Teksonik
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 521
- Joined: 2006/10/18 12:59:42
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
Can someone shed some light on the question of CPU performance for 64 bit plugins as opposed to their 32 bit versions? I seem to be getting some conflicting information and thought someone here could enlighten me further. Now I'm seeing claims of a 30% gain in CPU performance for 64 bit. True?
|
dmbaer
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 20:10:22
- Location: Concord CA
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/28 13:23:00
(permalink)
Teksonik
Can someone shed some light on the question of CPU performance for 64 bit plugins as opposed to their 32 bit versions? I seem to be getting some conflicting information and thought someone here could enlighten me further. Now I'm seeing claims of a 30% gain in CPU performance for 64 bit. True?
Assuming we're talking about something other than a sample player that uses massive amounts of memory, the performance of a 64-bit vs 32-bit plug will be identical as far as the plug's processing is concerned. There is a performance consequence, however. Assuming you're running 64-bit Sonar, a 64-bit plug can execute in the same process (or same address space, if you prefer). There's no overhead. If you're running the 32-bit plug (via a bridge component that allows communication between the two), then they are running in separate processes and there will be some overhead supporting the cross-process communications. With a current multi-core machine that has adequate memory, you probably wouldn't notice the difference under normal conditions.
|
Teksonik
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 521
- Joined: 2006/10/18 12:59:42
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/29 07:01:06
(permalink)
Thank you Sir. Very informative post.  So let's take Z3Ta+ for example, a synth that doesn't use large sample libraries. Say I've got a project in 32 bit Sonar 32 bit OS and I only use one instance of Z3ta that uses 20% of the available CPU power. That same project loaded into 64 bit Sonar 64 bit OS 64 bit version of Zeta+ would use only 14% as claimed by some? Softsynths like PolyAna that can easily take my Quad Core to the edge under normal playing conditions would certainly benefit from such a performance gain if true. But if I'm reading your post correctly this doesn't seem to be the case?
|
dmbaer
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 20:10:22
- Location: Concord CA
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/29 13:06:59
(permalink)
Teksonik
So let's take Z3Ta+ for example, a synth that doesn't use large sample libraries. Say I've got a project in 32 bit Sonar 32 bit OS and I only use one instance of Z3ta that uses 20% of the available CPU power. That same project loaded into 64 bit Sonar 64 bit OS 64 bit version of Zeta+ would use only 14% as claimed by some?
Well, as there's no 64-bit z3ta (nor will there ever be), this can only be speculation. But even if there were, I'd put money on the position that as long as Sonar and z3ta run in the same process (i.e., they're both 32-bit or both 64-bit) and there's enough memory that page swapping isn't happening, you wouldn't see anywhere close to the kinds of performance differences as 20% compared to 14%. By the way, I haven't seen such claims here like 14% vs 20% (not that I read anywhere close to all the posts).
|
Teksonik
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 521
- Joined: 2006/10/18 12:59:42
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/29 20:36:34
(permalink)
http://www.synapse-audio.com/x64.php From the link: "Second, modern processors are fully optimized for 64-bit processing. 64-bit code runs substantially faster than their 32-bit equivalent and runs natively in a 64-bit environment, rather than being emulated. A performance gain of 30% or more, dependent on project and plugins used, is often achieved in practice. " Don't know about claims here I just used Z3ta and Sonar as examples since we're at the Cakewalk forum. Cakewalk's White Paper: http://www.cakewalk.com/x64/whitepaper.asp I don't have the attention span to read all that however.
|
Genghis
Max Output Level: -74 dBFS
- Total Posts : 827
- Joined: 2003/11/09 16:09:17
- Location: Huntington Beach, CA
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/29 21:52:41
(permalink)
Actually the version that of z3ta+ that comes with SONAR seems to be x64. It doesn't require BitBridge to load and it is installed by default in C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\vstplugins instead of the Program Files(x86) folder.
|
dmbaer
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 20:10:22
- Location: Concord CA
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/30 13:15:21
(permalink)
Teksonik
"Second, modern processors are fully optimized for 64-bit processing. 64-bit code runs substantially faster than their 32-bit equivalent and runs natively in a 64-bit environment, rather than being emulated. A performance gain of 30% or more, dependent on project and plugins used, is often achieved in practice. "
Where can I get some of what these guys are smoking? In window 7 64-bit, 32-bit code runs on a thin layer called WOW64 (Windows on Windows 64) that translates calls to the OS to 64-bit and passes them through to the real OS. So, yes, there's a very modest overhead to be paid running 32-bit in a 64-bit environment. But it's nowhere close to a 30% difference. So what is the performance penalty? I haven't seen any hard numbers, but from what I've read, the consensus seems to be that 32-bit and 64-bit code runs at about the same clip (again, provided we're not getting into page swapping due to insufficient real memory).
|
dmbaer
Max Output Level: -49.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 20:10:22
- Location: Concord CA
- Status: offline
Re:64 bit Plugins more CPU Effecient than 32 bit?
2010/07/30 15:47:39
(permalink)
OK ... I was wrong ... partially, anyway.  I just read the Cakewalk write-up from the link in an earlier post, and will agree that 64-bit operation can boost performance when a substantial amount of double-length arithmetic is involved. Such is the case in Sonar as well as many plug-ins. The general consensus on the web is that 32-bit software operating under Windows 7 64-bit will run about as fast as 64-bit software (given adequate memory). But this no doubt is assuming a normal mix of PC software usage (word processing, web browsing, spreadsheets, etc.). The normal mix doesn't call for much, if any, double-length floating point computation. I stand corrected.
|