Can some mac user enlighten me about cpu performance of T7 against other DAW's ?
My main DAW is still Reaper, for a great part cause of it's incredible cpu use.
T7 - performance on mac ??
-
- KVRian
- 599 posts since 8 Apr, 2014 from USA
I use Cubase, Studio One, very occasionally Logic, and of course T7. I ran some unofficial CPU tests on the first three and it came out StudioOne (by far), then Logic, then a big gap then Cubase. (Cubase has improved with its 8.5 update it seems.)
I have not done that same test with T7, but it seems to be as efficient as StudioOne in use. For example, I just completed a project where I was running 4 multi timbral instances of Kontakt, Maschine, Battery4, two multi timbral instances of Omnisphere, a dozen audio tracks, plugins, a couple of reverbs, and some mastering effects on output and the CPU meter never cracked 40%.
FWIW, something that helps any DAW is to spread the processing load on the cores and the easiest way to do this is to limit the number of multi timbral instances you use to a minimum (and even those should only have a couple of instruments in each instance). Running multiple copies of Kontakt (one per instrument even) has little overhead penalty and insures the processing is spread out. T7 seems to respond very well to this strategy.
Sorry for the rambling reply!
I have not done that same test with T7, but it seems to be as efficient as StudioOne in use. For example, I just completed a project where I was running 4 multi timbral instances of Kontakt, Maschine, Battery4, two multi timbral instances of Omnisphere, a dozen audio tracks, plugins, a couple of reverbs, and some mastering effects on output and the CPU meter never cracked 40%.
FWIW, something that helps any DAW is to spread the processing load on the cores and the easiest way to do this is to limit the number of multi timbral instances you use to a minimum (and even those should only have a couple of instruments in each instance). Running multiple copies of Kontakt (one per instrument even) has little overhead penalty and insures the processing is spread out. T7 seems to respond very well to this strategy.
Sorry for the rambling reply!
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 260 posts since 23 Oct, 2004
Hi !
Many thanks for your help !
Wat stunns me is that you state that S1 rules by far ,concerning cpu performance.
In my experience and from what i have read, S1 cpu performance is very bad on mac.
That's why i dropped S1.
Glad to hear T7 performs well for you :0)
EDIT: Good tip about that spreading load !
Many thanks for your help !
Wat stunns me is that you state that S1 rules by far ,concerning cpu performance.
In my experience and from what i have read, S1 cpu performance is very bad on mac.
That's why i dropped S1.
Glad to hear T7 performs well for you :0)
EDIT: Good tip about that spreading load !
Rob van Hees
-
- KVRian
- 599 posts since 8 Apr, 2014 from USA
Hmm...S1v3 has been a stellar CPU performer for me. Give it another try when you have a chance. They have a 30 day demo. Cheers!
-
- Banned
- 1376 posts since 23 Jun, 2007 from france
I face some severe plugin UI lazziness on OSX.this issue happens with plugins which have animated UI as microtonic or when there is an automated parameter assigned to the plugin.