MOTUnation.com

I'm running a multi-core Mac Pro, running DP 8 to 9.1.

What is the best way to distribute the CPU load over the cores?

Often, projects will go in to the red when I go to lower latencies, but the Mac activity monitor shows very low CPU use.
It looks like I should have tons of headroom, but audio clipping and the red is blinking.
Some of the cores are lazy and not even being used.

Is there a way to help DP distribute the load?

Thanks

Yes, but I forget the details. Magic Dave has posted on this subject, I would do a search on his posts.

Phil

I'd like to know, too. I am using more plugins lately than "normal" and do get the occasional spike using DP 9.01.

I do remember that, if using Kontakt, it's better to use multiple instances as opposed to loading just one with multiple instruments as that somehow forces a spread amongst the cores.

Buzzy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Large and heavily scripted VI instruments should be in their own instance in f the VI, not shared. For every such VI instantiation there should be a separate faded in the mixed. This allows DP to access a separate core for each.

My impression about the CPU performance meter provided by MOTU is that is a peak reading meter, and the Apple version is average reading.

Once DP9.1 is fully sorted, it should be the answer to overworked CPUs for many.

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:Large and heavily scripted VI instruments should be in their own instance in f the VI, not shared. For every such VI instantiation there should be a separate faded in the mixed. This allows DP to access a separate core for each.

I've asked NI this directly and their response was the opposite. To use as few instances of Kontakt as possible since it handles multi-threaded operations more efficiently on its own. Now... which DAW they are comparing to I don't know. Logic for instance behaves better with 1 instance per instrument no matter what. Maybe DP is similar?

I would suspect for other sample players this is highly dependent on the underlying architecture. I know that ARIA based instruments should be spread out across instances as much as possible for instance.

Single instance definitely saves on RAM usage compared to multiple though.

I'd be curious what the results are if someone tested this though. The question gets asked a lot on other DAW forums.

Robert Randolph wrote: I've asked NI this directly and their response was the opposite.

Well that's how MagicD tells it and, in fact, it can and does reduce the processor load on my system substantially. In a non multi-core setting it would, of course, not make any difference at all. Other than that, you are correct.

Robert Randolph wrote: I'd be curious what the results are if someone tested this though. The question gets asked a lot on other DAW forums.

I assume you can deduce your answer to this from my earlier post.

Just in case you missed it...

viewtopic.php?p=530749#p530749

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:For every such VI instantiation there should be a separate ((((faded)))????? in the (((((mixed))))???. This allows DP to access a separate core for each.

I didn’t understand this sentence, can you please re-state?..Thanks

toodamnhip wrote:

MIDI Life Crisis wrote:For every such VI instantiation there should be a separate ((((faded)))????? in the (((((mixed))))???. This allows DP to access a separate core for each.

I didn’t understand this sentence, can you please re-state?..Thanks

He means fader in the mixer - auto correct error.