|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Poor performance with 5.1.1
I have a session that is a benchmarking type session for me. In 5.1 I have the most plugins I can get without the 9128 error. I installed the 5.1.1 upgrade this weekend and now I have to remove one plugin to avoid getting the 9128 error.
What's the deal? Why would I get slightly worse performance from this upgrade? Shouldn't an upgrade improve performance or stability or both? 5.1.1 did crash on me the first time I ran it but it hasn't happened since. I searched through the documentation to see what changes were made in this release and all I found were some new features and two new plugins. Was anything donce to fix some of the stability bugs from previous releases? I couldn't find any mention of "bug" fixes. It's almost as if Digi doesn't like to admit to having any bugs in their software. If nothing was done to improve stability then I will go back to 5.1 because it has better performance. A more detailed explanation from Digi would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
__________________
LANPARTY UT nF3 250GB RT Athlon 3400 DTR G.SKILL 1G(512X2) F1-3200DSU2-1GBLC ZALMAN CNPS7000B-CU RT EnerMax EG365P-VE FMA 1.3 RT GeForce2MX |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
I was shocked after upgrading to get a "running out of CPU message" on a session that was fine under 5.1. The problem was that the upgrade had reset my CPU usage to 65%. I changed it back to 85% and the session ran fine.
Mike |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Thanks Mike. I'll have to check that when I get home today. I hope you're right. If that's the case then owe Digi an apology.
__________________
LANPARTY UT nF3 250GB RT Athlon 3400 DTR G.SKILL 1G(512X2) F1-3200DSU2-1GBLC ZALMAN CNPS7000B-CU RT EnerMax EG365P-VE FMA 1.3 RT GeForce2MX |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Nobody owes Digi an apology. It is bad programming practice to have an update or patch that overwrites user preferences! Most programs save user preferences when a patch or upgrade is applied. Digidesign chooses to set everything back to its default values, which is a poor practice. I wish they would change this practice. It is annoying to have to go back through all the setup menus to set things back the way they need to be to run properly after an update.
It causes me no problem because I know to look out for it, but it is an unnecessary annoyance! Mike
__________________
-- Mike - HP Spectre x360 Convertible 14t-ea100 - 2.9 GHz (5.0 Max Turbo) i7-1195G7 32GB RAM, OLED 3k x 2k, Iris Xe Onboard Graphics - Windows 11 - PT 2021.12 - PreSonus Quantum 2 - PreSonus Studio 24c - Mackie Onyx 1640i - Samsung T3 and T5 SSDs - Various USB2/3 and Firewire HDDs |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Yeah it resets all of your input levels as well which really wrecks a mix that has aux ins for drums or other midi modules.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Just an FYI, in the 5.1.1 info the new recommended minimum Ram is 256MB as opposed
to 128MB w/ 192MB recommended. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
theory of the conspiracy! ehehehe!
for each new version, must have new machine! eheheh [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Bassart,
Where did you get the info re: minimum RAM for PTLE 5.1.1? Everything I've read still has the same requirements listed as before... 128min. 192 recommended. The compato docs still state the original specs, as well as the 5.1.1 addendum. Please post link to new higher RAM requirements. tnx Mike
__________________
-- Mike - HP Spectre x360 Convertible 14t-ea100 - 2.9 GHz (5.0 Max Turbo) i7-1195G7 32GB RAM, OLED 3k x 2k, Iris Xe Onboard Graphics - Windows 11 - PT 2021.12 - PreSonus Quantum 2 - PreSonus Studio 24c - Mackie Onyx 1640i - Samsung T3 and T5 SSDs - Various USB2/3 and Firewire HDDs |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Yes, Digi set my CPU usage back to 65%. I guess 5.1.1 may be ok afterall. Why can't they keep user settings though? I mean, you write a program as complex as Protools but you can't keep user settings?!?! Re-dragging my windows for dual monitors is getting alittle old too...
OK, I really want Win2000/XP support. When are we going to get it? These new "powered plugins" sound interesting but I'd rather build a dual AMD system on Win2k and be done with it. Digi, will this happen before the end of this year?
__________________
LANPARTY UT nF3 250GB RT Athlon 3400 DTR G.SKILL 1G(512X2) F1-3200DSU2-1GBLC ZALMAN CNPS7000B-CU RT EnerMax EG365P-VE FMA 1.3 RT GeForce2MX |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Poor performance with 5.1.1
Just remember programming is not easy, DIGI is still ironing out alot of bugs. I'm sure by the end of the year there should be P4 support too. I can't see Windows 2000/XP support happening until 2002. DIGI doesn't want to slap a program together and send it on its way with poor programing. Let them perfect it first.
__________________
Alex www.dreamware.ca Have something to brag about...Own a Dreamware Audio PC... My Rig: AMD Athlon XP 1700+ 512MB PC2700C2 Corsair MSI KT3ULTRA ARU 2x 80GB Seagate Barracuda 4 in RAID 0 GeForce 2 Ti 64MB Lite-On 40x12x40 CD-RW 16x Pioneer DVD Intel Pro/100 + SB Audigy Digi 001 |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Poor Performance | L-Dogg | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 6 | 06-12-2006 02:21 PM |
Imac G5 poor performance | jimskiwax | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 2 | 11-18-2005 05:37 AM |
very poor performance | gaus | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 17 | 03-07-2004 06:27 PM |
Digi 001 - Mic Pre poor performance | Alan John | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 0 | 10-03-2003 01:11 PM |
G4 PT 5.0 poor Performance | ProTools4 | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 2 | 02-24-2000 12:58 AM |