|
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Performance difference between Native and HDX
I currently have ProTools HD 10.2 with a Native card and an Omni and HD unit. I have had good luck and performance. Recently I have been running enough tracks, with Rtas plug-ins, sends, and automation that I am running up against the Native CPU limit.
What I am curious for those who have switched from native to HDX. Are there any additional pro tools functions (non plug-in DSP) that are processed through the HDX card that are not processed as part of the Native card such that a person would see an improvement going to HDX from Native? PC: Windows 7 Professional 64-bit / ASUS P6X58-E WS / Intel Xeon W3680 @ 3.33 GHz / 24GB RAM MEM [4GBx3 CRUCIAL_CT3KIT51272BA1339 ECC Non-Buffered; 2 kits] / Gigabyte nVidia GTX 470 1280MB / 128GB M4 SSD System Drive / 128GB M4 SSD active session drive / 1 OCZ 60GB SSD Page file / multiple HDD for storage |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
Quote:
Hope that helps. Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
Quote:
Yes, that answers my question at a high level. My situation, I am mixing and I have some plug-ins which consume significant CPU (Native). My limited understanding is that the CPU (Native) is a measure of the most difficult "task" within the session. It is also an indicator for when I am "maxing" out my session as the system errors out and/or the playback performance is poor. In my case, changing the # of cores or CPU % Utilization doesn't improve this "task" performance or lower the CPU (Native bar). What appears is that the combination of "# or cores" and CPU% utilization can improve, what I'd would call, the reliability of the system from error'ing out. I watch the little "peak" meter on the CPU (Native) meter vs the primary CPU bar to find a sweet spot where this "peak" doesn't jump back and forth a lot between the max and the current CPU (Native) bar. In the back of my mind I was hoping to understand if HDX would take some of the processing from within this worst case "task" and thus reduce the CPU (Native) level. Based on what you're saying, that is less than likely. Thank you! Jay |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
the only thing the dsp doesnt do is rtas plug ins... it handles all of the playback, record, track builds, aux sends, ect... that can be alot for ur computer to handle and the DSP handles it all beautifully... leaving ur computer for just rtas some screen movements i think and things like reason for example
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
Quote:
I think your point is also, dependent on the complexity of the session the improvement in performance could be significant especially with respect to their systems capabilities. Thanks, Jay |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
I wonder if a new i7/X79 mobo setup would net an improvement? I have read that the XEON cpu doesn't do nearly as well. Comments?
__________________
HP Z4 workstation, Mbox Studio https://www.facebook.com/search/top/...0sound%20works The better I drink, the more I mix BTW, my name is Dave, but most people call me.........................Dave |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
I am curious, what have you read that makes the XEON cpu's do less well. Could you share.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
Quote:
Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Performance difference between Native and HDX
Quote:
Shane
__________________
Pro Tools Power User Editing Give your plug-ins a facelift...and skin 'em! __________________ "Music should be performed by the musician, not by the engineer." Michael Wagener 25th July 2005, 02:59 PM __________________ Pro Tools|HD Native 9.0.1 | Pro Tools|HDX 10.2 | Studio One | REAPER 4.22 | HD OMNI | HoboMac Pro 2.26Ghz Quad-Core | W7 Ultimate 64-bit |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Performance difference on Macbook Pro | lampmusic | Pro Tools 11 | 3 | 08-05-2013 03:55 AM |
Performance difference? | adflaker | macOS | 2 | 01-14-2012 06:59 AM |
Has anyone noticed a performance difference with PT 8? | postprosound | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 0 | 12-21-2008 11:37 AM |
Much performance difference between PCI and PCI-X? | PhilBuckle | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 10 | 01-27-2006 03:44 PM |
16 VS 24 Bit. Performance Difference? | a2zproductions | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 10 | 06-07-2001 11:36 AM |