They won't, they never will, they never do, they don't care. If you really are interested, do a test yourself, prove to me I am wrong, or simply raise the issue with support yourself, and they can look at it and fix it. I have been complaining about T Racks cpu usage for years and don't have time to start a back and forth with support that will get me nowhere (it never has). I think that's more tests to prove my point than anyone could ever ask for.
#SAMPLETANK 3 CPU USAGE PRO#
I have confirmed it on my macbook pro using 12.12.6, on my imac pro using 10.13.6, on my win 7 quad 2.3ghz laptop, on bootcamp on my imac pro using windows 10, and on my friend's trashcan mac pro. They must all be faulty LOL.Įqual uses 20x the CPU of fab filter pro Q2. I've been told this for around 8 years now over 10 different macs. Please open a ticket at the link below and work with the team. I would like to assure you this isn't the typical experience with T-RackS and that our support team will be more than happy to see what could be going on here. even if you have a 16 core 4ghz overclocked monster, IK eq is going to use 20x the cpu of the Fab filter. In the video it's just a crystal well macbook pro quad 2.8ghz i7, 4500 single core geekbench, 17K multi. Yah but the imac pro has a ~10% downclock, on the other hand, mine is always at it's permanent all core turbo of 3.9ghz when running any DAW, as there are no thermal issues with the base model I've never seen it as low as the 3.2 factory speed, lowest i've seen is 3.8. I'm mainly using the BX SSL E on channels along with the Tube Tech MKII sometimes. I've heard about the high cpu usage on some of their stuff. The only thing by them I use on a regular basis is the Lurssen. I've never tried using IK stuff on every channel. What sample rate and buffer are you working at? That Xeon isn't too different from the overclocked 1700 I use. I guess I have to duplicate tracks galore to get a realistic ProQ2 figure, as i can't add enough instances on 64 stereo tracks to max it out. 960 instances of Pro Q2 is showing less on logic meter than what you saw in the video with just 64 IK Equal. Pro Q 2 with 7 bands enabled (5 bells, 2 cut filters):ĩ60, Logic cpu meter 35% across all cores, real cpu 25% per core. I also got a nasty crash when disabling or enabling individual instances with a "logic crashed due to the IK Equal plugin" message. Logic meter full, real cpu was 88% per core! Ok, final count of instances at plugin default settings. I am going to do a test stacking instances across those 64 channels to get this result :) Going by this, I would say that about 512 instances of ProQ2 would use about what 64 of Equal do. This is across 64 stereo audio tracks playing a guitar loop with one instance of each EQ.Ĭheck out the massive cpu usage difference. You have to see it to believe it, so I created a video. IK Equal, with just the default one bell enabled, vs Pro Q2 with 7 bands enabled.
Ok here's a very valid example where there is NO explanation other than a lack of optimisation. I know Peter will get upset when he reads this, and i love ya Peter so don't take this personal mate.
It's as if, Ik are just not bothered with any kind of optimisation. Sure.īut just to give you an example, the IK SSL channel uses 20x the cpu of duende Native and Waves. Ok, there can be an argument made in their favour when they are doing special analog emulations, as far as quality is concerned. I have even confirmed this now even on my reasonably powerful iMac Pro. I use special not "on every track" type of processors, but channel strips and EQ's, they consume between 10 to 20x and even higher the cpu usage of competitors. but I tend to not use them all that much due to cpu usage. I have many of the IK products over the years.
0 kommentar(er)
