Mojave & hyperthreading off

[digiot]

Originally Posted by JFreak

I can confirm this makes PT usable on Mojave with lowest 32 buffer -- CPU load behaves nicely.

Doesn't disabeling Hyper-threading basically cut your CPU power in half!?

[jjnssn]

Originally Posted by Emi

Wow! Most stable Protools platform I have ever had. No spikes and chrashes....smooth.

Sorry, I just had to share it with you.

Did you update to 10.14.2?

Also, do you leave turbo boost on?

Are you only disabling Hyperthreading?

Are you limiting the CPU?

THNKS! J

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by digiot

Doesn't disabeling Hyper-threading basically cut your CPU power in half!?

No, just as enabling it doesn't double it. Hyperthreading has always been shaky due to its nature. True, the core might be idle at times, and giving it something else to do is a good idea for OFFLINE work. But if you think Protools and people who like to use 32 buffer instead of 256 for tracking, you need to move those data streams quickly and predictably (which is the #1 reason DSP systems still exist). So, if you want low buffers, hyperthreading doesn't look so good anymore, doesn't it?

[indeloon85]

So I just tried turning off hyperthreading on 10.13.6. Definitely can’t handle 32 samples. Does ok at 64 though, but hoping this is still just the CPU spike bug that they mention on the site.

[Darryl Ramm]

32 samples is unreliable territory at the best of times. You likely should not have an expectation that works (and I'll be unconvinced by arguments that anybody needs 32 sampels vs 64 samples... and if you do then HDX is a reliable option).

[JFreak]

I have 32 samples working just okay on mojave with hyperthreading off

(mac pro 6.1 w/ 64GB memory and 1TB storage)

just testing though, in real life i use 256 buffer to avoid sudden stops while recording

[Emi]

Originally Posted by jjnssn

Did you update to 10.14.2?
Yes, but only test it with the internal Mac mini output. I have all my motu system out of the studio for a recording. With the Mac internal output was ok at 64, but at 32 it ran for about 2 min until the death message. I’ll post back once I test it.

Also, do you leave turbo boost on?
Yes, I’ve noticed that it performs better with it on. If I disable it it may cause some weird crashes and I’d have to restart the computer.

Are you only disabling Hyperthreading?
Yes

Are you limiting the CPU?
No, why should I do that?

THNKS! J

Anytime

[Emi]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

32 samples is unreliable territory at the best of times. You likely should not have an expectation that works (and I'll be uncionvinced by arguemnts that anybody needs 32 sampels vs 64 samples... and if you do then HDX is a reliable option).

You’re right. I’m usually at 256 for mixing and 128 for recording, sometime go down to 64...but only with picky players.

[JFreak]

Yea there is no such thing as zero latency. HD systems build up latency as you add plugins, didn't you know? If I have some stuff on the mixer that the artist wants, the DSP latency is easily about 256 samples and somehow it's okay because it's HD

256 samples @48k is 5.33ms

[Darryl Ramm]

Well you at least have the option of stability at very low latency... if you want to mess that up by letting people get what they want and adding plugin latency... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯