Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > Pro Tools 10

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-07-2015, 07:06 PM
guitardom guitardom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 6,777
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by amagras View Post
My computer wasn't cheap to me. I don't know that you and Amack have going on but I find your post a little angry. Peace
I understand it may not have been cheap to you. But in the world of computers and related power, its fairly low on the totem pole. That is fine though as long as you are content working within its abilities.

As far as Amack, take anything he says lightly. He has more wrong information floating around this forum than 1 can possibly keep track of.
__________________

pro-tools-pc.com


TRASHER Pro Tools Utility(updated 3-6-18)

HD Native, Avid 16x16, Eleven Rack, Focusrite Clarett 8preX, UA Quad Apollo TB.

Intel I7 6800k
Win 10
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-07-2015, 07:58 PM
Amack Amack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 846
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

guitardom - Could you please be a little more specific with that "wrong information" claim? As I have stated numerous times when accused of doing so (to no avail), I would like to correct any "misinformation" that I have posted ASAP!

amagras - I'm a retired electronics engineer, so I don't believe in magic. I will do me best to find out why some computers supposedly work better than others with PTs (hopefully with some help from other members). I will do so regardless of my ability to report the results on the DUC. (I'll just find other mechanisms to do so if necessary.) Also, please note that, since guitardom has a company that sells computers for PT, his advice is likely biased. I'm comfortably retired and have no biases. I'm only in this to help guys/gals like you (and my son) get the most from their DAW investments and maximize their probability of succeeding in the business by making and distributing good sounding music that people can enjoy.

Have you seen any problems/errors in my previous posts on your threads? If so, please let me know and I will correct them. I'm also quite happy to explain things more fully if it would be helpful - I've been told and fully realize that some have trouble understanding my "tech talk" - I'm sorry for that

Amack

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitardom View Post
I understand it may not have been cheap to you. But in the world of computers and related power, its fairly low on the totem pole. That is fine though as long as you are content working within its abilities.

As far as Amack, take anything he says lightly. He has more wrong information floating around this forum than 1 can possibly keep track of.

Last edited by Amack; 09-07-2015 at 08:39 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-08-2015, 12:24 AM
guitardom guitardom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 6,777
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amack View Post
guitardom - Could you please be a little more specific with that "wrong information" claim? As I have stated numerous times when accused of doing so (to no avail), I would like to correct any "misinformation" that I have posted ASAP!

amagras - I'm a retired electronics engineer, so I don't believe in magic. I will do me best to find out why some computers supposedly work better than others with PTs (hopefully with some help from other members). I will do so regardless of my ability to report the results on the DUC. (I'll just find other mechanisms to do so if necessary.) Also, please note that, since guitardom has a company that sells computers for PT, his advice is likely biased. I'm comfortably retired and have no biases. I'm only in this to help guys/gals like you (and my son) get the most from their DAW investments and maximize their probability of succeeding in the business by making and distributing good sounding music that people can enjoy.

Have you seen any problems/errors in my previous posts on your threads? If so, please let me know and I will correct them. I'm also quite happy to explain things more fully if it would be helpful - I've been told and fully realize that some have trouble understanding my "tech talk" - I'm sorry for that

Amack
First off, I do not advertise on this forum nor do I even have a link to our website in my signature. I rarely even mention it as it is typically others that have one or someone I have helped along the way here that mentions it. I know I never brought it up to you, so not sure where you found out or why you seriously think it would be "biasing" my information.

There is an i7 thread which I helped get going with Mykhal years ago that has many builds similar to the one I use which have been more than proven. I have also helped design other systems as well on here over the last 10 years or so.

Off the shelf machines like that 8700 typically have poorly written bios and less than stellar parts, and yes that is as minimal of an i7 as they make. No, not everyone can afford 2-3k or more for a new machine which I more than understand, but you do get what you pay for and you cant expect the same performance and abilities that many of the rest of us have. It would actually probably perform ok if you stayed at 44.1-48k. It is probably not going to be suggested by anyone to go above that unless you really need to for a specific purpose. If you do go above that, it is well known that you need a far more powerful machine as it uses FAR more CPU power and drive I/O bandwidth. A 6 core is even not powerful enough for big mixes at the higher sample rates. But there is a reason most of these off the shelf machines are not recommended as you are seeing.

Have I seen problems and errors in your previous posts??? SERIOUSLY!!!!!! How many more do I have to correct?? I just invalidated your entire set of testing and claims just a few hours ago in the buffer thread. It was so full of misinformation I had to read it a couple times because I kept laughing and couldnt get through it all. Sadly that was not the first one and cant believe you would act like its not. How long did it take for you to grasp the HW Buffer on HDX?? I am actually not even sure if you completely do. How many times does it need explaining that PT software is the software. HD version just has a few more unlocked features. There is no performance benefits between the 2. Repeatedly saying the actual engineers are wrong...Shall I go on??

If you want your son to get the most from his daw, it would be best to have him on here and let him learn his way around and ask questions. There is a lot of great people around here and many with 10-20 years experience on it that know what they are talking about and lots of people have niches that they specialize in and typically answer the questions about. There is a huge wealth of knowledge and good people around here.
__________________

pro-tools-pc.com


TRASHER Pro Tools Utility(updated 3-6-18)

HD Native, Avid 16x16, Eleven Rack, Focusrite Clarett 8preX, UA Quad Apollo TB.

Intel I7 6800k
Win 10
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-10-2015, 09:57 AM
Amack Amack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 846
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

amagras,

The problem isn't your (or my) computers, it's Pro Tools. That's quite evident in how much slower and less "stable" it is than other DAWs (as I have shown in the referenced link and you can see for yourself with Ableton). I bought this XPS8700 with a msata SSD, 24 G memory, and a Samsung 850 EVO external SSD in an attempt to make PT's stable enough for simple 2448 recording sessions (which Reason never had a problem with on my much older HP computer). It didn't help.

All 4 of my PCs (with 6 different interfaces) have similar "stability" problems with standard PT11 - PT12.2. Also, even though those PCs vary greatly in performance, they all show the same PT "System Usage" "throbbing" on thread 4 (and associated audio dropouts) with only a single signal generator plugin on a signal track (and multiple tracks) when the interface's (ASIO4ALL) buffer size is low and sample rate is high. This is shown in the above referenced/linked post (which does explain how to do similar testing). It really doesn't have anything to do with what the computers are really doing (I loaded them up to test that theory). Nor was I able to degrade a computer's performance enough to produce a noticeable change.

Maybe the use of Macs, PT|HD, RME interfaces, and/or computers tailed to avoid PT shortcomings are acceptable workarounds for some, but it really doesn't address the malignant underlying problems in PT that fundamentally limits its speed and stability.

Amack

Quote:
Originally Posted by amagras View Post
Actually the difference was very small in my PC too. Thank you Amack, I'll take a look. I haven't had time to research on how to do the tests. Maybe it's in that thread?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-10-2015, 02:10 PM
musicman691 musicman691 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Soprano State (NJ)
Posts: 16,551
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amack View Post
amagras,

The problem isn't your (or my) computers, it's Pro Tools. That's quite evident in how much slower and less "stable" it is than other DAWs (as I have shown in the referenced link and you can see for yourself with Ableton). I bought this XPS8700 with a msata SSD, 24 G memory, and a Samsung 850 EVO external SSD in an attempt to make PT's stable enough for simple 2448 recording sessions (which Reason never had a problem with on my much older HP computer). It didn't help.

All 4 of my PCs (with 6 different interfaces) have similar "stability" problems with standard PT11 - PT12.2. Also, even though those PCs vary greatly in performance, they all show the same PT "System Usage" "throbbing" on thread 4 (and associated audio dropouts) with only a single signal generator plugin on a signal track (and multiple tracks) when the interface's (ASIO4ALL) buffer size is low and sample rate is high. This is shown in the above referenced/linked post (which does explain how to do similar testing). It really doesn't have anything to do with what the computers are really doing (I loaded them up to test that theory). Nor was I able to degrade a computer's performance enough to produce a noticeable change.

Maybe the use of Macs, PT|HD, RME interfaces, and/or computers tailed to avoid PT shortcomings are acceptable workarounds for some, but it really doesn't address the malignant underlying problems in PT that fundamentally limits its speed and stability.

Amack
Dude - you have no idea what you are talking about.

With a properly set up system there are no real stability problems with PT. PT is no more slower or unstable than other daw s/w. Therein lies the issue - you need to have a properly set up system and know what the heck you're doing. That you don't is a matter of record all over the DUC.
__________________
Jack
See profile for system details
iMac dead & retired as of 11/4/17

QAPLA!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-10-2015, 03:16 PM
amagras amagras is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 3,262
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman691 View Post
Dude - you have no idea what you are talking about.

With a properly set up system there are no real stability problems with PT. PT is no more slower or unstable than other daw s/w. Therein lies the issue - you need to have a properly set up system and know what the heck you're doing. That you don't is a matter of record all over the DUC.
I'll have to back up that because even though my computer is "cheap" my rig is very stable and I haven't seen a single blue screen or freeze since I replaced the fast track. This goes for both PT 10 and 12
__________________
Dell XPS 8700. Intel Core i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz. RAM: 16GB. Windows 10 Home x64. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645. NI Komplete Audio 6. Pro Tools Software 2019
amagrasmusic.com
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-10-2015, 05:07 PM
musicman691 musicman691 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Soprano State (NJ)
Posts: 16,551
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by amagras View Post
I'll have to back up that because even though my computer is "cheap" my rig is very stable and I haven't seen a single blue screen or freeze since I replaced the fast track. This goes for both PT 10 and 12
Therein lies the answer - in the hands of someone who knows what they're doing an inexpensive machine can be a killer machine.
__________________
Jack
See profile for system details
iMac dead & retired as of 11/4/17

QAPLA!
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-11-2015, 03:21 PM
Amack Amack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 846
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman691 View Post
PT is no more slower or unstable than other daw s/w.
Except at least Ableton Live 9 Lite and Reason 7-8, which can operate with "stability" using half the buffer size available in PT at 192 kHz (64 samples vs 128 samples). I suspect virtually all other DAWs can too.


PT can't even support the 32 sample buffer size available from the Motu 16A at 96 kHz!

Attached Images
File Type: jpg Ableton 2496 - 64 samples.jpg (54.5 KB, 0 views)
File Type: jpg Reason 2496 64 samples.jpg (34.5 KB, 0 views)
File Type: jpg Motu 16A.jpg (47.5 KB, 0 views)
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-11-2015, 04:01 PM
musicman691 musicman691 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Soprano State (NJ)
Posts: 16,551
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amack View Post
Except at least Ableton Live 9 Lite and Reason 7-8, which can operate with "stability" using half the buffer size available in PT at 192 kHz (64 samples vs 128 samples). I suspect virtually all other DAWs can too.


PT can't even support the 32 sample buffer size available from the Motu 16A at 96 kHz!

Do you have any real world data to back up that assertion you make about the 16A and PT? I think not. And really - who records at 192 KHz? Most real users don't. Try talking about real-world users and numbers and not so theoretical BS and then get back to me. Until then you should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Stability depends to a great deal on the interface and drivers written for it. Whatever daw is used is secondary. Also you can't judge stability based on some theory you came up with. Try actually using the program - or better yet get your son to explain it to you as he's the one that's studying this stuff in college.

Better yet - let him sign up for the DUC and start asking questions. He'll probably show you up in no time flat.
__________________
Jack
See profile for system details
iMac dead & retired as of 11/4/17

QAPLA!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-11-2015, 04:26 PM
Amack Amack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 846
Default Re: # of cores and hyperthreading

You do realize that the minimum buffer size currently available in PT at a 96 kHz sample rate is 64 samples don't you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman691 View Post
Do you have any real world data to back up that assertion you make about the 16A and PT? I think not. And really - who records at 192 KHz? Most real users don't. Try talking about real-world users and numbers and not so theoretical BS and then get back to me. Until then you should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Stability depends to a great deal on the interface and drivers written for it. Whatever daw is used is secondary. Also you can't judge stability based on some theory you came up with. Try actually using the program - or better yet get your son to explain it to you as he's the one that's studying this stuff in college.

Better yet - let him sign up for the DUC and start asking questions. He'll probably show you up in no time flat.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Problems when using all 4 cores vs. 3 cores hopelessennui macOS 1 02-03-2012 06:54 AM
Mac Octo 2.26: Almost no difference between 2 Cores and 8 Cores Hive Guy macOS 8 05-10-2011 11:05 PM
better performance from 7 cores than 15 cores? stevesound macOS 4 03-30-2011 11:48 AM
Hyperthreading Latedada 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 20 10-13-2009 02:27 AM
Hyperthreading thenchel 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 0 07-18-2006 12:39 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:41 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com