Yeah that sounds reasonable, hard to say? but likely a developer could override it if they wanted to, but it would probably make the DAW unstable. It was one of the first things I thought about when the M1 was introduced, that it's possible we don't get any juice from the Efficiency cores in terms of audio processing, so honestly I was surprised that DP11 seemed to use them at all.antic604 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 2:05 amThat's a good point and something that crossed my mind as well, i.e. that there's some higher latency, lower clock or something when using those Efficiency cores? I just wonder if load allocation like you're seeing (all cores in pre-buffered mode, mostly high-performance cores in realtime) is done on the OS level, or is that something that the DAWs themselves decide? Most likely something in the middle, i.e. DAWs attach priority flags to jobs & the OS takes that into account when scheduling them?machinesworking wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 1:30 amThe fact that DP11 uses all the cores in Pregen (buffer for higher track counts), but also does not use the efficiency cores when using it's "live performance mode", points to either an Apple default, or a known issue with using Efficiency cores for real time operation. In other words if only one of them did not use the Efficiency cores like I first thought, then I would be upset, but since when DP11 is emulating Bitwig and Lives audio engine approach it also does not use the Efficiency cores, that points to a conscious programming decision.
In other words a physical limitation of using lower power cores along with high power ones in real time situations. Or, a decision to keep them for OS tasks so they don't interrupt the "unbuffered" real time audio.
One thing, it points to Bitwig probably not seeing a 1.7x increase in CPU with the Max and Pro, more like a flat 2x, since it isn't using the Efficiency cores at all really. so in my test 40 instances, and in the three note chord test 70!
