You are here

DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

For anything relating to music-making on Windows computers, with lots of FAQs. Moderated by Martin Walker.

DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby TAFKAT » Sat May 07, 2011 3:54 am

Hey All,

For those interested , I have uploaded the new DAWbench VI Universal 2011 - Virtual Instrument/Sampler benchmark @ DAWbench.com.

Details:

17 x Stereo Tracks of Audio

16 x Midi Tracks - Musical Content.

80 x Midi Tracks - Polyphony.

5 x Kontakt 4 - All instances with 16 multitimbral parts. 4 x instances with polyphonic parts inactive, to be enabled during playback.

Each part adding 20 notes of sustained polyphony until session is overloaded.

Test sessions can be downloaded Here

The initial release is for Cubase/Nuendo and Protools 9 only, and will require Kontakt 4 and its full associated library. Subsequent releases will be expanded to include more DAW hosts as well as Vienna Ensemble Pro.

Some initial test results and commentary can be found over at the DAWbench forum.

Peace

Vin Curigliano
AAVIM Technology
TAFKAT
Regular
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 1:00 am
Location: Australia
AAVIM Technology
DAWbench.com

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby Martin Walker » Sat May 07, 2011 12:39 pm

Thanks again for all your hard work on these benchmarks Vin 8-)

Looking forward to trying the latest one out, and thankfully I have Kontakt 4 ;)


Martin
User avatar
Martin Walker
Moderator
Posts: 16043
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:44 am
Location: Cornwall, UK

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby Pete Kaine » Mon May 09, 2011 9:36 am

TAFKAT wrote:
and will require Kontakt 4 and its full associated library.

*ouch*

Good thing I'm starting a new round of chipset testing today... looks like i'm going to spend it installing a new bench testing drive :tongue:

(Cheers Vin)
User avatar
Pete Kaine
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3185
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Manchester
Kit to fuel your G.A.S - https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/pro-audio

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby robinv » Mon May 09, 2011 10:11 am

TAFKAT wrote:Hey D,

Yes those are the actual results, tested , retested and confirmed by other BETA testers.

V:

The important thing to remember is that Professional users don't concern themselves with plug-in counts, they are too busy being creative and producing super-fabulous music with super-awesome artists. They would rather have 2 super-quality plug-ins working correctly and creatively in the super-stable Pro Tools environment on the super-superior Apple platform than a 100 plug-ins running in the dodgy world of consumer fisherprice products such as Cubase and Windows where nothing professional or creative ever happens. (One might imagine Avid would say)
User avatar
robinv
Frequent Poster
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 12:00 am
Molten Music Technology - Computers for doing music on
Making Music on the Microsoft Surface

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby Martin Walker » Mon May 09, 2011 10:49 am

Hah!

Do I detect a splash of sarcasm in your post Robin? :smirk:

Vin - I know including Kontakt 4 in the equation must have given you a lot of heart-searching, but in my opinion it makes sense to have softsynth/sampler parts playing as well as audio tracks+ plug-in effects, to more closely mimic the typical projects that so many of us run.

Where possible I’ve matched your past results with various review systems as well as my own PCs, to well within the bounds of experimental error, so I have no reason to doubt their accuracy on this occasion.

Having said that - those are jaw-dropping results, both from the OSX/WIndows 7 point of view and from the PT9/Cubase 5.5 point of view :shock:
Recent M Audio drivers also seem to be doing a lot better compared with RME (and they manage more than RME when run with Pro Tools in several cases - go figure ;))

Keep up the good work!


Martin
User avatar
Martin Walker
Moderator
Posts: 16043
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:44 am
Location: Cornwall, UK

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby Pete Kaine » Tue May 10, 2011 10:04 am

TAFKAT wrote:
M-Audio drivers are actually very good on the Profire range I have found , at least on Win7 , but what I found interesting on this particual VI test was that they stopped scaling after 256 samples , whereas the RME delivered a substantial improvement at 512. I need to test the FF800 reference unit I have here and see whether its a FW thing.. :-)

Donno if it helps (expecially as I don't have the exact scores noted anymore) but I noticed a simular scaling pattern using a Profire 1814 and a 9632 in some earlier testing using the P67 boards and Win 7. Some interesting results coming out of the Maudio drivers these days!
User avatar
Pete Kaine
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3185
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Manchester
Kit to fuel your G.A.S - https://www.scan.co.uk/shop/pro-audio

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby Martin Walker » Wed May 11, 2011 4:21 pm

johnny h wrote:Is it possible you could test out some extremely cpu intensive plugins. For example I find u-he's "Ace" particularly demanding.

Also things like Acustica Audio's 'Nebula 3' - there is a free demo available.

Hi johnny h!

I think the reason that Vin has used the plug-ins he has is that they are more typical of musician’s porjects in general.

Moreover, using particularly demanding plugs tends to make the results more susceptible to core-sharing, since each instance you add can only be allocated to a single core, and you may end up with ‘spare processing power’ because each core still has some unused leftover potential.

By using lots more modest plug-ins you get a better idea of system performance, because then all cores can be run as close to their limits as possible.


Martin
User avatar
Martin Walker
Moderator
Posts: 16043
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:44 am
Location: Cornwall, UK

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby johnny h » Wed May 11, 2011 4:44 pm

Martin Walker wrote:
johnny h wrote:Is it possible you could test out some extremely cpu intensive plugins. For example I find u-he's "Ace" particularly demanding.

Also things like Acustica Audio's 'Nebula 3' - there is a free demo available.

Hi johnny h!

I think the reason that Vin has used the plug-ins he has is that they are more typical of musician’s porjects in general.

Moreover, using particularly demanding plugs tends to make the results more susceptible to core-sharing, since each instance you add can only be allocated to a single core, and you may end up with ‘spare processing power’ because each core still has some unused leftover potential.

By using lots more modest plug-ins you get a better idea of system performance, because then all cores can be run as close to their limits as possible.
I totally understand that viewpoint. But I would also add that 'real world' performance with particularly demanding plugins would be beneficial also. Personally I find most plugins to contribute almost nothing to cpu load, other than those I have mentioned.

The 'tape sound' project that CDsoundmaster and Acustic Audio are doing is really quite amazing for the type of music I do, but I find my old quad core (q6600) really struggles. Likewise with the excellent 'u-he ACE'. Perhaps my needs are a little more obscure than those wanting just the usual mix of many tracks of audio and the standard plugins, but I can't be the only one!

Furthermore I must make the decision as to whether to keep my old macbook and upgrade the PC or get a shiny new 15" i7 MBP and all the great benefits which come with that.
johnny h
Jedi Poster
Posts: 4010
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:00 am

Re: DAWbench VI Universal - 2011

Postby TAFKAT » Wed May 11, 2011 10:39 pm

Hey J,

As Martin noted the selection of plugins is focused on allowing me to apply an incremental and progressive loading across the cores evenly , and of course your mileage will vary in regards to how that reflects to personal Real World environments.

I have looked at Nebula in the past , I find it incredibly inefficient, and its CPU usage was just so unpredictable it was unsuitable for the empirical methodology of the benchmarks.

You may find a discussion we had over at Gearslutz interesting where I tested some plugins that have large inherent delays / linear phase that would collapse a session very quickly with a few instances.

Plugins are always a moving target, we just need to stay abreast of where the bodies are buried.

V:
TAFKAT
Regular
Posts: 244
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2003 1:00 am
Location: Australia
AAVIM Technology
DAWbench.com