KVR Audio

ChrisBurton · Post by **ChrisBurton** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:24 am

Hey there,
i have an Intel Core i7 4790K, 16 Gb DDR3 RAM and Windows 8.1 (64 Bit).
When i am working in Fl Studio, it shows me high Cpu usage (up to 80%).. I set up my buffer length but nothig changed.. Fl Studio is still at 80%.. but my Taskmanager from Windows Shows me a usage of 12%..
What's wrong?

Thank You

goatgirl · Post by **goatgirl** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:45 pm

Nothing is wrong!

Many DAW's report worse case usage with cores. So if you have 8 system cores and FL uses 80% of a single core then you still have 7 and a bit cores left, which is about 12% usage as your system is reporting.

Other cores will fire up when needed, so make sure you run with power modes set to high performance to prevent any core latency and you should not get any pops and crackles either.

dsan@mail.com · Post by **dsan@mail.com** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 7:36 pm

A thorough read of this page is highly recommended:
https://www.image-line.com/support/FLHe ... derrun.htm

You should also consider reading this page for some additional thoughts:
https://www.ableton.com/en/articles/reduce-cpu-load/

As goatgirl points out, the CPU usage being reported in FL or Live or any other DAW for that matter is not "Actual" CPU usage but based on the core currently utilized. (in as much as I understand what's going on

)

Here's another thought; you should allow your DAW to handle multi core activity; meaning, if you are running Kontakt or another multi core capable plug, disable the multi core ability in the plug preferences, enable the multi core ability in the DAW. One or the other only should handle the multi core duties.

HTH

Happy Musiking!
dsan

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:37 pm

Forgive me.

When you are on a core2duo. Those "suggestions" might make sense.

You should not need them for an i7 desktop.

In fact, concerning FL studio, every time I upgrade a computer I launch my "lifetime free updates" version and it's unusable. Clearly this isn't the case for everyone, and I'm open to suggestions, but raising the buffer to a level where you can't do real-time audio/midi isn't an option when you get into computers that are as fast as the OP/my computer.

Hosts frustrate me to no end with this. Studio one is dicey, live is pretty damn good, sonar on the other i7 was good, reaper is fabulous. Ask someone else and they'll give you the exact opposite answer.

I've tried it all. Coreparking, background services, making my computer look like shit (turning off all the eyecandy that is supposed to be so terrible) and it NEVER makes any difference. Usually, it just makes everything worse.

Anyways, rant over, but I feel for the OP. I'd love to get FL to work but it hasn't been any good CPU wise on any computer for about a decade........regardless of computer horsepower.

Mivo · Post by **Mivo** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 4:19 am

goatgirl wrote:So if you have 8 system cores and FL uses 80% of a single core then you still have 7 and a bit cores left, which is about 12% usage as your system is reporting.

It doesn't actually work quite like this/linearly. 8 cores doesn't mean that if one core is busy, you have seven times as much capacity left. Also, many VSTs do not support multiple cores (yet).

goatgirl · Post by **goatgirl** » Wed Oct 22, 2014 7:40 am

Mivo wrote: It doesn't actually work quite like this/linearly. 8 cores doesn't mean that if one core is busy, you have seven times as much capacity left. Also, many VSTs do not support multiple cores (yet).

I know it is more complicated in reality. It was just a simplified way of explaining something that makes sense without writing a 100 page post.

Image-Line · Post by **Image-Line** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:29 pm

hibidy wrote:In fact, concerning FL studio, every time I upgrade a computer I launch my "lifetime free updates" version and it's unusable. Clearly this isn't the case for everyone, and I'm open to suggestions, but raising the buffer to a level where you can't do real-time audio/midi isn't an option when you get into computers that are as fast as the OP/my computer.

Does this happen with the demo projects or just your own?

What plugins are you using?

Regards Scott

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:57 am

Demo projects.

My specs: i7 4770/SSD/16 GB ram/quality focusrite soundcard with excellent drivers.

In live and bitwig, I have absolutely no issues with high track counts and many many FX.

I wish I knew WHY I have this issue. I don't see any reason in lowering the buffere or using ASIO 4 all since the other two hosts I've mentioned DON'T have this issue.

In fact, studio one doesn't either except for a few exceptions (like kontakt, very strange)

Image-Line · Post by **Image-Line** » Mon Oct 27, 2014 9:29 am

hibidy wrote:Demo projects.

My specs: i7 4770/SSD/16 GB ram/quality focusrite soundcard with excellent drivers.

In live and bitwig, I have absolutely no issues with high track counts and many many FX.

I wish I knew WHY I have this issue. I don't see any reason in lowering the buffere or using ASIO 4 all since the other two hosts I've mentioned DON'T have this issue.

In fact, studio one doesn't either except for a few exceptions (like kontakt, very strange)

I have almost the exact same rig here. i7 4770K, Intel SSD, 16 GB RAM, Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 and it runs perfect with all demo projects. I use around 10 ms latency, although its the same story at lower latencies.

If you care to drop into Techsupport and start a thread we can work through it with you.

BTW: I assume you are using High performance mode on that PC? Speed stepping on modern Intel CPUs can cause havoc.

Regards Scott

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Tue Oct 28, 2014 6:50 am

I've done that

But thanks.

but yeah, I have absolutely NO problems with live or (now demoing) bitwig.

Oddly enough, studio one gives me quite a bit of grief as well and THEY have a setting that fine "tunes" the pc and it does nothing, on either computer. I'm left feeling that it's not universal for all people.

Still, I'll try it again.......it's not like I don't have lifetime free updates and can't use it

Image-Line · Post by **Image-Line** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 2:17 am

hibidy wrote:I've done that But thanks. I'm left feeling that it's not universal for all people.

It's actually very rare to hear the symptoms you describe on a rig of your calibre with 'High performance' power settings and a Focusrite ASIO driver, unless there is something obvious overlooked, that's why I suggest we take this to Tech support and get to the bottom of it.

Here's my (almost) identical system to yours, running the New Stuff demo (and capturing a high resolution video at the same time)...

...so you can't achieve this level of smoothness/performance? What CPU load do you read at equivalent points in the project?

Regards Scott

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 6:36 am

Alright, I officially don't understand. There HAS to be something I'm doing wrong. Or is this at some incredibly high buffer rate?

goatgirl · Post by **goatgirl** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 8:57 am

If you are using Focusrite audio interface, I would get in touch with them and ask if you could try the beta software. I had lots of issues running the 6i6 with my computer which is quite a high end laptop, to the point that if I watched a youtube clip and browsed to twitter at the same time the audio would often crash. Since installing the beta mixcontrol which included updated firmware and usb drivers all the audio problems have gone away.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 9:04 am

I'll look into it, thanks

Image-Line · Post by **Image-Line** » Wed Oct 29, 2014 11:54 am

hibidy wrote:Alright, I officially don't understand. There HAS to be something I'm doing wrong. Or is this at some incredibly high buffer rate?

ASIO was set to 5 ms. These drivers (Scarlett Mix Control 1.8 exe) - http://us.focusrite.com/usb-audio-inter ... /downloads on Windows 8.1

Regards Scott

CPU Usage