Wow 72 tracks 55% cpu no issues

[Warren]

Not quite sure if this is the most accurite of tests, but I was still very happy.
I had stopped all processes, except for the ones needed for network and audio.

I ran guitar through all 72 tracks and applied comp and EQ to 32 of them.
I am using a dual XEON 3.2 gig w/4 gig ram buffers 1 x 32 forced SAC to one cpu and SAC reported 55% and windows reported 25% on the cpu that SAC was running on and reported 3% on the other. The system stayed that way very stable for one and a half hours it was 12:30 am. I am continuing to see all that can be done to increase performance. I also am using XPlite to decrease the windows bloat.

Also as I stated I am not sure how great a test this is but its sure the best news I have had since working with SAW years ago.

Thanks Bob for a darn fine product, very nice indeed!

Warren (Chris)

[Bob L]

That's pretty impressive... 1 x 32.

Bob L

[AudioAstronomer]

That's pretty impressive... 1 x 32.

Bob L

I'm able to run at 1x64 now with force single cpu after the macbook tweaks. :D

I just finished a short rehearsal with zero gitches at 1x64, and no sync inssues.

[Naturally Digital]

I ran guitar through all 72 tracks and applied comp and EQ to 32 of them.
I am using a dual XEON 3.2 gig w/4 gig ram buffers 1 x 32 forced SAC to one cpu and SAC reported 55% and windows reported 25% on the cpu that SAC was running on and reported 3% on the other. The system stayed that way very stable for one and a half hours it was 12:30 am. I am continuing to see all that can be done to increase performance. I also am using XPlite to decrease the windows bloat. What interface and motherboard are you running?

[Naturally Digital]

I'm able to run at 1x64 now with force single cpu after the macbook tweaks. :D Have you tested it? Is force single cpu actually improving performance? :eek:

[Warren]

Was able to reduce SAC CPU % down to 50% w/mono 72 tracks (32 had comp & EQ) windows stated 23% on the CPU that SAC was on and 2% on the other.

Part of this was due to suspending (Processes -S) both TOTALMIX and HDSP9652 settings programs after the presets were made, via batch files and resumed (Processes -R) them whem they need to be readjusted. The system was still very stable at 1 x 32 buffers and had no dropouts, delays or drifting for as long as I wanted to run the system. Still trying to reduce processes but not to many more avail at this point.

I think I shall see if it can run the complete 72 stereo tracks w/native effects, 6 aux and 24 outs and the same buffer settings but at this rate I don't think it will crash by the way its acting, At least thats what I want to believe.:D

Seems odd that most all "services" microsoft claims will make XP unstable when turned off, actually stablize the system when they are turned off.

Also the services that are meant to help with security concerns, are actually a security risk.

Off to tinker once again.
Having lots of fun with SAC.

[AudioAstronomer]

Have you tested it? Is force single cpu actually improving performance? :eek:

Yes I have.

It is important on my new macbook pro. Otherwire engaging the EQ's causes a cpu spike in both SAC and SAW. :(

I can't figure out why for the life of me.

[Warren]

What interface and motherboard are you running?

I am running:

IWILL DH800 MOTHERBOARD
TWO XEON 3.2 Gig processors
4 Gig ram
Matrox P750 three head video card
RME HDSP9652
TWO TASCAM MX2424 for ADDA

WINDOWS XP PRO SP2
XPLITE reducing as much bloat as possible
A utility call PROCESS.exe to kill, suspend or resume processes
I kill as much processes as possible leaving AUDIO, and NETWORK processes running via batch files.

I force the affinity of SAC, to only cpu1 letting windows have cpu0
this is also done by process.exe I set SAC to realtime.

I also suspend TOTALMIX and HDSPsettings processes until I need to re-adjust them.

I am still fiddling with it bu I doubt there is much more I can do to reduce the cpu loads, but at this point I don't feel as though it is really needed, as it is fairly los and very stable at this point. :D

I is a happy guy!!! :D :D

[DominicPerry]

I'm down to 5 services on my music rig. It was 4 with the Digiface but for some wild reason I need to run Windows Audio to support my EchoAudioFire's midi ports.

Dominic

[Warren]

I'm down to 5 services on my music rig. It was 4 with the Digiface but for some wild reason I need to run Windows Audio to support my EchoAudioFire's midi ports.

Dominic

What kind of track count and cpu loads are you experiancing?

[IraSeigel]

I am running:

IWILL
WINDOWS XP PRO SP2
XPLITE reducing as much bloat as possible
A utility call PROCESS.exe to kill, suspend or resume processes
I kill as much processes as possible leaving AUDIO, and NETWORK processes running via batch files.


Hi Warren,
Thanks for this very useful info. I'm assuming you're talking about this utility?: http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html

And the Process.exe comes from where?

Thanks,
Ira

[DominicPerry]

I can only run 6 ins and 6 outs using my present interface, so it's not much of a guide. I occasionally hit 2% :D .

It's a laptop, I spent ages trimming everything down to the bare minimum so it's super stable and gives me the best latency. But in reality it runs nearly as well with the other boot - with networking, AV, firewall, etc etc. I think the bus speed and the architecture of the machine is the biggest factor in defining what latency you can get, after the drivers. Using SAW (not SAC) I get 2x64 on the Music build and 4x64 on the Internet build.

Dominic

[Warren]

I can only run 6 ins and 6 outs using my present interface, so it's not much of a guide. I occasionally hit 2% :D .

It's a laptop, I spent ages trimming everything down to the bare minimum so it's super stable and gives me the best latency. But in reality it runs nearly as well with the other boot - with networking, AV, firewall, etc etc. I think the bus speed and the architecture of the machine is the biggest factor in defining what latency you can get, after the drivers. Using SAW (not SAC) I get 2x64 on the Music build and 4x64 on the Internet build.

Dominic

Wht I meant was play a guitar through track one then on tracks 2-72 assign the inputs to the same input device that the guitar is using to get the guitar going through all 72 tracks. Go live and see what the cpu% load is, now add Comp and EQ to at least 32 tracks. That is the test I am currently doing and I am getting very stable results.

Have fun!!! :D

[Warren]

Hi Warren,
Thanks for this very useful info. I'm assuming you're talking about this utility?: http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html

And the Process.exe comes from where?

Thanks,
Ira

Hi Ira
Sure hope it helps anyone with an unstable system or low track count.

Yes
http://www.litepc.com/xplite.html is the one.

Also Processes from below.
http://www.beyondlogic.org/solutions/processutil/processutil.htm
Using the following switches

Process -K = Kill
Process -S = Suspend
Process -R = Resume

I can't say that my settings will benifet all but it made my system scream, just not out loud.:D

All the best

[DominicPerry]

Warren,

this doesn't work for me. I get a complete audio disaster after about 10 tracks. I didn't realise I could assign the same input to multiple tracks - what's the reason for being able to do this?

I can get 62 tracks with SAC reporting 95% (and task manager reporting 87%) but with only 10 tracks I get something which sounds horrible, even though CPU is hitting only 15%.

I'm using a P4M laptop 1.7GHz, 2GB RAM.

Dominic

[Warren]

Warren,

this doesn't work for me. I get a complete audio disaster after about 10 tracks. I didn't realise I could assign the same input to multiple tracks - what's the reason for being able to do this?

I can get 62 tracks with SAC reporting 95% (and task manager reporting 87%) but with only 10 tracks I get something which sounds horrible, even though CPU is hitting only 15%.

I'm using a P4M laptop 1.7GHz, 2GB RAM.

Dominic

Might need more ram not sure?

Thats the pits, do you has windows sounds selected? If so set it to no sounds.

Anyway the reason to send gtr through all inputs is to fully test the engine by adding all inputs, gates, EQ, and Comp to determine how much your system can handle before locking up so your careful not to during an event.

The reason this option is avail is so you can say add a clean channel of vox and on the other effected now you can gain ride faders of both for a special and clean vocal mix or gtr , bass etc.

At least that is how I would be using it.
There may be other uses as well.

Have fun :)

[Bob L]

Dominic... many reasons to double up a channel assignment, especially in complex show setups where you may want the guitar clean and then dirty instantly... simply assign it to two channels, setup as needed and switch channels when necessary with the mute switch.

Be careful though... if you assign the same signal to multiple channels and leave your input faders at zero, you are going to reach total clipping distortion on your out chan very quickly... if you do ten channels for a test, make sure to go to the master Out channel and drop the level -20db or more to get the signal back within reason... you will notice though that SAC's internal mix bus did not clip the signal and loose data... simply bring the out level back into proper range and all should be crystal clear.

Bob L

[DominicPerry]

Thanks for the explanation Bob.

Warren, I can manage about 20 tracks, all with high pass, low pass, all 5 bands of EQ, gate and comp and one aux return active with Freeverb in it.
Runs at 2x64 but tends to slip. Seems steady at 4x64. This clocks about 75% CPU. If I push any more, it starts to slip away...........................

This is now an 'old' machine, P4M laptop, 1.7 GHz, 2GB RAM. Much as I feel upset that I can't run 72 channels, when I compare it to the 16 track Phonic desk I have, I soon remember why SAC is superior.

Dominic

[ffarrell]

Warren,

what's the reason for being able to do this?

Dominic

HI:

Lets say you wanted to do a trick like the recording guys do. You could have two channels of the same input one unprocessed and the other heavily processed then blend the two.


thanks
fvf

[Iain Westland]

HI:

Lets say you wanted to do a trick like the recording guys do. You could have two channels of the same input one unprocessed and the other heavily processed then blend the two.


thanks
fvf

nope, never done that to drums, ever, at all, in any way, honest

[DominicPerry]

Warren - dual XEON procs? Is this an ex-server? Quite an unusual choice for a desktop. Was it $$$$$$?

Dominic

[Warren]

Warren - dual XEON procs? Is this an ex-server? Quite an unusual choice for a desktop. Was it $$$$$$?

Dominic

Hi Dominic:

No not a server, it was the biggist option avail. at ADK (DAW Builder) a few years back. I took there design options and built it myself same parts just went to different sources to aquire the parts, and saved quite a lot.

[DominicPerry]

Warren,

Sorry to be a pain but, I know you have and IWILL DH800 MoBo but what model are the Xeons? There are quite a few at 3.2GHz.
I think the Xeon is the secret to your 1x32 buffers. But they are pretty pricey, I'm trying to find the older models.
Thanks

Dominic

[Warren]

Warren,

Sorry to be a pain but, I know you have and IWILL DH800 MoBo but what model are the Xeons? There are quite a few at 3.2GHz.
I think the Xeon is the secret to your 1x32 buffers. But they are pretty pricey, I'm trying to find the older models.
Thanks

Dominic

There the Nocona's

I am now thinking of a new machine using AMD processors but I need to do a bit more research.

I am sure in time you will get better results.
All the best.