KVR Audio

jamesOne · Post by **jamesOne** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:59 am

Jeez wrote:
jamesOne wrote:GPU: NVIDIA 6800
Time to render 1s: 192ms
Does this mean you could run five 1s convolutions on an NVidia 6800 with negligible CPU hit?

Hmm... five free convolutions...

Forever,

Kim.

The time to render 1s is meaningless and should have been left out. It doesn't have anything to do with the performance.

The scalability won't be announced until the plug-ins are optimized, but here's a teaser: you can run more than 5.

(Thanks for the enthusiasm and the thoughts on pricing Munchkin. Your position on pricing is shared by a lot of people and duly noted.)

Randolph - ATI cards are 24-bit in the pixel shader, which is not good enough. They basically cut off the numerical precision. NVIDIA cards are 32-bit through the entire pipeline, and therefore sound better. DX and/or OpenGL specs will be announced later.

Robert Randolph · Post by **Robert Randolph** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:27 am

Last I looked the x800's are capable of 32-bit...

Then again I dont really care THAT much, cant stand ATI after that infamous SE incident.

jamesOne · Post by **jamesOne** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:37 am

Robert Randolph wrote:Last I looked the x800's are capable of 32-bit...

Then again I dont really care THAT much, cant stand ATI after that infamous SE incident.

The pixel shader is still 24-bit:

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/ati ... /page3.asp

http://endian.net/details.asp?ItemNo=3906

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1710.2/

While "capable", the ATI cards still output 24-bits in the pixel shader hardware, then upsample to 32-bits.

This adds new meaning to the phrase, "it colors the sound," but it's exactly what happens to the audio.

Robert Randolph · Post by **Robert Randolph** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:40 am

I see.

Kim Lajoie · Post by **Kim Lajoie** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:51 am

jamesOne wrote:This adds new meaning to the phrase, "it colors the sound," but it's exactly what happens to the audio.

Forever,

Kim.

elwood · Post by **elwood** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:24 am

So is a GF4 TI 4200 enough to run this plugin...? And will there be a way to run it in Sonar?

Ixox · Post by **Ixox** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:30 am

elwood wrote:So is a GF4 TI 4200 enough to run this plugin...? And will there be a way to run it in Sonar?

No and surely Yes...

The only supported video cards seem to be the last generation of nVidia (6200/6600/6800)....
They are the only one which compute pixel shaders with a 32bits precision..

But i think that the motorala DSP of the powercore are 24 bits precision. So the 24 bits of the last ATI card should be enough to get good results....

griels · Post by **griels** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:48 am

Aleksey Vaneev wrote:Why it took 0.192s to render 1s audio? Does it mean this GPU-powered plug-in still consumes 19% of CPU?

No, it means the plug used for testing uses 19% of the GPU.

In any case, I'm not shelling out on some megabucks high end graphics card for now... I don't play computer games, and my Athlon 64 will do plenty of SIR instances anyway

jamesOne · Post by **jamesOne** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:27 pm

elwood wrote:So is a GF4 TI 4200 enough to run this plugin...? And will there be a way to run it in Sonar?

TI4200:
With the TI 4200 it is not a matter of having "enough" processing power. The early NVIDIA cards simply do not have the hardware to support the processing.

Sonar:
Yes, Cakewalk was nice enough to send us a copy of Sonar to test the plug-ins. So, we will make sure it runs well in Sonar.

jamesOne · Post by **jamesOne** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:34 pm

griels wrote:
Aleksey Vaneev wrote:Why it took 0.192s to render 1s audio? Does it mean this GPU-powered plug-in still consumes 19% of CPU?
No, it means the plug used for testing uses 19% of the GPU.

In any case, I'm not shelling out on some megabucks high end graphics card for now... I don't play computer games, and my Athlon 64 will do plenty of SIR instances anyway

Griels-

Hi. Good luck with the new website.

It has not been tested yet, but we are hoping the plug-ins will run well on the low-end 6200.

The PCI Express version of the mid-range 6600 are a lot less than $200. The 6200 should cost even less.

I have had the same good experience with the Athlon running plug-ins in ProTools.

Kingston · Post by **Kingston** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:47 pm

jamesOne,

I know the benefits of true convolution vs fft based solutions.

Still it would be nice to hear short demo examples on the same IR using bionic reverb vs. maybe SIR or Voxengo Pristine Space.

Could you maybe arrange something like this? I'm sure most of us would be very interested to hear them.

Ixox · Post by **Ixox** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:50 pm

jamesOne wrote:[Sonar:
Yes, Cakewalk was nice enough to send us a copy of Sonar to test the plug-ins. So, we will make sure it runs well in Sonar.

Why could you not try with the demo version of Sonar ?

griels · Post by **griels** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:58 pm

Ixox wrote:
jamesOne wrote:[Sonar:
Yes, Cakewalk was nice enough to send us a copy of Sonar to test the plug-ins. So, we will make sure it runs well in Sonar.
Why could you not try with the demo version of Sonar ?

No VST<->DX adapter, one would assume.

JamesOne - $200 doesn't sound so bad... Sadly my mobo has no PCI Express slots (was too impatient to wait for PCI-X Socket 939 boards after my old machine died). Incidentally, are there any laptop graphics chips that support your plugins?

jamesOne · Post by **jamesOne** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:00 pm

Kingston wrote:jamesOne,

I know the benefits of true convolution vs fft based solutions.

Still it would be nice to hear short demo examples on the same IR using bionic reverb vs. maybe SIR or Voxengo Pristine Space.

Could you maybe arrange something like this? I'm sure most of us would be very interested to hear them.

Not going to happen.

Our goal is to put out a great reverb as a demonstration of the AVEX technology and a glimpse of the future. There are a lot of plug-ins planned.

The guys that made those products (Christian and Aleksey) have made important contributions to the small studio market. I would rather see AVEX help their products at some point.

jamesOne · Post by **jamesOne** » Tue Oct 19, 2004 4:07 pm

griels wrote:
Ixox wrote:
jamesOne wrote:[Sonar:
Yes, Cakewalk was nice enough to send us a copy of Sonar to test the plug-ins. So, we will make sure it runs well in Sonar.
Why could you not try with the demo version of Sonar ?
No VST<->DX adapter, one would assume.

JamesOne - $200 doesn't sound so bad... Sadly my mobo has no PCI Express slots (was too impatient to wait for PCI-X Socket 939 boards after my old machine died). Incidentally, are there any laptop graphics chips that support your plugins?

Last time I spoke with their product manager we were tossing around the merits of the DX native vs. just running through the adapter. No decision was made, but they are convinced that it will run flawlessly through the built-in adapter.

They happen to be in the same city I am, so I will be spending some time in their office to make sure it runs well.

I just checked and the 6600 can be purchased through mail-order for less than $140+shipping.

These will be even cheaper in the future.

I have not started testing the engine on laptops yet. But, I will find out from NVIDIA which chips have the hardware support and post it on our website at some point.

** An official announcement about BionicFX latency **

An official announcement about BionicFX latency