Pro Tools 10 stress test results - DON'T believe the hype...

[Steve Gates]

So I just finished building myself a new dual-boot Sandy Bridge Computer i7-2600k, and I have been running stress tests all week.

Verty intertesting to note is that on 2 identically cloned 10.6.8 systems, on Pro Tools 9.0.6 I am scoring 475 D-Verb 2,0's on 96 audio tracks at 98/9 % CPU usage....

when I try to do the same test on Pro Tools 10.0.1 on the mirrored 10.6.8, the same session appears at first to use only 86-89% of my CPU but after trying to play the session through , it continually chokes and runs the cpu to 99% - making any further streaming or recording - impossible. I end up only being able to run 440ish D-verbs with alot of errors...

Seriously guys ? you release a new version that is full of new crap but that runs less efficient than the last version I payed good money for?

Just thought I would mention this, since most users are unlikely to try CPU stress test between versions, and they upgrade thinking everything is automatically more efficient and streamlined....
Ya , well, Good luck with those thoughts...

I am trying to mix a song right now with 96 audio tracks, and this is why this test was relevant to my setup.... Pro Tools 9.0.6 handles the full tracks while 10.0.1 craps out all the time. Regardless of what plug-ins are in my folder.

DONT BELIEVE THE CRAP THEY WANT US TO SHOVEL.....

as well as the "better" sounding 32-bit mixer with "1000 dbs " more headroom; LLOOOLLL!
after years of avid white papers denouncing the 32-bit mixers, now the Sales dept is on a rampage, adding what every other DAW has been boasting.

So again AVID, you have, WITHOUT releasing a properly , working, stable, 9.1 version..... jumped the gun to some more bells and whistles that most dont care about, forcing us to be part of the road or part of the machine.... these tactits are wearing thin, and I am not buying into it anymore. I am selling my copy of 10 !!!

Please tread carefully towards 11 because Im about to jump ship after 12+ years of being an blind investor/user and supporter. I don't like Logic, but I don't like being screwed constantly with no warning.

Unfortunately , this did turn ranty near the end, but I really believe this is justified, enough is enough.

[CME]

Just fwiw but pt9 has the 64-bit float mix engine also. It's just that pt10 can now handle 32-bit float audio files. And also interleaved files. I also rarely assume a new version is more efficient. In fact I tend to assume the opposite unless otherwise stated. Computers get faster, users want more features, programs and OS's require more power for these new features. If we could get pt6 to run on these new machines we could probably get 1000 dverbs.

Now I do hope pt11 finally is a whole new version and with the move to aax is seemingly more efficient and stable. If it is new from the ground up though, I'm not holding my breathe on the stability part. At least not at first.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[drumzalicious]

Could explain why every since i switched I've had some issues. I'm pretty sure Pro Tools just freezes and quits about 2-3 times a day now. I don't know what the heck the issue is but its got me contemplating going back to 9. I love the clip gain and such but this is ridiculous.

[Drew Mazurek]

Just go back to your PT9 partition and wait it out.

You have one of those right?

If not, you just learn a good lesson didn't you?

[Dism]

Originally Posted by Steve Gates

I don't like Logic, but I don't like being screwed constantly with no warning.

You realize the irony in this statement... right?

Sounds a little fishy that someone would start a brand new account just to complain... especially with no Sandra report, explanation of exactly what system you're using, plugins, etc.

Software gets more demanding on a system as it evolves. That's how the industry works. If you don't like it, I suggest you stop using computers.

I'll sacrifice a few CPU % for more/better features like clip gain, real-time fades, 32-bit float, etc... If you do a little research, you can see why some of these features are important. If you don't like them, there's nothing stopping you from using PT9.

Considering there's a full working demo of PT10 out there, no one can currently pull the excuse of being "sucked in" to buy something without knowing what they're getting.

Are you having any serious problems? Or are you really just here because you got a few less Dverbs on a Dverb test?

[Sparky1]

Originally Posted by Steve Gates

Verty intertesting to note is that on 2 identically cloned 10.6.8 systems, on Pro Tools 9.0.6 I am scoring 475 D-Verb 2,0's on 96 audio tracks at 98/9 % CPU usage....

when I try to do the same test on Pro Tools 10.0.1 on the mirrored 10.6.8, the same session appears at first to use only 86-89% of my CPU but after trying to play the session through , it continually chokes and runs the cpu to 99% - making any further streaming or recording - impossible. I end up only being able to run 440ish D-verbs with alot of errors...

Good to know...

I'll try and keep my sessions to under 400 instances of D Verb...

Sparky

[RuffinMedia]

I have agree with STEVE GATES on this one. Although I love the new features in ProTools 10, its more than a coincidence that there are so many stability issues with 10. Most of the pt10 posts are from people just like me who are having all kinds of issues. Alot of us havent been in a creative mode since PT10 and we spend our time researching and trying things out; to no avail.

I do have the option to go back to 9 but I feel a little invested in PT 10 (especially because I paid for it). I don't know about a stress test between versions but stability should be a key factor when making an upgrade. Everything else should be secondary. Not to mention that if this site didnt exist, where could we go for help? Talking to Avid about anything is gonna cost you even more money.

Anyway, I don't mean to jump on the bandwagon nor am I here to bash Avid, PT10, etc; this is just my experience with PT 10.

my 2 cents

[carlone]

Don't believe the hype of the op's email. Since he chose not to include valid info about his system (as others have said) as well as explain what his stress test consists of.
Add some facts so we can understand what you're talking about.

[Dizzi45Z]

To be fair, although i may not be able to run more D-Verbs in my sessions, PT 10 feels far more snappy to me than PT 9/8. I am certain that this is due to the new Disc Cache features. I love that when I go to record 16 audio tracks, PT begins recording the instant I hit record. PT 9/8 always had to sit for about half a second before it would start playback/recording. This was so annoying to me because sometimes I was in Punch in Mode and I had to just play a couple spots back. Every time you hit play, you would have to wait half a second. But PT 10 totally resolved this.

PT has been equally if not more stable than my PT 8.1.1 was for me. Although there may be a little more weight in version 10, it is so minimal that I don't notice it at all. In fact, until I read your tests, I would have believed the exact opposite.

[PD-John]

Originally Posted by Dizzi45Z

To be fair, although i may not be able to run more D-Verbs in my sessions, PT 10 feels far more snappy to me than PT 9/8.

I agree. I'm on PT10 Native (no Disc Cache) but it still feels a bit more zippy than 9, especially regarding playback as Dizzi says.