wrench45us
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4991
- Joined: 2003/11/06 15:57:01
- Status: offline
multi core question
it occurred to me last night in thinking about the possibility of P5 implemnted as vst
that as such P5 could possibly run as vst within P5
and if (as I hope) that is recognized by the operating system as two separate processes wouldn't the OS assign those two instances of P5 to different processors if one had a dual core system?
some speculation
but I think the theory holds
if one rewires P5 into Sonar does the OS assign P5 and Sonar to different processors?
if someone could verify that or tell me where my thinking is flawed please let me know.
|
xylyx
Max Output Level: -50 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2505
- Joined: 2003/11/23 12:23:25
- Location: England
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 09:36:52
(permalink)
If two instances of a P5 vst version were run inside P5 as it is now, it would all still run on one core as the host is responsible for assigning the plugins to different processors.
I did try the rewire P5 into Sonar idea to see if it put each onto it's own core, but it didn't work...not sure if this is because I am running XP Home or not.
|
wrench45us
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4991
- Joined: 2003/11/06 15:57:01
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 09:46:09
(permalink)
thanks
it makes sense -- the vst implementation is really not a standalone process, so it makes sense
I was confusing this with something we do at work -- which violates all sorts of commons sense rules, but does connect two independent processes. As a vst plug in (dll) I can see where it's not likely to be a separate process
on slightly related news
Steve Ballmer seems to be hesitating a bit more about pulling the plug on XP. Some IT departments are really lobbying hard to keep XP supported until the next new OS.
|
muso_price
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 496
- Joined: 2006/04/21 09:16:25
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 09:50:00
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: xylyx
I did try the rewire P5 into Sonar idea to see if it put each onto it's own core, but it didn't work
Yeah, I just tried, with SONAR 6. Rewired P5 into SONAR added some vsts did some midi editing and played it both processors seemed to be sharing the load equally. If it each program was on a different core I would have expected one to be working harder than the other i.e. the P5 one. But this, from here implies it should. However, the processor will multitask better since it can run two programs at once, one on each core.
I'm guessing it's probably a limitation of XP, it's quite a few years old now. Vista?
|
xylyx
Max Output Level: -50 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2505
- Joined: 2003/11/23 12:23:25
- Location: England
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 09:57:53
(permalink)
It may actually be a limitation of rewire, as using two unconnected programs together does seem to use separate cores...maybe the invisible 'elastic band' that is rewire is causing XP to treat them as more of a combined entity?
Also, I don't think the load was split across two cores when I rewired...I think it pretty much loaded one (I'll have to check again later and see if this is the case).
|
wrench45us
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4991
- Joined: 2003/11/06 15:57:01
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 10:08:27
(permalink)
by definition they are two separate processes: two separete exes
is it possible on a multi-core machine to use Task Manager to look and see what processes are running on what processor?
I think xylyx is probably onto something that the Rewire may be connecting them in whatever way it has to and this may spread across the multi cores in unexpected ways
|
gwmatt
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 100
- Joined: 2006/09/05 14:51:22
- Location: Maryland, USA
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 10:08:52
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: xylyx
If two instances of a P5 vst version were run inside P5 as it is now, it would all still run on one core as the host is responsible for assigning the plugins to different processors.
I did try the rewire P5 into Sonar idea to see if it put each onto it's own core, but it didn't work...not sure if this is because I am running XP Home or not.
I don't remember the details now as it's been some years, but I believe XP Home is single CPU (or single core) only. Back in 2001 when XP first came out, multi core CPU's were still just an idea that hadn't been implemented yet. There were multi CPU motherboards (one with two or more CPU slots) but these were expensive and were used primarily for servers and other high end machines. As I recall, XP Home was designed for, well, "Home" use. And since the average "home" computer at that time was highly unlikely to be multi CPU, XP Home was designed to only use a single CPU. XP Professional however did support multiple CPU's. I know it can handle at least 2, and perhaps as many as 4.
|
b rock
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 8717
- Joined: 2003/12/07 20:31:48
- Location: Anytown (South of Miami), U.S.A.
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 10:14:09
(permalink)
Here's some light reading for the next Dunkin' Donuts coffee break: Uneven Core loading makes Sonar unusable for complex mixes Here's the Reader's Digest version. Official answers, minus all of the idle chit-chat, self-aggrandizing, and just plain bull **** found in many Sonar forum threads. Post #22 Post #58 Post #62 Generally speaking most plugin's don't care about multiprocessing - its up to the host to schedule them on different cores. In fact without cooperation from a host multiprocessing a plugin can even be counter productive since its threads might prempt the host processing. There are only a few plugins I know of that do some processing on different threads. - Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk] Now that would indeed be some kind of SuperSynth.  BTW another factor that legitimately leads to unequal load in SONAR is unequal loading of plugins in effects bins. All plugins in a single bin are processed serially and on a single thread so if you have many dsp heavy plugs on a single effects bin the core assigned to that will definitely show a higher load. - Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk] Excerpts from Post #85. Peanut gallery commentary ... my own. Post #108 Post #109 Post #117 Post #165
|
muso_price
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 496
- Joined: 2006/04/21 09:16:25
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 10:23:57
(permalink)
It may actually be a limitation of rewire I've always thought of rewire as just being a pipe that passes MIDI and audio between applications, if that's all it is then I can't see it being that. XP Home was designed to only use a single CPU. I reckon it's more likely to be that, but SONAR has multi-core support and runs on XP home so that kinda rules that out.
|
wrench45us
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4991
- Joined: 2003/11/06 15:57:01
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 11:00:41
(permalink)
We have a lot going on right now and didnt have the resouces to spend more time on pursueing this before you reported your results, that's all. We'll be looking into this more...
anybody catch this in post #109 dated 4/13/2008 "we have a lot going on right now" -- much as I suspected all along
|
ew
Max Output Level: -57 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1837
- Joined: 2004/01/27 21:24:49
- Location: Eagan, MN
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 12:20:48
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: gwmatt
I don't remember the details now as it's been some years, but I believe XP Home is single CPU (or single core) only. Back in 2001 when XP first came out, multi core CPU's were still just an idea that hadn't been implemented yet. There were multi CPU motherboards (one with two or more CPU slots) but these were expensive and were used primarily for servers and other high end machines.
XP Home can use multicore processors. It just can't handle multiple discreet processors (multiple sockets). ew
|
xylyx
Max Output Level: -50 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2505
- Joined: 2003/11/23 12:23:25
- Location: England
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 12:38:58
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: wrench45us
anybody catch this in post #109 dated 4/13/2008
"we have a lot going on right now" -- much as I suspected all along
It remains to be seen whether that is from working on a number of products or just general upheaval from the whole Roland thing...
|
candlesayshi
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 694
- Joined: 2008/02/01 00:00:55
- Location: Chicago, IL
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/04/25 15:59:11
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: wrench45us
anybody catch this in post #109 dated 4/13/2008
"we have a lot going on right now" -- much as I suspected all along
Yeah, they have pretty kept their lips shut for quite a bit now. ORIGINAL: xylyx
I did try the rewire P5 into Sonar idea to see if it put each onto it's own core, but it didn't work...not sure if this is because I am running XP Home or not.
I tried it in Live a while ago too, it doesn't work there either, neither with Multiprocessor Rewire on.
|
Omnoproyet
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 58
- Joined: 2006/11/03 17:15:10
- Status: offline
RE: multi core question
2008/05/18 03:02:07
(permalink)
XP has handled multi processors and multi cores from the beginning. Problems are associated with the application, as they must be designed differently to be compatible with "multi - threaded" in order to take advantage of multi cpus without crashing ORIGINAL: muso_price
I'm guessing it's probably a limitation of XP, it's quite a few years old now. Vista?
|