New, Updated SonarTest

looks like my system is a bit slow too -

48 samples - wont play
64 samples - wont play
96 samples - 76%
128 samples - 63%
256 samples - 45%
512 samples - 35%
756 samples - 33%

I'm using 1.5gig of kingston DDR400 ram but it's only running at 333 due to motherboard limitation.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

ORIGINAL: daverich

looks like my system is a bit slow too -


Dave Rich

Dave what is your system.

MSI K8N neo platinum
athlon3200 64bit cpu - not OC
1.5 gig Kingston DDR400 @ 333mhz
sonar pro 4.0.2
Windows xp sp2
RME fireface driver - 1.8.1
UAD1
USB2 sample drive
SATA audio drive
IDE system drive
Geforce5200 video card

Processor sched - background, All gui crap disabled, most tweaks done apart from system restore (I like it too much ;) )

No irq sharing, bios flashed for optimal. Cool n quiet disabled, on board sound/lan/serial and parrallel ports disabled. Double Dawg tweaked VGA @ 96, firewire @ 128, uad1 @ 96

It does seem something is holding me and guitarmech back here . . . maybe its the fireface/firewire ? I've plenty of performance - would be nice to know I'm running on all cylinders though.

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Dave your problem is that your memory is not running at it's proper speed, it shoud be running @400mhz. I had the same problem when I first started using my system no matter what I did the memory would always revert back to 333mhz. What corrected this problem for me was low latency Corsair memory with a Cas Latency of 2. There is a small free app called CPU-Z that should tell you what your memory settings are mine are 2.5,3,3,6 and at these settings it runs quick and stable. Hope this helps.

MSI K8N neo platinum

I don't know if the Kingston memory will work at a higher voltage, but check this out: Corsair recommends this for NEO2

I noticed an increase in startup and got the wow factor. Haven't had a chance to do any big projects with it yet. I have been at basketball awards all night.

ORIGINAL: Poni

Dave your problem is that your memory is not running at it's proper speed, it shoud be running @400mhz. I had the same problem when I first started using my system no matter what I did the memory would always revert back to 333mhz. What corrected this problem for me was low latency Corsair memory with a Cas Latency of 2. There is a small free app called CPU-Z that should tell you what your memory settings are mine are 2.5,3,3,6 and at these settings it runs quick and stable. Hope this helps.

Whilst you may be correct about the voltage boost - the MSI board only runs at 333mhz with all memory slots populated.

Bit of a bugger really - maybe I should overclock the memory bus up to something nearer 400 from 333?

I'll have a play around today and see what I can do.

I have noticed that if I put the board in aggressive timing mode then the board wont post and i have to open up the case and clear cmos and start again - very irritating as it's rack mounted heh.

Kind regards

Dave Rich.

ok.

its works!

I've also upped the cpu +5mhz and now get these results.

48 samples - wont engage
64 samples - 84%
96 samples - 67%
128 samples - 55%
256 samples - 40%
512 samples - 32%
768 samples - 29%

pretty good improvement :) ran that memtest and all seems well there too. there's no way to oc the ram separately with my bios though which is a shame.

Still not anywhere near as quick as the 3200 listed on the graph though :(

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Thought I'd add my results...

AMD Athlon 64 3000+ Socket 754 (2Ghz)
DFI Lanparty UT nf3 250Gb
1x512Mb PC3200 Corsair XMS XL DDR400 (2-2-2-10)
ATI Radeon 9000 Pro 128Mb
Maxtor 30Gb 7200rpm ATA-133 system drive
Western Digital 80Gb 7200rpm ATA-100 audio drive
TDK DVDRW 1280b
Antec True380 psu
Windows XP Pro SP1
M-Audio DeltaTDIF pci audio
ASIO drivers 5.10.00.0046

Default settings:
46.4ms..........28%
23.2ms..........30%
11.3ms..........33-34%
5.8ms............41-42%
2.9ms............56-58%
1.5ms............84-86%

O/C'd to 2250Mhz:
46.4ms..........25%
23.2ms..........26-27%
11.3ms..........30-31%
5.8ms............36-38%
2.9ms............50-51%
1.5ms............76-79%

The first results are with the bios settings pretty much at default, except the memory timing is manually set to 2-2-2-10. The second results are with the same memory timings, but the FSB is overclocked at a stable 225Mhz.

ORIGINAL: daverich

Whilst you may be correct about the voltage boost - the MSI board only runs at 333mhz with all memory slots populated.

Kind regards

Dave Rich.

That's a shame, I'd pull the third stick of memory and manually set the timing of so it ran at about 440 mhz. I think you would be much happier with your machine.

ORIGINAL: Poni

ORIGINAL: daverich

Whilst you may be correct about the voltage boost - the MSI board only runs at 333mhz with all memory slots populated.

Kind regards

Dave Rich.

That's a shame, I'd pull the third stick of memory and manually set the timing of so it ran at about 440 mhz. I think you would be much happier with your machine.

ok pulled the third stick and the memory is now running at 410.

NO difference at all in performance scores.

Whaddya make of that?

Seems odd to me ;)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

ok pulled the third stick and the memory is now running at 410.

NO difference at all in performance scores.

Whaddya make of that?

Seems odd to me ;)

You know, that is why I kept feeling something should be working better. With the settings from the forum I posted, I was able to get XP to boot a load faster, so I am sure the DAW is working better. Just how much SONAR will benefit? Only time will tell... Hopefully not too much time ...

ORIGINAL: daverich

ORIGINAL: Poni

ORIGINAL: daverich

Whilst you may be correct about the voltage boost - the MSI board only runs at 333mhz with all memory slots populated.

Kind regards

Dave Rich.

That's a shame, I'd pull the third stick of memory and manually set the timing of so it ran at about 440 mhz (totally stabe). I think you would be much happier with your machine.

ok pulled the third stick and the memory is now running at 410.

NO difference at all in performance scores.

Whaddya make of that?

Seems odd to me ;)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

That's strange when I overclocked my machine 10% the performance gain seemed to reflect it. My 3000+ running @2.2ghz FSB @440 shows 50% cpu useage at 128 sample latency setting using the asio driver. Your 3200+ should get the same results running at the stock settings.

That's strange when I overclocked my machine 10% the performance gain seemed to reflect it. My 3000+ running @2.2ghz FSB @440 shows 50% cpu useage at 128 sample latency setting using the asio driver. Your 3200+ should get the same results running at the stock settings.

Are you running FW too?

ORIGINAL: Guitarmech111
Are you running FW too?

No M-audio delta 44.

Hi.

Actually after doing some digging around it would seem that my memory WAS working at 400 before. there must've been a bios update to fix it after the mobo manual was released.

If I clock my computer up to 440 I get 51% and 128 latency.

I guess it's a driver performance thing.

What were you testing with?

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Actually after doing some digging around it would seem that my memory WAS working at 400 before. there must've been a bios update to fix it after the mobo manual was released.

If I clock my computer up to 440 I get 51% and 128 latency.

I guess it's a driver performance thing.

What were you testing with?

I just got to a stable 1.3ms latency!!!

I NOW HAVE THE WOW Factor!!!

This project is a hog and I am able to play it back without any rice krispies!!!!

I am now officially a happy camper.

Conley - are you using SATA? - if so you need to plug it into SATA 3 or 4 because those are locked. Otherwise overclocking the board will overclock your hard drives which is not really a very safe situation ;)

Kind regards

Dave Rich

Conley - are you using SATA?

Nope. IDE

edit: I only sped up the memory, nothing else.

Hi Scott
Can you tell me inunder God what is the purpose of this test. It would seem to me you are a very knowledgable person so why dont you give all these people very simple advice... if you need power buy a big DAW or better still solve everybodys problems by telling them to buy a mac and use dp4 or protools
Running tests is something thats done at school, It has nothing to do with pro audio. the theory is simple your computer works or it doesent period.
So scott how about changing the TUNE and come up with something more valuable to newbys and pros alike.or is it that You consider Sonar and cake to be still at the testing stage and playing catch up?, perhaps your right.
Dont get me wrong here i have the utmost respect for you but please i think its time you moved on and change the tune


Shea

This post is for people who are building/buying a new computer for Sonar use. It gives them an idea on what kind of results you will get for different systems. While the test mainly focus on cpu use and how low you can get your latency, I think this site is useful.

Buying a Mac+Pro tools isn't neccesarily the way to go. Many "non technical" people who will look at your post will go out and buy a 350Mhz G3 mac with pro tools Le and wonder why they can only run 2 plug ins.

This post is for people who are building/buying a new computer for Sonar use. It gives them an idea on what kind of results you will get for different systems. While the test mainly focus on cpu use and how low you can get your latency, I think this site is useful.

Buying a Mac+Pro tools isn't neccesarily the way to go. Many "non technical" people who will look at your post will go out and buy a 350Mhz G3 mac with pro tools Le and wonder why they can only run 2 plug ins.

Jason, you have to understand Shae. Shae is a disturber, knowledgable, but still a disturber. Most of us won't even respond to jabs like this. He knows what this is for.

I just got to a stable 1.3ms latency!!!

I NOW HAVE THE WOW Factor!!!

This project is a hog and I am able to play it back without any rice krispies!!!!

I am now officially a happy camper.

congratulations. Now come to Japan and set me up.

Now come to Japan and set me up.

You buy, I'll fly!! (seriously) <g>

think you would be happy on an Asian diet? Sushi, salad, fish, beer,sake, noodles, rice?

Sushi,

I would have to cook this... <g>

It just dawned on me that I turned of dithering. That is what I needed in the performance boost! Dave, what performance do you get when turning off dithering?

I just got to a stable 1.3ms latency!!!

I NOW HAVE THE WOW Factor!!!

This project is a hog and I am able to play it back without any rice krispies!!!!

I am now officially a happy camper.

ORIGINAL: Guitarmech111

Sushi,

I would have to cook this... <g>

the misses maight be able to rustle ya up some deep fried mamushi. Sorry, ain't got no rattlesnake. Stir fried with some baked beans and sla-a-w-ww. Finger lickin' good.

http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:YV620Mt5KR8J:www.pharmacy.arizona.edu/news/newsletters/fall97.pdf+mamushi+deadly%3F&hl=en

http://images.google.com/images?q=mamushi&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wi

http://www.pref.hokkaido.jp/hfukusi/hf-kchnh/genko/mamushi/mamushi1.jpg

TO daverich & guitarmech111:

It sounds like both of you have experienced and resolved your issues with your very similar setups to mine. (several posts ago in this thread). Can you sum up you results and reasons for improvements?

Reason: I have only resolved my problems by seting my BIOS to "Optimum" and enjoying the benefits/i.e. mixing. But I would like to know if the RAM issue (2 sticks vs. 3 on MSI K8N Neo Plat) or something else that you had discovered... I have been so busy recording and mixing, that I have not had time to look into this furthur. I will add that I have noticed that if you use UAD-1 plugs - using 2-4 in a track causes spikes of CPU on my Athlon XP 3400+. Not sure it is the path I should looking down for more streamlining, but I have just found that it can be a pain.

Can you sum up you results and reasons for improvements?

Well, my end result is the 'WOW' factor I was looking for compared to my old setup. I went from an ASUS A7S333 athlon XP2400+ with 1G to the NEO2 Athlon 3500+ (s939) 1G combo.

My initial setup after installing all the programs and drivers was not impressing me like I thought it would. After searching through the memory manufacturers website and the MSI NEO2 board hot rodding pages, I felt mine could do a lot better. With a little tweaking, I did.

The SONAR3 Test results didn't change much, but the actual performance of projects skyrocketed! Actually, it worked better after I tweaked the system and turned off dithering. I am able to work at 1.3ms latency on a project that used to go 5.8ms latency with my Delta1010. I am sure the extra processing power helped in this area too. My ASUS would not go below 17ms for the FF800 without stability issues like clicking and popping.

I am VERY content with the results now.

Hi Im new around here however I feel like I've hit the definitive, info, motherload, / overload,forum page I just picked up a Mackie onyx 1640 W/firewire. analogue mixer board.
I also have a Tascam US-428 DAW controller, I intend to replace my old P3, My Budget is $1200-$1500 for dedicated system I dont think I can read all 568 posts and not become a little confused! Would anyone care to help me design A DAW based on (XP home or pro), sonar 4, dual head video AGP, I just need , mostly CPU,MOBO, HD, & RAM, advice.
Hopeing to Achieve something like Scotts results. Very soon
Thanks In Advance , Steve S.

Scott Reams is very knowledgeable in this area. He's the guy behind the web site http://www.LiquidDAW.com. Since selecting parts for a DAW can be tricky, (for example, read some of the threads relating to compatability with the UAD-1 card, a VERY popular effects PCI card), I'd seriously consider letting him build and configure it. You also might want to read the thread below, towards the end, where a guy 'rickgn' makes the quote below. He uses UAD-1 cards. I've been seriously thinking about getting an AMD Athlon 64 setup, but this one quote has put a damper on those thoughts, and is a good example of why this isn't an easy question to answer...

"My advice: Ditch the AMD platform for an Intel setup. I just did and found myself getting lower latencies instantly and is 10x more stable. Yes, the AMD system seemed to have 10% more performance with Sonar. But at the cost of PCI latency and stability? hardly a bargain. The Intel chipset architecture has features built-in that allows for better streaming cabability. Yes, I know, many of you out there have been successful with creating a solid AMD system but I'm just sharing my experience."

http://www.cakewalk.com/forum/tm.asp?m=361301&mpage=1&key=fireface%2Cyeah

"My advice: Ditch the AMD platform for an Intel setup. I just did and found myself getting lower latencies instantly and is 10x more stable. Yes, the AMD system seemed to have 10% more performance with Sonar. But at the cost of PCI latency and stability? hardly a bargain. The Intel chipset architecture has features built-in that allows for better streaming cabability. Yes, I know, many of you out there have been successful with creating a solid AMD system but I'm just sharing my experience."

I have an AMD 3500+ 64-bit and NEo2 Platform that will outrun yours. I dare you to prove your 10X claim too. You can't. I am using a FF800 and it is working very smooth at 1.3ms latency. Intel is NOT more superior. It is just another preference. Most of us here did our homework and chose AMD for our needs. Some Chose intel for their needs. Most chose AMD...

Ummm. I was quoting someone else there... Are you one of the people using UAD-1s on Athlon 64 with no problems? I'm kind of waiting now for a decent PCI-Express firewire solution...

Ummm. I was quoting someone else there..

Ah, Sorry. I didn't see the quote box.

No, I don't use a UAD-1. I almost went PCI-E. I didn't want to lose my GEForceFX5900 with 256M though. PCI-E is still young technology. I would wait a bit longer. What I have now is really smokin. The only thing I think I would improve in my setup is SATA drive in a RAID for backup purposes.

Sorry for the confusion..

Deleted by the poster.

Here is an update for th STAudio c-port. ESI have released the 8.4 driver. Because of recent developments there, it will probably be the last driver released for this card. I've included the comparison with the earlier 8.2rc5 driver

MSI Neo2 Platinum (939)
Athlon 64 +3500 (2200mhz)
1gig Corsair twinx 3200xl ram (dual channel) set 2325
Windows Pro
Sonar 3.1.1 PE
STAudio C-port with ESI drivers

buffers 64

8.2driver 8.4 driver

ms
46.4 25% 26%

23.2 27% 28%

11.6 30% 31%

5.8 39% 38%

2.9 50% 53%

1.3 53%* 78% *(can't be right)


At 96/24 and everything else above I can get 3ms with 82% load. I'll probably switch back since the only real 'advance' of the driver is the ability to route mme simuteneously with the WDM. Don't really need it and the old one was a smidge faster.

Hey Conley, saw you over on the Corsair page. How did the tweaks work out? I had similar issues with some twinx xl

Hey reset, was always an intel user 'til now. Very happy with the A-64 here. I've no instabilties.

(edit for clarity didn't work)

Hello all. New member. Great thread for reviewing system specs/performance. I'm in the middle of getting a brand new rig up and running this week. I've been a Cakewalk/Sonar user for many years and am currently running Sonar 2.2XL, as well as Adobe Audition. I can't run the test, but I have a question on my new daw.

Athlon64 3400+
Asus K8VX
Delta Audiophile 24/96
ATI Radeon 9250 128meg AGP8X
Delta MidiSport 2X2 USB
2 x 512Meg DDR400 RAM
2 x WD 7200RPM 80/8 ATA100 HD's
1 x Dual layer DVD/CDR Drive
WinXP SP1
Antec Sonata Case

I've done basic XP tweaks. No overclocking. My question is regarding HD master/slave options. Right now, No.1 HD (OS and software)is primary master, with No. 2 HD (audio) is primary slave on the same IDE channel. The DVD drive is secondary master on the other IDE channel. If the audio HD is attached to the secondary master instead, would that be a better way to go? If so, where would be the optimum place to put the DVD drive. Or should I run with the current config? (My old rig was single HD only, but it was used primarily for MIDI.)

Thanks!

It will be fine the way you have it.

Thanks mgaretz. I'll leave it that way for now and see how she likes it.

Dell Centrino Pentium 4 M 1.4 512mb ram Echo Indigo I/O
ASIO

64 Samples 1.5ms No Go
128 2.9ms 80-90%
256 5.8ms 63-80%
512 11.6ms 54-70%
1024 23.2ms 46-60%
2048 46.4ms 39-58%


Not bad for a notebook with all the bells and whistles that are in the file.
Will try on a Pentium 3 1ghz
Will try on Pentium 4 3.0E with 1 gig ram

SHUTTLE SN25P nVIDIA nFORCE4 CHIPSET
AMD ATHLON 64 4000+
2 GB PC3200 400MHZ CL3 (3-3-3) DDR DIMM
ATI Radeon X700 Pro 256MB PCI Express
NEC ND-3520A BLACK 16X/16 DVD DUAL DOUBLE LAYER REWRITABLE DRIVE W/SW
MITUSMI 1.44 FLOPPY
MAXTOR 250GB SERIAL ATA150 7200RPM 8MB
2) 17" LCD NEC monitors
Microsoft Windows XP Professional
Tascam FW-1884

ASIO
46.4 ... 23%
23.2 ... 25%
11.6 ... 28%
5.8 ... 34%
2.9 ... 41-44%
1.5 ... 61-63%

Sony Viao TR2
1 Ghz Pentium M Centrino
512 G
40 g 4200 RPM
Sound Max internal Audio

WDM Driver
11ms 85%
20ms 75%
40ms 65%
80ms 57%

What am I missing?

I just upgraded my sytem to:

Gigbyte 939 GA-K8NF-9
nforce4-4X chipset
AMD 64 3200+
512x2 RAM
ATI X300 PCIe
260gigs WD HD
40gigs 10KRPM HD

Audio Interface
Tascam FW-1884

The problem is I'm using ASIO at .7ms latency and I show no CPU% strain what so ever. My audio engine is engaged and I have Sonar 4 PE with all plug-ins. Now one thing I do not see is any audio tracks inside the audio folder. Is there supposed to be audio data inside the audio tracks?

No there is no audio data.
This test file just sits still. That's all it does.

I can't help you with the other part. Someone who knows will drop by.

Steve

I guess I'm doing it right then. I have two audio cards and one is a Terra Tec EWS88D. The EWS88D shows 29% CPU strain at .7 msecs but when I switch audio to use the FW-1884 with ASIO or WDM drivers I don't have any CPU strain even with the lowest settings of .7msecs. I double clicked all plug-ins to make sure they are present and active and they are. I have also made sure the audio engine was engaged. Are the new 939-pin processor and the N4 chipset really that great? I was told the processor would be able to transfer up to 1.6gigs directly from the RAM, so maybe this is why? Could it be that latency is no longer a big issue?

The results you are seeing are definitely not right. No single CPU system can run the test at 0.7ms. Try at all latencies and post the whole group of scores.

-S

Gigbyte 939 GA-K8NF-9
nforce4-4X chipset
AMD 64 3200+
512x2 RAM
ATI X300 PCIe
260gigs WD HD
40gigs 10KRPM HD

24 Bit 44.1Khz
1st card
Terra Tec EWS88D-ASIO

46.4msecs- 27%
23.3msecs- 29-30%
2.9msecs- 55%
1.5msecs- 82-84% !!Warning!!

2nd Card-
Tascam FW-1884-ASIO46.4msecs- 0%
23.2msecs- 0%
5.8msecs- 0%
0.7msecs- 0%

I've made sure the darn thing is turned on and plugged in. Also, I adjusted the latency slider on Tascam's control panel by accessing ASIO control panel button in Sonar. Tascam allows it to go down to 0.7 when adjust the slider to 32 samples.


Terra Tec EWS88D-WDM

40msecs- 0%
20msecs- 0%
10msecs- 0%
1msecs- 0%

Lowered Ultra DMA buffer settings to 1msec on the Terra Tec EWS88D CP and adjusted the slider in Sonar. Used Wave porfiler each time and all frequencies for both cards are testing ok, just in case.


Tascam FW-1884

39.9msecs- 0%
28.9msecs- 0%
11msecs- 0%
1msec- 0% -lowest option in WDM mode

The results are outrageous!

If you check back in this post I have done this test before using my older terra tec card and so I didn't think I was doing anything different. And as you can see the ASIO drivers are the only ones that show any sort of strain on the CPU meter. On the other hand, with the same card in WDM mode there is no strain. Can this be accurate?

When you use the Tascam, the audio engine isn't engaging (even if it indicates that it is). You can veryfy this pretty easily. SonarTest uses input monitoring in order to stress the system. Try to monitor a real signal through one of the tracks. If you can't hear signal and plugins in realtime, nothing is happening.

-S

*MSI K8N Neo Platinum 2
*AMD Athlon 64 3500
*2-Seagate Barracuda 80 gigs
*Sonata Quiet Case
*Liteon DVDRW
*Tacam US-122
This is within the US-122 asio panel...
256 - 39-45%
512 - 29-35%
1024- 26-28%
2048- 24-25%

W/WDM =
46.4 -24-26%
23.2 -26-28%
the rest are ...unavailable with slider
11.6 -
5.8 -
2.9 -
1.5 -

P4 HT/ Prescott 3.20/2ghz PC3200 DDRam

46.4 25
23.2 27
11.6 32
5.8 41
2.9 60

ok now its working correctly,

Gigbyte 939 GA-K8NF-9
nforce4-4X chipset
AMD 64 3200+
512x2 RAM
ATI X300 PCIe
260gigs WD HD
40gigs 10KRPM HD

Tascam FW 1884

ASIO
x2048 46.4msecs = 27%
x1024 23.2msecs = 29%
x512 11.6msecs = 33%
x128 5.8msecs = 43%
x64 1.5msecs = 86%
x32 .7msecs = CRASH!

feels good doesn't it?

You can say that again

Dell Dimension
P4 2.4
512 Mb
Maxtor 6L080L4 80Gb ATA 133 7200
Nvida Ge Force 4 Ti 4200
M Audio Firewire 410
XP Home SP1
Sonar 3.1.1

Hi guys
I'm not that tech minded but here are my sad results. I would appreciate any help. I disable the modem and Anti Virus/ Security when working with Sonar.

ASIO

2048 46.4msecs 38%
1024 23.2msecs 41-43%
512 11.6msecs 46-53%
256 5.8msecs 61-70%
128 2.9msecs No CPU
32 1.5msecs Are you kidding me!

John, Hi there. I saw your posts on the Cakewalk forum (the Sonar benchmark). I am currently buying 2 new DAWs for my studio, one for Sonar and the 2nd for GigaStudio and soft-synths. I noticed you use a NF4 chipset board with your Athlon64 processor. I'm curious to know how the performance is. I have read several negative reports about the NF4 chipset due to the PCI bandwidth issues. The RME site gives the NF3 chipset overall better CPU performance and better PCI bandwith also.

One other question: I'm considering buying a Pentium for my Sonar machine (as I have a DSPF sound card and I hear it does better on the Intel chipsets rather than the AMD)...I'm just wondering if you might want to convince me to not get a Pentium for the Sonar machine...that the AMD will be a much better option for multitracking in Sonar. I have a Tascam FW1082 (small brother of the 1884) as my main interface for the Sonar machine...but I'm going to try to run the DSPF in the same machine at the same time to see if I can benefit from the onboard mixer.

Thanks,
Nathan

Hi,

My results:

MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum,
AMD 3500+ 90nm Winchester,
2GB RAM OCZ 3200 DDR 400 2,3,2,5
IDE 0 : Barracuda 120G = XP, Sonar, apps
IDE 1 : Barracuda 200G = live samples and audio backup,
SATA RAID0 : Barracuda 160G X 2 = live audio & samples library
Sapphire ATI Radeon 9600 SE AGP Video
TI firewire PCI card
UAD-1 DSP PCI card
DVD-COMBO
DVD+/-RW
Floppy
XP Pro SP1

MOTU 896HD (firewire)

Roland XP60
MIA Strat

(not necessarily in that order)

ASIO
Buffer...Latency...CPU (max)

2048 ... 46.4 ... 25%
1024 ... 23.2 ... 27%
512 ... 11.6 ... 31%
256 ... 5.8 ... 38%
192 ... 4.4 ... 42%
128 ... 2.9 ... 52%
96 ... 2.2 ... 63%


--thndrsn

Nathan,

I sent you an email with my response to avoid getting off topic. Good music on your website BTW...

Hi,

did the Scott Reams SonarTest and the ADK SonarTest with this setup:

MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum
Athlon FX55 @200MHz x 13
2x 512MB OCZ4001024ELDCPER2-K Rev2 Platinum EL CL2 2-2-5
2x IBM IC35 80GB as PATA1 and PATA2
1x Maxtor Diamondline III 300GB 7B300S0 attached to SATA2
BIOS version: 1.8mod
1x RME HDSP Digiface
ASIO driver 2.9.0.1
WinXP Pro SP2 latest patches
Sonar PE 4.0.2

and got these results:

Latency || ScottReams-Sonartest || ADK-Sonartest
8192(186ms) || 20% || 56%
4096(93ms) || 21% || 58%
2048(46ms) || 22% || 62%
1024(23ms) || 23% || 68%
512(12ms) || 25% || 76%
256(6ms) || 29% || 89% critical
128(3ms) || 38% || dropout
64(1,5ms) || 53% || dropout

After a couple of minutes at 6ms with the ADK-SonarTest where the CPU load was jumping between 87 to 93% monitored with Sysinternals Process Explorer 9.01 I got a blue screen two times with the message claiming that Driver_Irql_Not_Less_Or_Equal and NDIS.SYS has caused an error at memory address yxz – system halted! The second time the error was so serious that WinXP was damaged in systemroot\system32\config\software that I had to reinstall an image. Actually this was the first time something like this happened with this and former systems. However I hadn’t used the ADK-SonarTest before.

Athlon 64 3000+ (939)
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum
Corsair Twinx 3200C2 (512MB x 2) (set above spec to 2-3-3-5 1T, synchronized with CPU)
Grandmars ATI Radeon 9550SE
Echo Mia Midi (PCI)
Antec Truepower II 430W
Seagate IDE HDD

FSB=200Mhz/HT=5:
46.4 ms - 31%
23.2 ms - 33%
11.6 ms - 38%
5.8 ms - 46%
2.9 ms - 63%
1.5 ms - Failed

o/c to FSB=225Mhz/HT=4:
46.4 ms - 27%
23.2 ms - 29%
11.6 ms - 32%
5.8 ms - 39%
2.9 ms - 54%
1.5 ms - 80%

You can say that again

feels good doesn't it.

ORIGINAL: winnie_pooh

Hi,

did the Scott Reams SonarTest and the ADK SonarTest with this setup:

MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum
Athlon FX55 @200MHz x 13
2x 512MB OCZ4001024ELDCPER2-K Rev2 Platinum EL CL2 2-2-5
2x IBM IC35 80GB as PATA1 and PATA2
1x Maxtor Diamondline III 300GB 7B300S0 attached to SATA2
BIOS version: 1.8mod
1x RME HDSP Digiface
ASIO driver 2.9.0.1
WinXP Pro SP2 latest patches
Sonar PE 4.0.2

and got these results:

Latency || ScottReams-Sonartest || ADK-Sonartest
8192(186ms) || 20% || 56%
4096(93ms) || 21% || 58%
2048(46ms) || 22% || 62%
1024(23ms) || 23% || 68%
512(12ms) || 25% || 76%
256(6ms) || 29% || 89% critical
128(3ms) || 38% || dropout
64(1,5ms) || 53% || dropout

After a couple of minutes at 6ms with the ADK-SonarTest where the CPU load was jumping between 87 to 93% monitored with Sysinternals Process Explorer 9.01 I got a blue screen two times with the message claiming that Driver_Irql_Not_Less_Or_Equal and NDIS.SYS has caused an error at memory address yxz – system halted! The second time the error was so serious that WinXP was damaged in systemroot\system32\config\software that I had to reinstall an image. Actually this was the first time something like this happened with this and former systems. However I hadn’t used the ADK-SonarTest before.

ouch never had that test do that before, must have been too much for it. we test every sonar box with that test never had an issue....

just for comaprison here is what i got on my daw
Gigabyte K8ns Ultra 939 (my new daw)
939 pin 3800+ 1 gig ram (AGP board)
RME Multiface
1024 = 78%

512 = 87%

anything less than 512 is INSTANT dropout

Scott
ADK