If you want to test using all the same ASIO driver you can try this fake driver.
It has a fixed buffer of 44 samples (1 msec), and it's main usage is to turn ext or any host into a MIDI processor.
http://homepage.hispeed.ch/mbncp/tmp_a3 ... odummy.zip
idle XT2 cpu comparison (everyone please)
-
- KVRAF
- 4143 posts since 7 Sep, 2001 from Melbourne, Australia
Ooops - sorry all I've been terribly misleading. I've only been saying ASIO4ALL v 2 to distinguish from version 1. I know - I know.soma wrote:Or ASIO version 2.0 ? I have the same setup as Caleb (with a slower proc and less ram) but get less cpu and the only dif I see is I have ASIO4All v2.7 and he has 2.0
The version I'm actually using in v2.8 Beta 1 - on my laptop anyway. I'd have to check my desktop when I get home.
Jens - in regards to the laptop suggestion - you may be right. However, it might also be because I'm using on-board sound. Someone was saying earlier that ASIO4ALL with internal sound chips can cause more CPU load. This is also something I can confirm on my desktop when I get home as I wasn't using the on-board sound in my last test.
Regards
Caleb
Happiness is the hidden behind the obvious.
-
- KVRian
- 852 posts since 28 Oct, 2004
Intel P4 2.8 1G RAM Maya44 MkII PCI
Hyper Threading = ON
XT1
Desktop 0-2%
Peak @ Boot 12%
Empty Sequencer 0-2%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-3%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-3%
Main window Maximized 0-3%
Main window Dragging Master Out with Mouse Down 58% (
!!!!)
XT2
Desktop 0-2%
Peak @ Boot 24%
Empty Sequencer 0-5%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-3%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-2%
Comps window Maximized 0-2%
Comps window Dragging Audio Out with Mouse Down 60% ( !!!!)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyper Threading = OFF
XT1
Desktop 0-1%
Peak @ Boot 25%
Empty Sequencer 0-2%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-4%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-4%
Main window Maximized 0-4%
Main window Dragging Master Out with Mouse Down 100% ( !!!!)
XT2
Desktop 0-1%
Peak @ Boot 46%
Empty Sequencer 0-2%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-4%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-5%
Comps window Maximized 0-4%
Comps window Dragging Audio Out with Mouse Down 100% ( !!!!)
Now ... Why why why why does the CPU spike at such abnormal levels when doing something simple as dragging the Master Out/Audio Out in an idle (non-playing) VST-empty sequencer project.. I just can't understand it...
From above values you can see that when HT is ON the CPU-% have lower values (but I guess the task manager spreads the load on two cores and can't computer the real % value). So one core gets maxed out at 60%, the other core is at a nice 0-4% in both xt1 and xt2. However with HT on the stability is very very bad, especially when browsing patches (i.e. can crash at an instant)
With HT off the stability is better but the percentage values are higher. One would think HT = ON would be better, but the better stability makes at least xt2 usable..
Hyper Threading = ON
XT1
Desktop 0-2%
Peak @ Boot 12%
Empty Sequencer 0-2%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-3%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-3%
Main window Maximized 0-3%
Main window Dragging Master Out with Mouse Down 58% (
!!!!)XT2
Desktop 0-2%
Peak @ Boot 24%
Empty Sequencer 0-5%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-3%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-2%
Comps window Maximized 0-2%
Comps window Dragging Audio Out with Mouse Down 60% (
!!!!)---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyper Threading = OFF
XT1
Desktop 0-1%
Peak @ Boot 25%
Empty Sequencer 0-2%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-4%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-4%
Main window Maximized 0-4%
Main window Dragging Master Out with Mouse Down 100% (
!!!!)XT2
Desktop 0-1%
Peak @ Boot 46%
Empty Sequencer 0-2%
Sequencer window Maximized 0-4%
Sequencer window Maximized Playing 0-5%
Comps window Maximized 0-4%
Comps window Dragging Audio Out with Mouse Down 100% (
!!!!)Now ... Why why why why does the CPU spike at such abnormal levels when doing something simple as dragging the Master Out/Audio Out in an idle (non-playing) VST-empty sequencer project.. I just can't understand it...
From above values you can see that when HT is ON the CPU-% have lower values (but I guess the task manager spreads the load on two cores and can't computer the real % value). So one core gets maxed out at 60%, the other core is at a nice 0-4% in both xt1 and xt2. However with HT on the stability is very very bad, especially when browsing patches (i.e. can crash at an instant)
With HT off the stability is better but the percentage values are higher. One would think HT = ON would be better, but the better stability makes at least xt2 usable..
-
- KVRian
- 1278 posts since 24 May, 2004
mine is between 12 and 15% with only the empty sequencer and nothing else. i'm using it natively (no wine) on ubuntu linux (feisty) with the low latency kernel (2.6.16) and jack driver in realtime mode @ 256 samples.
the CPU peak when dragging components is confirmed here.
[EDIT]my system is a ibm x30 subnotebook with pentium 3 1,2Ghz and 512mb ram. i might switch to pure:dyne or dynebolic soon, which is said to be slicker. i'll post the results then.
the CPU peak when dragging components is confirmed here.
[EDIT]my system is a ibm x30 subnotebook with pentium 3 1,2Ghz and 512mb ram. i might switch to pure:dyne or dynebolic soon, which is said to be slicker. i'll post the results then.
-
- KVRist
- 106 posts since 25 Sep, 2004 from Iceland
19% idle on Core 2 duo 2.16, 2gb RAM M-Audio Delta drivers. Thats a lot
-
- KVRist
- 143 posts since 8 Mar, 2005 from Stockholm, Sweden
36% at startup, then goes between 0 and 8%. Memory 33 MB RAM.
System:
Intel P4 2,8 Ghz
512 MB RAM
M-Audio Audiophile ASIO Driver
System:
Intel P4 2,8 Ghz
512 MB RAM
M-Audio Audiophile ASIO Driver
-
- KVRAF
- 10815 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from UK
skurken wrote:19% idle on Core 2 duo 2.16, 2gb RAM M-Audio Delta drivers. Thats a lot
do you have any other asio drivers you can test? (or asio4all)
thats very high for the speck of that system
Subz
-
- KVRist
- 106 posts since 25 Sep, 2004 from Iceland
-
- KVRist
- 344 posts since 14 Oct, 2005
hi, on my internet computer which is a pentium 3 933 with a voodoo3 video card and 512ram and windows xp pro asio4all v2.7(the minimum recommended specs are 1.4ghz i think) xt2 uses between 37 and 44 percent cpu idle with sequencer as default, on the other hand on the computer i use for music which is an amd 3800x2 with built in graphics nvidia (6200 i think) 1gb ram which the graphics share 128mb and windows xp pro x64, 2x audiophile 24/96 using maudio 64bit beta drivers, xt2 uses two - three percent cpu idle with seq as default.
(copied and edited from performance thread)
edit:this may be a bit cheeky, but i wonder if jorgen will share his results?
john
(copied and edited from performance thread)
edit:this may be a bit cheeky, but i wonder if jorgen will share his results?
john
-
- KVRAF
- 25008 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
these are crazy numbers, Lithren. Something is not right on your machine.
-
- KVRist
- 391 posts since 28 Jul, 2003
Sorry about the trolling, but XT is more feature bloated than ever, yet the very core DAW feature has never been there : streaming audio without crackles.
How many years till XT becomes _really_ usable as a DAW then? starting to regret my 50 euros spent last week on the XT2 license...
And Jorgen keeps beeing silent about this massive issue, does he know where the problem is? does he know what to do to fix this? does he have an idea of when it will be fixed? Should I buy a Sonar 6 studio license?
How many years till XT becomes _really_ usable as a DAW then? starting to regret my 50 euros spent last week on the XT2 license...
And Jorgen keeps beeing silent about this massive issue, does he know where the problem is? does he know what to do to fix this? does he have an idea of when it will be fixed? Should I buy a Sonar 6 studio license?
-
- KVRAF
- 25008 posts since 12 Jul, 2003 from West Caprazumia
The audio-streaming has been massively improved.
-
- KVRist
- 344 posts since 14 Oct, 2005
i have been checking buffer size settings on asio4all on my p3 933 and when i lower the buffer size the cpu usage drops noticeably
at 128 it drops to 29 -42 averages mid thirties (the buffer size when i posted the other test results was 512)1024 is higher usage
64 is nearer 29 - 38 but does reach 40 so it is making some difference. changing asio4all settings was a bit fiddly if i changed it in the offline panel (xt2 closed)when i opened xt2 it changed back to original buffer size so i had to do it in xt2 -advanced opens asio4all panel then i set xt2 as well.
hope this is narrowing things down a little
john
at 128 it drops to 29 -42 averages mid thirties (the buffer size when i posted the other test results was 512)1024 is higher usage
64 is nearer 29 - 38 but does reach 40 so it is making some difference. changing asio4all settings was a bit fiddly if i changed it in the offline panel (xt2 closed)when i opened xt2 it changed back to original buffer size so i had to do it in xt2 -advanced opens asio4all panel then i set xt2 as well.
hope this is narrowing things down a little
john
-
- KVRAF
- 5350 posts since 8 Aug, 2003 from Berlin Germany
Adding/streaming 18 audio tracks only increases cpu on my machine 10%
-
- KVRAF
- 5350 posts since 8 Aug, 2003 from Berlin Germany
Is the buffer size in XT2 matching your ASIO4All buffer size?1barEnuff wrote:i have been checking buffer size settings on asio4all on my p3 933 and when i lower the buffer size the cpu usage drops noticeably
...
john
Hmmmm.... I just changed my XT2 sampling rate to 48K and the CPU (already fine) droped to half when playing. I think this is the rate my ASIO driver is using.
Why is there a seperate setting for my driver and the app?
Also, turning off the frequency display did nothing noticable to my CPU usage.
[edit: ok with a large project it isn't half but it is a lot less.]