10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

toodamnhip · Post by **toodamnhip** » Mon Jun 03, 2019 11:58 pm

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.

mesayre · Post by **mesayre** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:11 am

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?

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:34 am

How one divides the cpu load is also critical. Only one large vi instrument per instantiation of the vi.

Gravity Jim · Post by **Gravity Jim** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:59 am

Says you.

MIDI Life Crisis · Post by **MIDI Life Crisis** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:08 pm

Gravity Jim wrote:Says you.

Says MagicD and my cpu meter. Lol

Gravity Jim · Post by **Gravity Jim** » Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:51 pm

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.

Yiannis · Post by **Yiannis** » Wed Jun 05, 2019 12:36 am

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??

MOTUnation.com

10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07

Re: 10.01 way less efficient than 8.07