idle XT2 cpu comparison (everyone please)

[lazerkind]

Some more stats for ya.

Idle empty sequencer XT2(beta 8-june):
0-2% CPU
36,4Mb Ram used

XT1.4 with empty sequencer.
0-3%CPU
8,5Mb Ram used

This is on my AMD X2 3800, 1Gb RAM, XP Pro with a M-audio 1010Lt. (512samples latency)

Edit:
Oh btw, I started up Cubase SL 3.1 just to see what I got there.
0%CPU
68.8Mb Ram used
/Edit:

/Cheers

[skurken]

Oops, my bad. I had another cpu hog running when I got the 19%. XT2 is actually well behaved when Idle, only 0-2% CPU usage on my Core 2 Duo 2.16

Sorry for the f**kup

[paradiddle]

with a sequencer I get 2-6% idle 7 megs only. p3 1.2ghz 512 megs of ram.

[alech]

1-2% cpu, 30Mb memory after startup, then down to 5 Mb

Pentium D 2.8Ghz, 512 Mb, ASIO4ALL V2

[Caleb]

oh, something which just came to my mind:

asio4all 2.7 performed significantly worse on my system than 2.6 so I went back...

2.6 can still be downloaded from the official site and also there's a 2.8beta...


...might be worth trying for those with problems who use asio4all - Caleb?

I'm already on 2.8beta.

I'm not having trouble per se, just helping the cause by adding more data to the pool.

I haven't really seen XT2 under a proper load situation yet.

Regards
Caleb

[druid]

bunches of stuff about ASIO4ALL

i had the same issue with ASIO4ALL until i downgraded from 2.8b2 to 2.7, chect this out

Unfortunately the version I was using was 2.7. :)

[respirator]

Idle, empty: 0%

AMD X2 4800 2GB Ram. Doesn't seem to release memory (try adding and deleting components).

[druid]

Doesn't seem to release memory (try adding and deleting components).

That problem is known afaik. It's to do with the undo buffer IIRC.

[UltraJv]

As people tend to use a DAW with a project - how about repeating the same experiment with a simple common project that everyone can test. The results would then tell you whether the CPU idle consumption is carried across and added to real usage. I dont use XT / XT2 but just thought it might help.

[Guckli]

I don't really see the point of all this, unless you all use the same project as previous poster mentioned, run XT2 from one drive and all data from another, and make sure to use the same version of the same testplugins - that are all tested to behave equally on different hardware...
Most of all: if it's gonna help Jørgen any you need to post detailed specs. "3y old amd, >256MB, Seagate drive, beige cabinet" isn't going to do much for anybody.

[soma]

Doesn't seem to release memory (try adding and deleting components).

That problem is known afaik. It's to do with the undo buffer IIRC.

I'll add it to the list. I remember finding that problem in XT1 at one point but this is the first time I've heard about it in XT2.

J8- XT does not seem to release memory when deleting components.

[Caleb]

I thought the point of this was the claim that XT2 is sucking the juice while supposedly doing nothing.

I agree that it's performance with a loaded project is far more important, but if the claim is that it's not performance friendly even with nothing loaded then wouldn't you want to address that first - or at least have an explanation for it?

But the idea of moving on to a common project isn't a bad idea - it will see how the performance scales depending on configurations. You might indeed find that my figures become bloody awful with a loaded project and someone who's figures currently look grim might actually scale better.

Regards
Caleb

[druid]

I agree, the original intent of this was a problem in eXT before you do anything in it. It seems ok to me, but that's me.

I'm happy to test a default project as long as the person uses inbuilt XT2 synth and effects and no samples, because I rename all my VSTs so it won't be loading the same if people use them. :P

[UltraJv]

The thing is that you may find that the CPU idling figure has no affect on a real project - the only way to find out is to test again with a project and compare the difference to what people have found at idle. If there is a problem, the project will be the same percentage higher when subtracted from the idle. This will all be useless for those running other background software on their machines though (virus checkers, firewalls, ASIO4ALL etc), you would expect a higher idle figure in that case.

[Caleb]

I was going to say that's pretty much what I just said with more details - but then I re-read your post and realise I have no idea what you just said.

Regards
Caleb