Re: CPU Usage difference
Re: CPU Usage difference
- Subject: Re: CPU Usage difference
- From: Richard Dobson <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 14:29:26 +0000
tahome izwah wrote:
Yes but you have multiple cores so it's not a big issue, right? It's
no secret that noone is optimizing code too much these days...
You may be right... the current (March) issue of Sound on Sound has a
review of Cubase 5, and includes a small panel on the "Reverence"
reverb. The reviewer writes:
"I did encounter a slight performance issue when running the surround
version.. on my test computer, an older but still powerful dual
quad-core Xeon...at 2.66GHz and 16GB memory. Cubase's red CPU overload
indicator started flashing and the audio output became garbled. This
would happen...with only one 5.1 track and only Reverence loaded....the
stereo version worked fine..and seemed quite efficient"
One observation at the end of the review indicates strongly that the
reviewer was using Tiger, but it is nowhere stated explicitly.
I have just written to SoS to ask why on earth they did not use Activity
monitor to view the work on each CPU. But the above could easily be
explained if both reverb formats had but one core to run on, so that
despite the machine having eight of them, a plugin will only be able to
use one of them. On the face of it, such a machine should have no
trouble whatsoever running a single 5.1 convolution reverb - but only if
said plugin has multiple cores available, or the plugin is maximally
optimised to run on one.
So it may be that optimisation techniques remain relevant, however many
cores a machine has.
Richard Dobson
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Coreaudio-api mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden