I'm purchasing a new mac pro.. I use Diva and a few other u-he, as well as Synthmaster.. A quite CPU demanding.. using Logic Pro
NO ONE at Apple can give me a serious answer. I've gotten from 4 core - 12 core.. there are no Logic experts there anymore.. or I couldn't reach any after repeated attempts, even got a letter forwarded to Emagic (who still maintains Logic).. They didn't respond except to say Logic will make use of 12 cores.
I have to buy the right amount of cores the first time, cause there are no upgraded to higher cpus. Does anyone at u-he have any idea.. I want to have reserves for the future.. I suspect more VI programmers will created instruments and effects that are more CPU intensive because the power is there.
I run up to to 40 audio tracks, but do use several instances of the u-he and KV331 Synthmasters. Some of the Diva patches would completely overload my 2008 8 core 3.0G MacPro, and bring Logic to a stutter and then a stop.
Any insight, or advice from anyone here using Logic (or any DAW with a number of virtual instruments, and the new MacPro, how many cores they are using, and the how demanding it is.
Thanx. - Mark Styles
which mac pro 2013
-
- KVRian
- 1075 posts since 23 Apr, 2003
The thing with Logic is that it uses multiple cores, and you can spread the load over multiple cores - however, an individual plug in typyically uses one specific core (and not multiple cores at once). Furthermore, if there are multiple insert fx in a track, this comes on top of the synth AU, and all of this goes to one core. So you can actually overload Logic, while there is still a lot of overall processing power in your system - as it overloads that specific one core. You will run into that problem much earlier than overloading the whole system.
Furthermore, the currently selected channel for playing and recording live via the keyboard is in a 'live input/recording' mode (or whatever it is called in Logic), and will overload much more easily than a simple playback track. So it may be helpful to change the selected track when playing back a project, for example to an empty track.
Furthermore, you may also spread the processor load more evenly by using bus sends to aux effects tracks, instead of inserting multiple fx in one channel (again, this 'stacking' of AUs in one track might overload one core, as all the processing drain of that track goes to one processor core).
There are also several settings in Logic that you can use to reduce processor load. As always, the latency settings for your audio interface will have a lot of impact on the stuttering - low settings will lead to overload and stuttering much earlier. Freezing tracks might help in reducing processor load. And setting AUs to low quality mode for recording and playing (and setting to high quality mode and then freezing for the final mix) will help as well...
Anyway, based on all of this, I would probably go for a system with pretty powerful individual cores if I would want to use demanding soft synths (to prevent overloading single cores). If you rather go for large projects with many different tracks (where you can spread the processing power), the number of cores becomes more important. However, you can do freezing with many tracks, which helps with the overall processor load. Personally, I would always try to get a system with a lot of power in the individual cores, and then get as many cores as I can get for my money, and not the other way round (i.e. many cores, but with less power per core) - because I use a lot of demanding soft synths (and as I do not use tons of audio/mixing tracks).
As you can see: It really depends on your personal preferences and how you plan to use Logic - there is no 'ideal' system that does it all (as long as you can't buy the top system with the maximum speed and the maximum cores...).
That said, other components (RAM and SSD/HD) play a role as well, and might have an impact, too... Hope this helps a bit!
Furthermore, the currently selected channel for playing and recording live via the keyboard is in a 'live input/recording' mode (or whatever it is called in Logic), and will overload much more easily than a simple playback track. So it may be helpful to change the selected track when playing back a project, for example to an empty track.
Furthermore, you may also spread the processor load more evenly by using bus sends to aux effects tracks, instead of inserting multiple fx in one channel (again, this 'stacking' of AUs in one track might overload one core, as all the processing drain of that track goes to one processor core).
There are also several settings in Logic that you can use to reduce processor load. As always, the latency settings for your audio interface will have a lot of impact on the stuttering - low settings will lead to overload and stuttering much earlier. Freezing tracks might help in reducing processor load. And setting AUs to low quality mode for recording and playing (and setting to high quality mode and then freezing for the final mix) will help as well...
Anyway, based on all of this, I would probably go for a system with pretty powerful individual cores if I would want to use demanding soft synths (to prevent overloading single cores). If you rather go for large projects with many different tracks (where you can spread the processing power), the number of cores becomes more important. However, you can do freezing with many tracks, which helps with the overall processor load. Personally, I would always try to get a system with a lot of power in the individual cores, and then get as many cores as I can get for my money, and not the other way round (i.e. many cores, but with less power per core) - because I use a lot of demanding soft synths (and as I do not use tons of audio/mixing tracks).
As you can see: It really depends on your personal preferences and how you plan to use Logic - there is no 'ideal' system that does it all (as long as you can't buy the top system with the maximum speed and the maximum cores...).
That said, other components (RAM and SSD/HD) play a role as well, and might have an impact, too... Hope this helps a bit!
-
- KVRAF
- 37508 posts since 14 Sep, 2002 from In teh net
I would wait till they update the whole line anyway - they are well due for an upgrade.
-
- KVRAF
- 5391 posts since 25 Jan, 2014 from The End of The World as We Knowit
Yes. Intel has a new generation of chips; the Retina iMac quadcore is now faster than the MacPro quadcore. Plans are to put those new chips in new MacPros late this or early next year, in Xeon versions which give MUCH more L3 cache which address performance issues described above. I think Apple has a poor training program for their sales staff, but my sales rep said:
if you want tech specifications on any Mac, go to:
http://www.everymac.com
if you want to compare performance between two CPUs (cpu data from everymac), go to:
http://cpuboss.com
Those two sites will help you get across Mac hardware.
if you want tech specifications on any Mac, go to:
http://www.everymac.com
if you want to compare performance between two CPUs (cpu data from everymac), go to:
http://cpuboss.com
Those two sites will help you get across Mac hardware.
F E E D
Y O U R
F L O W
Y O U R
F L O W