SAC Computer Performance

[William Bushnell]

I have a question concerning my SAC computer performance. I am running XP Pro with Bob's suggested tweaks and the computer running on one CPU. Here is what I have setup.

FOH and 5 monitors
22 channels, 3 sub groups
No channel strip EQ or dynamics
2 AUX sends on each channel
Studio Reverb on FOH return 1
Studio Reverb on return 2 of each of the 5 monitors (Is ther a more efficient method of getting reverb on the 5 monitor mixers?)
No other plugins
Total Mix

With SAC set to 2 buffers and 32 samples the load is 50 to 52 % and when set to 2 buffers and 64 samples the load is 30 to 32 %. While it seems very stable at either of these settings the load readings seem really high compared to what others have mentioned. And this is only 22 channels with channel strip EQ and dynamics, output channe(s) EQ and compression yet to be added.

Hardware:
Intel Pentium D 3.6 Ghz CPU (The 2 core processor before the core 2 duo CPU's came out)
Intel D945GNT Motherboard
3 GB DDR2 RAM
SATA 3 system and data drives
RME PCI card to Digiface
3 ADA 8000 converters

Bob and others have mentione the Core 2 duo processors are more effeicient. If there is a big difference between a core 2 duo and the Pentium D then I'm thinking I should use this computer for the remote and build a new main system to run SAC. Thanks.
____________
William Bushnell

[Bob L]

That still should be fine... but... the 5 reverbs are most likely adding to the cpu load... try just one reverb on the FOH and then select pre or pst tap for the return channels on the monitor mixes.

This will also allow you to easily mute the FOH verb which will also mute the verb on all monitro mixes at the same time.

Shouls lighten the cpu load a bit.

Running at 32 samples is a real beatup on the cpu... that means all mix processing only has about .75 ms to finish... I would suggest using the 64 sample setting.

Yes... the Duo Core 2 processors are drastic in their performance improvement over the older P4 processors... at least in my experience.

Bob L

[William Bushnell]

Hi Bob,

As you suggested removing the Studio Reverb from each of the 5 monitor mixers reduced the Load reading , in this case, about 7%. However, I am not able to use the FOH reverb for the monitor mixers because I want the FOH and monitor mixers to be completely independent from each other. For me this is important. I tried both the pre and post tap point on the return channel but each setting had it own restrictions.

I hope when I add what I need for input channel dynamics and EQ plus what ever processing the output channels need, I will still have enough head room for a stable system. Thanks for your help.
____________
William Bushnell

[Bob L]

If you want to keep FOH and monitor verbs separate... then use a verb in FOH and a verb in the First Monitor Mix 1... this can then be used as the master monitor mixer and the rest of the monitor mixes can be tapped post on the return channels from that.

Bob L

[William Bushnell]

Thanks, I will give that a try.

____________
William Bushnell