operating system, not the host.
I can't speak on behalf of host manufacturers though. But as the number of plug-ins with built-in multithreading rises, they may have to eventually deal with such problems.
It's either
- hosts offer a multithreading model to plug-ins (not very likely)
- hosts play nicely with multithreaded plug-ins (
Quite honestly, we were very surprised as to how well the OS can spread the load across cores evenly. from our perspective I see no reason to try to invent any better load balancing in a host.
-
AstralExistence AstralExistence https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=265049
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 2276 posts since 19 Sep, 2011
Urs wrote:As people say, any i7 is sufficient to run Zebra. Any modern DAW will run instances on whichever core is free. There's no problem running 4 Zebras on 4 cores in parallelAstralExistence wrote:still a bit confused urs. so will my i7 be able to spread out the cpu as more synths are added? laymans terms urs none of this dsp genius mumbo jumbo
gotcha.
- u-he
- 30247 posts since 8 Aug, 2002 from Berlin
Which model is it? Our 2008 model is pre-Sandy-Bridge and thus has a weak memory controller. Not a machine for Diva. Our 2010 hexacore on the other hand runs numerous Divas without a hitch.LFO8 wrote:My 8-core Mac Pro is often struggling with some of the more expansive Zebra and Diva patches these days. Just when stuff starts to get interresting..
