Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.



Forum Jump  
Go to last post
Posted on Tue, Jan 11 2011 04:36
by knievel
Joined on Thu, May 28 2009, Newcastle, England, Posts 80

Hello all!

Does VSL or any users have any ideas or views on RAM latency?

I know people (inc myself!) can get hung up on teeny weeny (scientific term there!) differences in speed, but surely the latency of the RAM used will have an impact on a clean, click free playback?

i.e will RAM latency of CL5 do much better with VSL than CL7 or CL9 ?? Or will I not notice much difference?

I'm just about to upgrade a few things over the next few months (I'm maybe waiting for MIR Pro...) including RAM and CPU and was just getting some ideas...

What RAM latency does VSL use in their machines I wonder??!

Best regards and a [belated] Happy New Year to all, 


Posted on Wed, Jan 12 2011 00:37
by kleinholgi
Joined on Sat, May 09 2009, Posts 171

I have no experience with the newer intel architectures, but in the past it didn´t make a huge difference.

If you want to go for maximum high end possible, of course it may give you a few % gain in performance.

It is easy to find out. Just write down the settings from the SPD or the actual latencies and buffer stategies that make it actually a stable system. Then try to lower the setting and test the system stability with Prime. If it doesn´t work, go back to the old setting.

Of course, many times you also have to increase the voltage for the most aggressive settings. If you do that, you´re beginning to fish in unchartered fields. In that case, check some typical overclocker or gaming websites.

In the end, I don´t know if it is worth the trouble.

In less than half a year, the new computer systems will be faster again anyway, even without tweaking.

Moore´s Law : No. of transistor´s /die double every 18 months.)

Otellini´s Law : " No. of Vice Presidents at Intel double every 18 months "  Big Smile

Posted on Wed, Jan 12 2011 15:58
by knievel
Joined on Thu, May 28 2009, Newcastle, England, Posts 80

Some interesting points!!! :)   Than you.

Its just that with VSL using the first part of any sample played straight from RAM, if I have a whole orchestra playing at once (i.e. 40 odd instruments or so...) then surely using faster latency of CL5 will play the samples with less glitches than if using CL9 latency.

I understand there are many aspects of improving performance with VSL (better CPU, better sound card, overclocking etc) but regardless of different systems and users set ups, the first line in the chain for every user setup, is that the samples start by being played from the RAM.

If using a 'low' latency of CL9, (as opposed to faster CL5), with VSL will not make any difference, then I will just get the cheaper CL9 RAM and put the money saved towards other parts of my system.

VSL - what RAM specs do you use in your systems??

Best regards,


Posted on Wed, Jan 12 2011 20:13
by kleinholgi
Joined on Sat, May 09 2009, Posts 171

Have a look here,


- but some hardcore enthusiasts, with a lot of time for system tweaking...



Posted on Sat, Jan 15 2011 20:53
by cm
Joined on Fri, Dec 20 2002, vienna, Posts 9146

memory timing becomes an issue if you come close to the edge, eg. like to run huge arrangements with the super package on a dedicated MIR-machine or your (older) CPU is not really powerfull, so every wait-state you could get rid of would count.

much more important IMO is to have memory which is on the compatibility list for your motherboard ...

so if you have the choice and the price difference is neglectable i'd choose memory with lower latency of course ...

and remember: a CRAY is the only computer that runs an endless loop in just four hours ...
Posted on Sat, Jan 15 2011 22:09
by dorremifasol
Joined on Fri, Oct 22 2010, Barcelona, Posts 59

Perhaps you should focus your optimization efforts on hard disk speed rather than RAM speed. It's for sure that you will run out of disk speed much before you notice any gain with faster memory.

Any portion of sample that is not loaded in RAM will be read from disk in real time (most of them, actually). If you have several voices playing at the same time, the hard disk head will be travelling the disk for the right chunks of each sample, which will traduce in lots of milliseconds wasted in seek time.

I'm pretty sure that any RAM speed will be enough for playing VSL, we are talking about just playing samples and little more, not rendering video!



Intel i9 9900KF, 48Gb RAM, Windows 10 64bit, Cubase 12 / Nuendo 11
Posted on Sun, Jan 16 2011 01:25
by Cyril Blanc
Joined on Thu, Dec 19 2002, Paris France, Posts 2900

Disk speed is very important, but the processor speed too.

Looks like the best solution is, if you need a big orchestral template, is to spread your orchestra on farms.

It's really depends of what you are expecting, on how you are organized in your work, on how long you are accepting to wait, tell us more

At the moment we are doing a lot of speed test.

I am looking for somebody with SE PLUS that has a PC and/or a MAC Westmere 6 or 12 cores to do more tests

MacBook Pro 2019 16" 64gb 4TB + 2 x Odisseey G9 49"

MacPro 2010 12 core 2.93 ghz 64 GB Mac OS X 10.11 2722 Rocket Raid Sata III card with 8 x ssd

Kbd : P80 Yamaha, S88 + S25 Komplete Kontrol, DX7
I-Controls Pro
Synth : many....
Logic X , Dorico, Band In A Box, ORB Composer
VSL : MIR PRO 3D, Appassionata Strings I, Solo strings , Wind, Brass, Percussion Complete, Dimension Brass, Big Band Orchestra series, Many Synchronised libs, Many Sychron Instruments

Kontakt, Omnisphere, QLSO, QLSC, CS 80, Arturia V5, Maximo, Realivox Blue. CS 80 V3, The Orchestra 3, Art Conductor, Genesis Children Choir, Lunaris, Lacrimosa, Kinetic libs, EW libs

Final Cut pro
Camera full HD
You cannot post new threads in this forum.
You cannot reply to threads in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.