Hdx, native plugins not loading by Hdx card

[gcmella]

Hello friends!.



I have a very stranger issue.

Loading some plugins, When I select to load many are not charging on my HDX card.

From some brands as Plugin Alliance, is loaded well into the HDX cores and many others not and is charging by Internal CPU cores as Izotope or (my big trouble) Acustica Audio....

When I select these plugins from Acustica I can see that all these are loading by a single core of my internal CPU, so when I place 3-4 insert of these the system have high peaks and consequence failure, so pro tools can't to play nothing.


I see that when I'm inserting these, all going charging into a single of internal CPU. having 12 free cores on HDX card.


Any one have knowledge about this issue?

¿How can I to force it, to native plugins be charged by HDX card?

I have a iMac 2017 I7 4,2gHz 40Gb DDR4 and HDX with sonnet expansion chasis.

I have connected the chasis to the Thunderbolt 3 iMac port to the Sonnet Thunderbolt 2 with a Thunderbolt 2 cable with a Apple T3 to T2 adapter.

All system work perfectly until I insert Aqua plugins and all be loading by the only one core....

Any idea to solve and load all by HDX card?

Gonzalo

[LDS]

HDX will only host AAX-DSP plugins. Izotope and Acustica don’t make AAX-DSP plugins. Only AAX-Native.

Both Acustica and Izotope plugins require substantial CPU power. When you load multiple instances on a single channel, it will cause one CPU to spike as the plug-in chain is processed as a serial operation.

[BScout]

What LDS said.

Those aren't AAX-DSP plugins. ONLY AAX-DSP plugins can load on HDX chips.

[gcmella]

Originally Posted by LDS

HDX will only host AAX-DSP plugins. Izotope and Acustica don’t make AAX-DSP plugins. Only AAX-Native.

Both Acustica and Izotope plugins require substantial CPU power. When you load multiple instances on a single channel, it will cause one CPU to spike as the plug-in chain is processed as a serial operation.

thanks...

Really I'm not very familiar with these differences in architecture AAX-DSP or Native....

I thought that AAX-Native it was loaded by cores of HDX card and AAX-DSP by Internal CPU cores....
Really is the opposite right? I'm very lost with all this....

So from the other side, ¿why is the insert (as you can see at the capture screen) all inserts are loading only by a core and distributed by 8 cores... all be load into a core and breaking the capacity of the CPU load?.

Big question:
Really when I place only four-5 inserts from Acustica all are CHARGED IN A SINGLE CORE and break the system.

I have the buffer at maximum capacity, Testing deferent Memory cache sizes.... and ever is the same.

And doing another test, I place the playback engine from internal outputs with Hdx and work better with same conditions, but when I select the HDX card for the playback engine, don't work.

Thank so much for the answers!!

[LDS]

Originally Posted by gcmella

thanks...

Really I'm not very familiar with these differences in architecture AAX-DSP or Native....

I thought that AAX-Native it was loaded by cores of HDX card and AAX-DSP by Internal CPU cores....
Really is the opposite right? I'm very lost with all this....

So from the other side, ¿why is the insert (as you can see at the capture screen) all inserts are loading only by a core and distributed by 8 cores... all be load into a core and breaking the capacity of the CPU load?.

Big question:
Really when I place only four-5 inserts from Acustica all are CHARGED IN A SINGLE CORE and break the system.

I have the buffer at maximum capacity, Testing deferent Memory cache sizes.... and ever is the same.

And doing another test, I place the playback engine from internal outputs with Hdx and work better with same conditions, but when I select the HDX card for the playback engine, don't work.

Thank so much for the answers!!

It is a bit unclear from your screenshot what version of Pro Tools you are using. You have a lot of quite heavy plugins on a single channel. It appears you might be running HDX in classic mode too? If you have access to Pro Tools 2021.6 or later you may find that enabling hybrid mode will better suit your needs.

Acustica is unfortunately just really CPU intensive because of its dependence on dynamic impulse responses.

[gcmella]

Thanks

I'm with Protools ultimate 2019.10

That is a new and clean session with only 2-3 tracks where I've inserted some plugins in a single Chanel to was very clear the hot single core process.

But being a clean session only with 9 plugins. (is the same if a place in only one Chanel or more).

The Acustica plugins are loaded only in a single core breaking the CPU limit...
They are not distributed by other cores...

With this Protools version can I use hybrid mode? not right?

Why is overload only one core and not used all others?


Thnks so much for your help!
Gonzalo

[gcmella]

Thanks

I'm with Protools ultimate 2019.10

That is a new and clean session with only 2-3 tracks where I've inserted some plugins in a single Chanel to was very clear the hot single core process.

But being a clean session only with 9 plugins. (is the same if a place in only one Chanel or more).

The Acustica plugins are loaded only in a single core breaking the CPU limit...
They are not distributed by other cores...

With this Protools version can I use hybrid mode? not right?

Why is overload only one core and not used all others?


Thnks so much for your help!
Gonzalo

[gcmella]

Thanks

I'm with Protools ultimate 2019.10

That is a new and clean session with only 2-3 tracks where I've inserted some plugins in a single Chanel to was very clear the hot single core process.

But being a clean session only with 9 plugins. (is the same if a place in only one Chanel or more).

The Acustica plugins are loaded only in a single core breaking the CPU limit...
They are not distributed by other cores...

With this Protools version can I use hybrid mode? not right?

Why is overload only one core and not used all others?


Thnks so much for your help!
Gonzalo

[BScout]

Everything on one track has to run on one thread/core. It is because it is a serial process. The output from one plugin feeds the next. You can't split that up. The next plugin always has to wait on the previous one's output.

All DAWs have to work this way.
Different tracks can be distributed to different cores though.

And the Acustica stuff is bad for performance.

[gcmella]

Originally Posted by BScout

Everything on one track has to run on one thread/core. It is because it is a serial process. The output from one plugin feeds the next. You can't split that up. The next plugin always has to wait on the previous one's output.

All DAWs have to work this way.
Different tracks can be distributed to different cores though.

And the Acustica stuff is bad for performance.

Thanks by the explanations... understood.

I was reading about AAX Native a nd DSP and now all is clear.

Acustica sound amazing but I don't understand how is possible that only they have AAX native , when using them with a octo core is not possible to use a few inserts from Acustica at same time in a Chanel...

To don't be freeze I can't to use more that 2 - 3 plugins as much in the master Chanel, because they overload the core where is charged these, all this having 18 cores on the HDX card to work, very sad.


¿Do you know other way to load AAX Native in DSP card?

Metaplugin from DDMF or Blue Cat's PatchWork could to help for this, I don understand it well, I see who is to do mixed line plugins but I don't understand how it works if will be the same charging at the CPU...

Thanks guays for all your help!

Regards