10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

For seeking technical help with Digital Performer and/or plug-ins on MacOS.

Moderator: James Steele

Forum rules
This forum is for seeking solutions to technical problems involving Digital Performer and/or plug-ins on MacOS, as well as feature requests, criticisms, comparison to other DAWs.
Post Reply
User avatar
toodamnhip
Posts: 3840
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Contact:

10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by toodamnhip »

So after weeks of careful clean install on a new 2013 Mac Pro "trash can", I can say clearly that, on a clean install of DP on Sierra, 10.12.6, DP 8.07 is way more efficient than the new DP 10.01.
This saddens me because it means I will have to stay back in Sierra. This will get harder and harder as software and updates continue to march forward in time.

In 8.07, I can run a full, heavily automated and packed mix at 128. Even at 256 in DP 10.01, the cpu is choking.

Unless anyone has some advise on making DP 10.01 less cpu hungry, I will have to stay back in 8.07.
I will load 9.52 for MIDI muting etc, but Im staying out of 10.
Mac Pro (Late 2013
2.7 GHz 12-Core Intel Xeon E5
64 GB 1866 MHz DDR3
Mojave
DP 10.13
MOTU 8pre, MTP AV, 828 mkII
Tons of VIS and plug ins. SSD hard drives etc
mesayre
Posts: 223
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:04 am
Primary DAW OS: Windows
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by mesayre »

I believe that, as part of the audio engine work they did in 9 and 9.5, there was some mention that the latency was reduced at all buffer sizes, such that running at 256 is now the same in terms of actual round trip latency as what had been occurring at, say 128 before.

I don't recall where MOTU mentioned this—possibly in the release notes? Not saying you're not having an issue, but with my particular drivers, latency is imperceptible at 256 and not bothersome at 512. So if you have a way to actually measure that it might be worth checking.

Other thing I would check is the default option for plugins. Are they all running real-time, or are they taking advantage of Pregen?
DP 10 - Win 10 - Ultralite AVB
User avatar
MIDI Life Crisis
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Contact:

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by MIDI Life Crisis »

How one divides the cpu load is also critical. Only one large vi instrument per instantiation of the vi.
2013 Mac Pro 32GB RAM

OSX 10.14.6; DP 10; Track 16; Finale 26, iPad Pro, et al

MIDI LIFE CRISIS
User avatar
Gravity Jim
Posts: 2005
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:55 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by Gravity Jim »

Says you.
Jim Bordner

MacPro 5,1 (3.33Ghz 12-core), 32g RAM, OS X 10.14.6 • MOTU DP 10.11 • Logic Pro X 10.2.5 • Waves Platinum, UAD-2, Slate Digital, Komplete, Omnisphere 2, LASS, CineSamples, Chipsounds, V Collection 5[color]
User avatar
MIDI Life Crisis
Posts: 26254
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Contact:

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by MIDI Life Crisis »

Gravity Jim wrote:Says you.
Says MagicD and my cpu meter. Lol
2013 Mac Pro 32GB RAM

OSX 10.14.6; DP 10; Track 16; Finale 26, iPad Pro, et al

MIDI LIFE CRISIS
User avatar
Gravity Jim
Posts: 2005
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 2:55 am
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Santa Rosa, CA

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by Gravity Jim »

After getting it running right, my CPU meter indicates that DP10 runs more efficiently than DP9. I can run more instances on Kontakt, for example, with less CPU use, than I could before.

So I think it runs fine. But then, I'm just making music. I'm not reverse engineering DP so I can more effectively point out its faults and failings.
Jim Bordner

MacPro 5,1 (3.33Ghz 12-core), 32g RAM, OS X 10.14.6 • MOTU DP 10.11 • Logic Pro X 10.2.5 • Waves Platinum, UAD-2, Slate Digital, Komplete, Omnisphere 2, LASS, CineSamples, Chipsounds, V Collection 5[color]
User avatar
Yiannis
Posts: 242
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Post by Yiannis »

After reading this I did some tests using cpu hungry Acustica Aqua plugins (3 in realtime and 3 in pregen playing the same tracks at the same part of the project)and found DP 10 more cpu friendly even if it shows more cpu in Activity monitor....
What concerns me is all those inactive cpu threats.....Does anyone know why??

Image Image Image
-----------------------------------------

I am a very happy DAD.


MacPro 3.33Ghz 6core-32g Ram-10T HDs-10.12.6-Dp-10.0.1.
Korg Kronos 2-Korg Pa4X-Ensonic TS 10-Korg T3-Yamaha Dx 7iiFD-Akai S3000xl-Roland JV 2080
Genelec 1031A with KRK 10S sub-Yamaha NS10m
ULN-2..Tubetech Lca2B-Avalon 737sp-HEDD 192-Lexicon PCM 90.
Soundcraft Sapphyre 28ch
Post Reply