[ddots-l] Re: Ultimate DAW!
- From: "Sean A. Cummins" <seanacummins@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 06:59:54 -0700
Hi Albert,
I'm most interested in the "Mom publishes simple facelift trick" at the end
of your post! LOL!
SeanA
----- Original Message -----
From: <albertm13@xxxxxxxx>
To: <ddots-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 5:26 AM
Subject: [ddots-l] Re: Ultimate DAW!
Hi,
I'm posting this for Bryan Smart due to a problem:
Of course, most of this is a near total waste.
Most DAWs, including Sonar, aren't so great at spreading the work around to
multiple processor cores. Sonar can certainly find use for two cores. If you
have a quad core processor, your third core might be a good place for
Windows to push some of your OS processes, and your fourth core can try to
run Jaws (just kidding). Beyond that, though, you aren't going to see much
of a boost.
When I started using systems with lots of cores, I anticipated that Sonar
would be able to spread my synth and effect plug-ins out among all available
cores, but it doesn't really work that way. Some parts of the mixing engine
can't be broken out to multiple processors, and becomes a bottleneck. Put
more simply, imagine that the mixing engine has 100 things to do, and you
have 5 synths, each with 100 things to do. If you have 6 cores, all 5
synths, plus the mixing engine, should have their own dedicated core, and be
able to work at the same speed, right? Wrong. The synths might do 4 things,
but then have to wait on the mixing engine to get through 6 or 8 things
before it is ready for them to do additional work. The result is that, for a
lot of the time, those synths are on other cores, paused, waiting on some
part of Sonar to be ready for them to work again.
The bottom line is that each core helps less than the one before. 2 cores
are a lot better than 1. 4 are a little better than 2. 6 or 8 are barely any
different than 4. For the last 1.5 years, I've been using a dual processor
Mac Pro that has 2 quad-core Xeon processors with hyperthreading. I
therefore have 8 physical and 8 virtual processor cores. Most of the time,
three fourths of them are idle. Even in a massively loaded project, Sonar
just isn't able to split up the work enough to make use of all of them. The
only DAW I've used so far that does well with lots of cores is Logic, but
that would figure, right?
The 64GB of memory also made me laugh. Most people that I talk to have a
hard time using 4GB. I know a few people that are actually using enough
sample libraries to where 4GB isn't enough, but 8GB is almost always plenty.
No way that anyone, outside of someone on some massive hollywood project, be
able to find a use for 8 times that much, other than to see how fast they
can spend their money.
Solid state drives are always a good upgrade, though, if you can afford
them.
Bryan
____________________________________________________________
Woman is 57 But Looks 27
Mom publishes simple facelift trick that angered doctors...
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/500aa0ad7c08220ad7a2cst53duc
PLEASE READ THIS FOOTER AT LEAST ONCE!
To leave the list, click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=subscribe
If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
unsubscribe
For other list commands such as vacation mode,
click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subjectúq or
send a message, to
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
faq
PLEASE READ THIS FOOTER AT LEAST ONCE!
To leave the list, click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
If this link doesn't work then send a message to:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
unsubscribe
For other list commands such as vacation mode,
click on the immediately following link:
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=faq or
send a message, to
ddots-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
and in the Subject line type
faq
Other related posts:
