Members Lawrence Farr Posted December 4, 2005 Members Share Posted December 4, 2005 Just a reminder to inexperienced native daw users... use your system buffers to your advantage. I ran into another guy who just refuses to accept the fact that buffers are *designed* to be changed. Buffers are not a "set and forget" hardware setting on native daws. I watched him struggle with a mix on a PC system faster than mine as his cpu was peaking. With 512k buffers. He had no idea he should change them for the application at hand. For maximum performance your buffers should always be set to the maximum setting (largest latency) when mixing large projects or when mixing with a lot of virtual instruments or plugs. If your buffers are at the max and your cpu hits 100% that's it, you've used all you've got, there's nothing left. If you bog down during a mix with low buffer settings you're wasting a good portion of your daw system's capability. I still see daw users who monitor through the daw with a very low latency (as they should) when tracking mix with those same low buffer settings. Adjust your buffers to fit the job at hand. That's exactly what they are for. Just for the new guys. Most here know that already. Lawrence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted December 4, 2005 Share Posted December 4, 2005 Excellent point / reminder. Of course, if this Athlon 64 4200 X2 I'm building lives up to expectations, I might not NEED to do a lot of buffer setting changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lawrence Farr Posted December 4, 2005 Author Members Share Posted December 4, 2005 Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe Of course, if this Athlon 64 4200 X2 I'm building lives up to expectations, I might not NEED to do a lot of buffer setting changes. Jesus... 4200? I think I need an upgrade! Seriously though, I have a P4 2.8 system that I dread the thought of replacing even though I know I'll have to eventually. Fortunately I have a digital console so on the REALLY large projects that I figure will need more processing than my PC can handle alone I start the mix there and do a hybrid thing. It never runs out of CPU! Lawrence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sonik Posted December 4, 2005 Members Share Posted December 4, 2005 If you can squeeze a few more dollars I reccomend going to the 4400 model. It has 1 more MB of L2 Cache than the 4200. Otherwise it's the same. Or you could always go for the 4800.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted December 4, 2005 Members Share Posted December 4, 2005 I should tattoo this on my forehead. Actually, that's not helpful...I wouldn't see it. I *always* forget to switch it back from low-latency monitoring when I'm mixing, and so much of this is because I'm always hopping back and forth between projects. Most of the time, it doesn't come back to bite me, but every once in a while.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted December 4, 2005 Share Posted December 4, 2005 Originally posted by Lawrence Farr Jesus... 4200? I think I need an upgrade! Seriously though, I have a P4 2.8 system that I dread the thought of replacing even though I know I'll have to eventually. Fortunately I have a digital console so on the REALLY large projects that I figure will need more processing than my PC can handle alone I start the mix there and do a hybrid thing. It never runs out of CPU! Lawrence Well, Lawrence, if you're dreading doing an upgrade, here's something that might make it a bit less painful for you. I got it up and running for the first time last night... here's the specs: Asus A8N-SLI Premium motherboard (Fanless, with heatpipe) Athlon 64 4200 X2 dual core CPU (moderately OC'ed to 2.5 GHz) ATI Sapphire Advantage X550 128 MB PCI-E dual head video Enermax 485 W Noisetaker PS 2 GB (4 X 512) Patriot RAM (2 3 2 5) WD 7.200 RPM / 8 mb cache 160 GB PATA (NOT SATA) HDD (C Drive) Coolermaster Hyper 48 CPU cooler (also uses heatpipes + 92 mm fan, I have it rotating at 1,500 RPM) Old school Pro Tools "Davec test" (EQ 2 / compressor / Digi short / med and long delay plug ins on each track / aux return channel): Topped it out! 32 + 128 @ 1024 on the buffer! That's 800 plug ins! I got screenshots too. I didn't know what all the "new Davec" tests were, so I did some additional testing and playing around... How about 32 tracks + 17 aux returns... with each track / aux having 7 band EQ 3 BF 1176 compressor Long delay Extra long delay Dverb Or, if you prefer, 32 tracks, each with all of the above listed plugs, but recording and playing back EASILY at the 128 buffer setting! This thing is a SCREAMER! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Originally posted by sonik777 If you can squeeze a few more dollars I reccomend going to the 4400 model. It has 1 more MB of L2 Cache than the 4200. Otherwise it's the same. Or you could always go for the 4800.... Good points, but actually, I specifically wanted a processor with the Manchester core instead of a Toledo core. Why? Well, as you probably already know, the Manchester cores, with their smaller caches, have fewer transistors - 154 million, instead of the Toledo's 233 million. They have a smaller die size too, and require less wattage (89 W vs 110 W). All of that means (at least to me) that it's going to draw less juice, require less from the power supply, and (my biggest consideration), will be a good candidate for overclocking without having to resort to a water pumper. And I have just never felt comfortable with a water cooled system. Normally I would agree with you and I'd think that a larger cache is better to have... but in all of the reviews and benchmarks I've read, the larger cache appears to be most beneficial for hard core (no pun intended) gaming... and I'm not a gamer. There's also the cost considerations. And for me, I think the 4200 X2 and 4400 X2 are probably the best insofar as price / performance ratios go. While that 4800 X2 is mighty tempting, it's just a little too rich for my blood. Oh well, my decision's been made, and it's a little too late to take it back now. Lucky for me the system's an absolute screamer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Lee Knight Posted December 5, 2005 Moderators Share Posted December 5, 2005 Buffer Size switching. Teeter Totter all night long. I have a hard time FORGETING to switch. My PTLE, AMD 3000 Barton system is kind enough to remind me. Frequently. Edited to add quaint British quote: "Up and down like a bride's nightie". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lawrence Farr Posted December 5, 2005 Author Members Share Posted December 5, 2005 Originally posted by Lee Knight Buffer Size switching. Teeter Totter all night long. I have a hard time FORGETING to switch. My PTLE, AMD 3000 Barton system is kind enough to remind me. Frequently. Edited to add quaint British quote: "Up and down like a bride's nightie". You would think something like ASIO (not PTLE) would allow the buffer setting to follow the project, to be a setting recalled by the project. That way if you returned to a mix the large buffers would be set on loading. I would often realize I forgot when I saw my cpu up at 50% early in the mix. I think... what the ???? Lawrence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.