Is DP 7.2 using all 8 cores on your Mac Pro?

[BobK]

I've been trying to sort out the relative merits of 4 vs 8 cores:

http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... =9&t=42777

From posts I've read over at Mac Performance Guide, it appears that not all apps can use multiple cores, and so having 8 cores isn't necessarily better than 4. Better to spend the money on a faster processor.

So I'm wondering: those of you with 8-core Mac Pros, when you check Activity Monitor while running a large DP project, does it show all 8 cores being used?

Here's some info at MPG about this: http://macperformanceguide.com/Optimizing-Cores.html

I'd appreciate any data points, since I'm considering taking the leap on a used 8-core Mac Pro.

Thanks!

[Shooshie]

I can't answer in regard to 8 cores, but DP certainly uses all 4 cores in my Intel machine. "MenuMeters," a menu-bar based system metering set, allows me to keep track of what my Mac is doing all the time. DP has no problem distributing its weight around all 4 cores. The Mac and OSX are getting better about that, too, so less is required of the developer to make this happen. I would think that 8 cores would be no more problematic than 4, and certainly more powerful! In the original 8 core machine, I do recall there being a problem, possibly with OSX rather than the hardware. In any case, they're all running fine now.

Shooshie

[Elektroakoustika]

DP uses all 8 cores on my machine

[twistedtom]

Yes it uses all 8. I think there was some thing posted here and at the MOTU site about this.

[BobK]

Thanks for the responses, guys.

Yes, MOTU does say DP 'takes full advantage of the latest advances in Snow Leopard's multi-threading and multi-processor operation.'

So maybe I'm being overly cautious. I read about tests at several web sites that claimed very few apps can take full advantage of all processor cores, and they backed this up with test results from several pro apps. However, none of them were music-related. If I take MOTU's statement at face value, then DP should indeed be able to make the most of an 8-core computer.

I'm considering a used 2009 Nehalem 8-core (basic model, 2.26 GHz). Some tests found it was actually slower than the 4-core, but for apps that can fully use all cores, it's faster.

[waterstrum]

Another yes here.
I just opened Activity Monitor and DP7.2.
I brought up a fairly complex project
All eight cores are pretty much equally engaged.
The CPU meter in DP is much more worried than Activity Monitor.
Snow Leopard seems to be a huge leap in helping many apps use all available cores.
My hat is off to MOTU and Apple... DP7.2 rocks... SL is a beautiful OS.

[Elektroakoustika]

Thanks for the responses, guys.

Yes, MOTU does say DP 'takes full advantage of the latest advances in Snow Leopard's multi-threading and multi-processor operation.'

So maybe I'm being overly cautious. I read about tests at several web sites that claimed very few apps can take full advantage of all processor cores, and they backed this up with test results from several pro apps. However, none of them were music-related. If I take MOTU's statement at face value, then DP should indeed be able to make the most of an 8-core computer.

I'm considering a used 2009 Nehalem 8-core (basic model, 2.26 GHz). Some tests found it was actually slower than the 4-core, but for apps that can fully use all cores, it's faster.

I can't really think of many apps that don't use all the cores on my Mac Pro. Almost all of them do in some way or another. And plus I'm hosting most of my VI's in VE Pro which gives you the option of how many threads you want each instance to use.

I'm using the 2.26 and I don't have really any problems with it. You can see more details on my set-up here:
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... 26&t=42592" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I was working on a project tonight and had 24 LASS tracks, 5 True Strike tracks, a couple VSL tracks, and a few EW PLAY tracks running and my CPU was at 35%. All with reverb and EQ attached. Not too shabby.

The other downside of the 4-core is you're limited to using only 4 dimm slots of RAM. Which means you can only use 16GB according to Apple, but some users have been able to use 32GB if you boot in the 64-bit kernel (which from my experience DP and VE Pro run fine in, but iTunes does not).

Its up to you though. I love my Mac Pro. But the 4-core is a fine machine as well.

Good luck deciding.

-ea

[laurence]

In my tests between a quad core and 8 core using the same session I discovered that dp is not as efficient with 8 core machines as I would have liked .... It still runs a little better on the 8 core but it's more a case of if I load up a session that maxes the quad (woodcrest 3ghz) to the point of it making crackles in audio then activity monitor reports 80 % usage ....if I save the session as it is and load it On a 8 core 2.8 harpertown it begins to max out if I add about 4 more plug s (ssl waves channel strip) and is only reporting 36% usage in activity monitor...It does "feel" more responsive in the interface and while the quad is maxed it can't really do anything else , however when the 8 core is maxed in dp it can still load other programs and use the rest of the CPU ... I can render video in premiere quite fast while running dp ! So in short I think the 8 cores are better to work with but dp doesn't actually use themin proportion to the truly available power ... FYI logic utilizes the 8 cores much better and I can get about 30 % more plugins out of similar sessions comparing 8 core performance .... Still very happy with my 8 core I don't thnk u will be disappointed if u get one

[bdr]

I know there have been quite a few discussions here in the past.
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... ilit=+Core" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... ilit=+Core" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing I remember reading is that EW recommended opening a new instance of PLAY for every new sound loaded up to the number of cores as each instance uses a different core and doesn't spread it. That just confuses me even further about resource allocation.

[mess]

I know there have been quite a few discussions here in the past.
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... ilit=+Core" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.motunation.com/forum/viewtop ... ilit=+Core" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One thing I remember reading is that EW recommended opening a new instance of PLAY for every new sound loaded up to the number of cores as each instance uses a different core and doesn't spread it. That just confuses me even further about resource allocation.

Each instance of a VI runs on a single thread in the host, therefore they can't spread their load across multiple threads and/or cores. It's up to the plug-in dev to make their product multi-threaded. It's the same with ALL multi-timbral VIs. If you load up 1 instance of MachFive with 16 sounds it's going to hammer on only one core. If you load up 8 instances of M5 with only 2 sounds in each, it will spread the load far more evenly.

[bdr]

Thanks for that info, I've never heard any plug in manufacturer apart from EW advising this, that's why I was confused. I always found that when I opened 8 instances of PLAY (I have an 8 core) everything was far far more unstable.