Danirustic
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 81
- Joined: 2003/11/23 18:45:58
- Status: offline
[Solved] Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
Hi, can you please check how is it working the same Project in X2 compared to X3? On my system X3 its eating more cpu! I tried like 4 diferent projects, with diferent plugins, and all have the same CPU increase on X3 On the same project my CPU Reading is more or less like: Sonar X2: 27-30% Sonar X3: 37-40% Thats about a 30% percent more CPU usage! This happens in all the projects I tested. Presing "E" for bypassing every plugin for checking that its not any plugin increasing it...and it looks the same increase: Sonar X2: 15% Sonar X3: 20% I already deleted the AUD.INI file as suggested in another thread...but nothing changed. And of course I checked that all the settings are the same on X2 and X3..buffer size, bit resolution etc. Is this happening to anyone here? Can you please chek it? Just open the same Project on X2 and then on X3, and while playing just check the cpu% on the task manager This is driving me crazy, because I was always freezing tracks when Im getting near the CPU limit (for not hearing tha typical pops a crackling) , and now, projects that play perfect on X2, on X3 they are on the limit and some "pops and cracks" are appearing! Thanks Daniel
post edited by Andrew Rossa [Cakewalk] - 2013/11/08 12:39:45
Intel i7 920, 8GB Ram, Windows 7 64bits, RME HDSP 9652, Sonar X3c, Wavelab 7, Komplete, Waves etc
|
bentleyousley
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 279
- Joined: 2004/12/24 15:19:40
- Location: Kansas City
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/02 18:52:56
(permalink)
I seem to experience the same issue. Complex projects that ran using a certain buffer size in X2 require an increase in buffer size to run in X3.
|
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/02 19:13:57
(permalink)
Do you guys have any screens shots or projects you can supply for us to take a look? I like peaking under the hood :o)
|
Danirustic
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 81
- Joined: 2003/11/23 18:45:58
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/03 06:36:28
(permalink)
Hi Dan,
Do you mean a screenshot of the task manager?
I will try to do it and post it here.
I just tried to compare it on another computer, and it was exactly the same... about a 30% more CPU usage. Its innoteceable when you dont push sonar to the limit, but my projects are very VST hungry and I need to be in low buffersize latencies..so the cpu many times reachs the limit.
Just asking, you dont see the same behaviour with any of your projects??
Perhaps it has to do with the new options added to sonar X3 compared to X2...but it would be a shame to loose this 30% of power
Please, can somebody try to test it?
Thanks!
Daniel
Intel i7 920, 8GB Ram, Windows 7 64bits, RME HDSP 9652, Sonar X3c, Wavelab 7, Komplete, Waves etc
|
gswitz
Max Output Level: -18.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5694
- Joined: 2007/06/16 07:17:14
- Location: Richmond Virginia USA
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/03 07:11:23
(permalink)
I'm not trying to disrupt this thread... but I have to say the opposite is noticeably true for me.
StudioCat > I use Windows 10 and Sonar Platinum. I have a touch screen. I make some videos. This one shows how to do a physical loopback on the RME UCX to get many more equalizer nodes.
|
jamescater
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
- Total Posts : 175
- Joined: 2007/09/22 09:57:11
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/03 07:18:22
(permalink)
Dan, Cakewalk support are asking you to send them the contents of your project folder to them (e.g. as a zip file) (They want to load this up in their offices to see if they can recreate the issue their end) James, Dan Gonzalez [Cakewalk]
Do you guys have any screens shots or projects you can supply for us to take a look? I like peaking under the hood :o)
|
Rob[at]Sound-Rehab
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2819
- Joined: 2011/02/03 04:31:35
- Location: Sound-Rehab, Austria
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/03 07:44:48
(permalink)
I have also observed higher readings on Sonar CPU meters, interestingly also when play back is stopped.
I wonder if that has something to do with recent changes to FX tail handling and/or VST3.
Always Stream Audio Through FX. If any tracks or buses contain active plug-in effects, the audio engine will be activated and stream silence through the effects, even if the tracks have no audio data or Input Echo enabled. You will typically only disable this option if you want to conserve a bit of CPU processing if you play a project that contains lots of empty audio tracks with effects. There are several benefits to having this option enabled:
- Any effect with a “tail” (reverb, delay, etc.) will finish playing when playback is stopped.
- Effects will respond to automation envelopes, even on empty audio tracks.
- Many plug-ins do not update their UI properly until they receive audio input.
GOOD TUNES LAST FOREVER +++ Visit the Rehab +++ DAW: Platinum/X3e, win10 64 bit, i7-3930K (6x3.2GHz), Asus Sabertooth X79, 32 GB DDR3 1600MHz, ATI HD 5450, 120 GB SSD OCZ Agility3, 2x 1TB WD HDD SATA 600 Audio-Interface: 2x MOTU 1248 AVB, Focusrite OctoPre, (Roland Octa-Capture) Control-Surface: VS-700C VSTi: WAVES, NI K10u, FabFilter, IK, ... (too many really)
|
Danirustic
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 81
- Joined: 2003/11/23 18:45:58
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/03 16:43:18
(permalink)
Hi Dan,
I will test it with one of your Sonar demos...so there will be no need to send you a Project, and I will come back to write here my cpu readings in sonar x2 compared to sonar X3 (with exactly same buffer size)
Thanks
Intel i7 920, 8GB Ram, Windows 7 64bits, RME HDSP 9652, Sonar X3c, Wavelab 7, Komplete, Waves etc
|
dan le
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 252
- Joined: 2004/05/02 15:26:12
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/03 20:18:57
(permalink)
Didn't we have a thread where CW said to delete the AUD.INI in X2 and let it rebuild it.
That did it for me as well.
In my situation, I did not have more CPU usage in X2 but, less CPU then X1.
Needless to say, softsynths play even better.
dan
|
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/05 16:09:13
(permalink)
Danirustic
Hi Dan,
I will test it with one of your Sonar demos...so there will be no need to send you a Project, and I will come back to write here my cpu readings in sonar x2 compared to sonar X3 (with exactly same buffer size)
Thanks
Awesome, anything that we can get would be great.
|
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14250
- Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
- Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/05 19:31:01
(permalink)
Danirustic
I will test it with one of your Sonar demos...
The Cori Yarckin - Floating demo from X1 makes a good benchmark. On my less-than-state-of-the-art machine with ASIO buffer at 128 samples in X2, this project idles at 36% and plays back at 45% (1-minute average CPU for SONARPDR.EXE in Windows Resource Monitor). In X3 it does exactly the same.
SONAR Platinum x64, 2x MOTU 2408/PCIe-424 (24-bit, 48kHz) Win10, I7-6700K @ 4.0GHz, 24GB DDR4, 2TB HDD, 32GB SSD Cache, GeForce GTX 750Ti, 2x 24" 16:10 IPS Monitors
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/05 20:58:29
(permalink)
I have an interesting one happen with the X3 Demo, and very consistent. If I mute the final mix (rather than solo it), it will crash exactly at the start of the 18th measure (only 14% CPU load). If I set my audio buffer to 2048 samples, I get the "Audio Engine Crashed" and can still use X3. 4096 samples and X3 locks with no sound. Anything under 2048 will lock X3, and usually with some nasty noise through the speakers. This is repeatable even saving as a bundle file. The drive the audio is on is a 7200rpm SATA3 drive.
My audio interface is degrading, so just ordered a new one and see if that helps, but I have found it very odd that the above is repeatable on my machine. The CPUs are running smooth with smooth sound and then I get the audio engine failure.
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
cooljoebay
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 25
- Joined: 2010/01/09 23:53:07
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 01:09:05
(permalink)
People can take this anyway they want. But with all due respect, I don't get why so many people are so easily duped into upgrading every year. The last good version of Sonar was 8.5. I tried using X2 for awhile. Of course, I had to use it on my desktop due to its extreme appetite for power. And that's of course due to the heavy interface and bloat. it is what it is. But I can accomplish anything with 8.5 that I do on X2.
To me the X series is like moving rearranging your furniture in a way that you can sit in one place in the room and reach more things without getting off your rump. Call it a 'dumbing down" of users. It does not make you wiser or more creative. For years I have been putting out demos using inferior machines that are more marketable than a high profile digital studio. Yes. its all about creativity. And those who stay on the upgrade bus likely lack in the creativity department. Cakewalk isn't what it used to be since they imposed the X series on the public. Just another marketing scheme that hands out more and more royalties to third parties. That's pretty much a sign that they have already packed as much as anyone needs in the 8.5. You might think you need to use VST3. But nobody does unless you are so damn lazy or in a hurry. You can get ANY job done using the old versions. X1...X2...X3. All patches of the same beta software. How smart are you??
|
cliffr
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 539
- Joined: 2010/02/19 21:44:43
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 01:51:21
(permalink)
cooljoebay
People can take this anyway they want. But with all due respect, I don't get why so many people are so easily duped into upgrading every year. The last good version of Sonar was 8.5. I tried using X2 for awhile. Of course, I had to use it on my desktop due to its extreme appetite for power. And that's of course due to the heavy interface and bloat. it is what it is. But I can accomplish anything with 8.5 that I do on X2.
To me the X series is like moving rearranging your furniture in a way that you can sit in one place in the room and reach more things without getting off your rump. Call it a 'dumbing down" of users. It does not make you wiser or more creative. For years I have been putting out demos using inferior machines that are more marketable than a high profile digital studio. Yes. its all about creativity. And those who stay on the upgrade bus likely lack in the creativity department. Cakewalk isn't what it used to be since they imposed the X series on the public. Just another marketing scheme that hands out more and more royalties to third parties. That's pretty much a sign that they have already packed as much as anyone needs in the 8.5. You might think you need to use VST3. But nobody does unless you are so damn lazy or in a hurry. You can get ANY job done using the old versions. X1...X2...X3. All patches of the same beta software. How smart are you??
So why crash someone elses thread with such a load of opinionated poppycock. Did you just come here to insult the bakers and the rest of the community ?. Are you more creative than all of us who use the X series ? Seems YOU think so. So, how smart are you ?? I could probably answer that for you, but I see there's no need since you did that yourself with your condescending post. So if you have nothing worth contributing on the thread subject (which appears obvious), then have some manners and let the people involved go through their process. If you want to moan or insult people, go start your own thread and title it appropriately. Cheers - Cliff
i7-950 24 GB, GTX 580, W7/64 Ultimate, Sonar Platinum, Alesis MasterControl, KRK Rokit RP8g2s Some Real piano, basses, and guitars, Komplete 8Ultimate, Ibanez guitars, MusicLab RG/Strat/LPC, Trilian, Omnisphere, RMX, EWQL SO Platinum, Pianos, Choirs, VOP, Gypsy, Goliath, SD2, MOR, Ra, HS, HB, too many plugs, Midi controllers, and all kinds of weird gadgets My Soundclick Page
|
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14250
- Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
- Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 01:55:30
(permalink)
cooljoebay
People can take this anyway they want.
Okay, I'll take it as complete and utter hogwash, then. 
SONAR Platinum x64, 2x MOTU 2408/PCIe-424 (24-bit, 48kHz) Win10, I7-6700K @ 4.0GHz, 24GB DDR4, 2TB HDD, 32GB SSD Cache, GeForce GTX 750Ti, 2x 24" 16:10 IPS Monitors
|
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12010
- Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
- Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 02:07:44
(permalink)
Nothing quite like washing hogs. So Mr cooljoe go wash some.
Mike V. (MUDGEL) STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64, PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz. Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2. Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub. Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX. Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor. Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
|
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14250
- Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
- Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 02:47:18
(permalink)
My first choice was "poppycock", but it was already taken. I see bunkum, horsepuckey, and balderdash are still available, however.
SONAR Platinum x64, 2x MOTU 2408/PCIe-424 (24-bit, 48kHz) Win10, I7-6700K @ 4.0GHz, 24GB DDR4, 2TB HDD, 32GB SSD Cache, GeForce GTX 750Ti, 2x 24" 16:10 IPS Monitors
|
cliffr
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 539
- Joined: 2010/02/19 21:44:43
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 07:09:47
(permalink)
Daniel,
I'm not seeing any difference (significant enough to notice) between x2 and x3 here.
I wonder if there's some difference in a configuration file setting between x2 & x3 on your system ?
Might pay to check the settings in AUD.ini ( Preferences -> Audio -> Configuration File ) and compare between x2 & x3 ?.
I remember having to set "ThreadSchedulingModel=2" ... but that was way back, and that setting has migrated with each upgrade.
Hope you can get it sorted mate.
Cheers - Cliff.
i7-950 24 GB, GTX 580, W7/64 Ultimate, Sonar Platinum, Alesis MasterControl, KRK Rokit RP8g2s Some Real piano, basses, and guitars, Komplete 8Ultimate, Ibanez guitars, MusicLab RG/Strat/LPC, Trilian, Omnisphere, RMX, EWQL SO Platinum, Pianos, Choirs, VOP, Gypsy, Goliath, SD2, MOR, Ra, HS, HB, too many plugs, Midi controllers, and all kinds of weird gadgets My Soundclick Page
|
Danirustic
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 81
- Joined: 2003/11/23 18:45:58
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 09:14:06
(permalink)
Hi, thanks for sharing your comparisons!
That made me start testing a lot, and finally I found the culprit!
This is really weird, if I play the Project with just the console view on the screen, then the readings are the same on X2 and X3
BUT, if I am playing the Project with the trackview on the screen, then the cpu meters go high like a 30% more
I have 2 nvidia cards for a triple monitor setup (as you can see in my avatar photo)
I will try to update the nvidia drivers..actually one week ago I updated them...and later I reverted them because it installed some more software from nvidia, and I want to have my computer as clean as posible.
Question is, why in X2 is all ok, and now in X3 there is this behaviour...
Has something changed on the graphic interface?
Thanks to all
Daniel
Intel i7 920, 8GB Ram, Windows 7 64bits, RME HDSP 9652, Sonar X3c, Wavelab 7, Komplete, Waves etc
|
blacksheep
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 28
- Joined: 2012/09/25 07:59:46
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 09:48:09
(permalink)
so what driver version and what cards are you testing on. since with 3 monitors the realestate is lovly.
sabertooth 990fx 16 gigs of ram win 7 64 delta 1010
|
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14250
- Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
- Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 11:05:32
(permalink)
One difference between Console and Track view that may have seen changes in X3 is the handling of the Now time Cursor. I forget the name of the Windows graphics functionality that it depends on, but if you have certain Aero features turned off it could have an effect. I think several changes have been made over time to eliminate the "disappearing cursor syndrome", and that could account for a difference between X2 and X3, though I wouldn't expect it to have such a dramatic effect on CPU load. One recommendation related to that was that you set "Adjust for best appearance" (instead of "Let Windows choose") on the Visual Effects tab in Performance Options; you might try that or experiment with other options if that's already what you have set.
Does CPU Conservation Mode (Pause key) make a big difference in X3 on your system?
SONAR Platinum x64, 2x MOTU 2408/PCIe-424 (24-bit, 48kHz) Win10, I7-6700K @ 4.0GHz, 24GB DDR4, 2TB HDD, 32GB SSD Cache, GeForce GTX 750Ti, 2x 24" 16:10 IPS Monitors
|
KPerry
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3120
- Joined: 2011/04/26 15:13:15
- Location: London, UK
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 11:12:07
(permalink)
Desktop Window Management is the Windows feature that is used.
|
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14250
- Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
- Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 11:25:24
(permalink)
Ah, yes. I remember the name from the times that it crashed on my system; turned out I had a bad RAM module.
SONAR Platinum x64, 2x MOTU 2408/PCIe-424 (24-bit, 48kHz) Win10, I7-6700K @ 4.0GHz, 24GB DDR4, 2TB HDD, 32GB SSD Cache, GeForce GTX 750Ti, 2x 24" 16:10 IPS Monitors
|
Danirustic
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 81
- Joined: 2003/11/23 18:45:58
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/06 11:55:06
(permalink)
Hi,
Well I have 2 nvidia pcie cards with two video outputs each one. Ther are not expensive, its a Nvidia geforce 7300LE and a Nvidia geforce 210. Windows recognizes both cards and I can plug 4 screens.
Never had a problem with this configuration... and I have another video output available if I want to use it.
Im gonna check the drivers and do what Brundlefly wrote, lets see if I can resolve this issue :)
Many thanks for your answers!
Intel i7 920, 8GB Ram, Windows 7 64bits, RME HDSP 9652, Sonar X3c, Wavelab 7, Komplete, Waves etc
|
mettelus
Max Output Level: -22 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5321
- Joined: 2005/08/05 03:19:25
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/07 19:39:04
(permalink)
Iobit just released a free driver updater recently (the official name is "Iobit Driver Booster") and it can be found at this link. This is a handy utility to update drivers in your system efficiently. http://www.iobit.com/driver-booster.php
ASUS ROG Maximus X Hero (Wi-Fi AC), i7-8700k, 16GB RAM, GTX-1070Ti, Win 10 Pro, Saffire PRO 24 DSP, A-300 PRO, plus numerous gadgets and gizmos that make or manipulate sound in some way.
|
Danirustic
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 81
- Joined: 2003/11/23 18:45:58
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/08 10:23:25
(permalink)
I solved it!!
FreeFlyBertl, you were totally right and I didnt try what you said...my mistake
I solved it just uncheking the option "Always stream audio through FX". I thought that was to do with the tail effects after pressing stop when the project is playing...but it just consumes cpu on blank tracks with effects and I normally have a lot, just in case I would need them later.
So...I just unchecked it (it came checked by default) and now my cpu readings are the same as in sonar X2!
But when trying to solve it. I played with my Nvidia setings etc and I suddenly discovered that when I have the track view expanded across the 3 screens, it consumes a 30% more CPU!.
If I shrink the Sonar window to fill just one screen, letting the other 2 screen empy (just the desktop background photo) then I win a 30% cpu power. This happens in X2 and X3
I will try to search more info on this...I use 2 nvidia cards for multimonitoring, perhaps with just one card with 3 video outputs would be better?
Im trying to find silent ones (fanless)...but cant find them
Thanks for your help!
Daniel
Intel i7 920, 8GB Ram, Windows 7 64bits, RME HDSP 9652, Sonar X3c, Wavelab 7, Komplete, Waves etc
|
Rob[at]Sound-Rehab
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2819
- Joined: 2011/02/03 04:31:35
- Location: Sound-Rehab, Austria
- Status: offline
Re: Sonar X3 is more CPU hungry than X2 on my system
2013/11/08 15:50:03
(permalink)
Hi Daniel
I'm glad I could help. I've made the same observations as regards CPU consumption when trying to understand that new "Always stream audio through FX" option.
I turned it off as it felt strange to have so much "number crunching power" being wasted when not playing back anything ... sort of feels like I'm wasting resources and hence risking instabilities when doing heavy edits (e.g. melodynize an entire vocal track)
Yet I fail to fully understand the implications of turning it off, but maybe somebody can educate me further on this topic?
As regards the graphic card driver I'm faced with a similar dilemma: I haven't had many issues with X2a but still get some instabilities with X3c. Now I found a new graphic card driver, yet the old one worked fine with X2a ... will updating the graphic card driver (ATI HD 5450) be beneficial or just add another variable to the vast number of unknowns that may cause these occasional crashes?
I reckon I just consult the wisdom of the cowd in another thread ..
Cheers
Rob
GOOD TUNES LAST FOREVER +++ Visit the Rehab +++ DAW: Platinum/X3e, win10 64 bit, i7-3930K (6x3.2GHz), Asus Sabertooth X79, 32 GB DDR3 1600MHz, ATI HD 5450, 120 GB SSD OCZ Agility3, 2x 1TB WD HDD SATA 600 Audio-Interface: 2x MOTU 1248 AVB, Focusrite OctoPre, (Roland Octa-Capture) Control-Surface: VS-700C VSTi: WAVES, NI K10u, FabFilter, IK, ... (too many really)
|