v.i. control forum

[Rob Elliott]

Posted this over at VSL but just in case someone else has just traveled this 'road'



Loving the new puter (i7 - 940 chipset). All local puter plugs (kontakt, RMX, Omni, etc...) can run on as little as 64 samples but just as soon as I load up previous template which uses VEPRO - local puter and 3 farm units I get pops and cracks with anything below 512 samples (all buffers are set to '2')


I am running build 4686. I have both multiprocessing and hyperthreading ON (running Nuendo 4.3).



Something seems amiss??? Any suggestions?

[josejherring]

I've got a similar setup but with xp. VEPro is flaky. I've been working with it for about 1 week. Sometimes it works well. Sometimes it doesn't.

Considering going to an all hardware solution.

One thing that did help. Make sure hyperthreading is off on all machines.

[Rob Elliott]

josejherring @ Thu Jan 21, 2010 2:25 pm wrote:

I've got a similar setup but with xp. VEPro is flaky. I've been working with it for about 1 week. Sometimes it works well. Sometimes it doesn't.

Considering going to an all hardware solution.

One thing that did help. Make sure hyperthreading is off on all machines.

Many thanks. Everything I have read says for the new i7 CPUs and W7 Hyperthreading is best left on - but - I think I'll so as you suggest and give it a try (can also put it back if needs be.)

On XP - I found (and I a running PC/Nuendo) to save all the VEPRO instances and THEN the Daw project they are connected to - for some reason that seems to do the trick (not on W7 though.) Hope that helps ya.

[josejherring]

Yes. I had it on for a long time. But then I read that Cubendo recommends turning it off. It wasn't a problem until I tried VEPro. But then I had crackling gui problems in Cubase once I went to Cubase 5.1.1. So for safety sake I just turned it off. It made VEPro more stable most of the time.

Bummer. I really liked seeing the 8 cores. But in truth I haven't noticed any difference performance wise in turms of cpu.

So give it a try.

[gsilbers]

i thought hyperthreading was something on the software side, as in , software needed to have programming which would let the hardware know to split processing in 2 if hyperthreading is available.

from what i understand the issue in the computer world is that hardware is very fast, with 8 core (16 with hyperthreading) but that the software is not up to speed. most programs come from pentium days and developing code for core and hyperthreading would take too much.
sorry for the little OT

[Mahlon]

Rob,

Have you tried the same setup, except subsituting the MOTU for the RMX? At least this would eliminate one possibility if behaves differently.

Mahlon

[Rob Elliott]

Mahlon @ Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:18 am wrote:

Rob,

Have you tried the same setup, except subsituting the MOTU for the RMX? At least this would eliminate one possibility if behaves differently.

Mahlon

Yea thought of that - and the local puter processing (and audio) - is heads and shoulders faster. Really like the ASIO driver. Same project - old 70% asio performance - new RME - about 21%. Problems only happen when VEPRO is connected on three farm units.

Going to check IRQ as Christian just suggested at VSL.

[Rousseau]

Rob,

As I was saying to Jose last week, issues start when you're trying to use more than 1 farm unit at low latency; and for that reason I've gone back to streaming audio into the DAW from 3 to 4 slaves depending on project (using VE PRo on all slaves). This is not to say that VE Pro has issues, but just like FX Teleport, using multiples slaves over LAN is hairy.

Put it this way, I've now got a massive template running over 4 PCs with silly low latency with no issues using Ve Pro on all slaves; and occasionally I steal some bandwidth from the Wife's PC (don't tell her) but that's VE Pro over LAN. VE PRo is crazily awesome - especially allied to Vienna Suite - but LAN itself is the weak link IMO.

PM me if you want to chew the fat on this some more

Cheers