Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

182,337 users have contributed to 42,220 threads and 254,759 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 3 new thread(s), 11 new post(s) and 51 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. General & Hardware
  3. Adding ram to reduce cpu usage in mastodontic template

  • Adding ram to reduce cpu usage in mastodontic template

    B
    B

    Hello !!

    Let's say I have on the mac pro 12 core 2.93 GHz a template which is so ridicolously heavy lol that no cpu threads allocation selection prevent me to reach the 100% cpu usage (with clicks,pops and so on...).

    I want to know if bringing my system's ram from 32 Gb to 96 Gb and buying a small SSD for the OS is going to help in order to reduce the cpu usage and make things running flawlessly.

    Samples are all spread on 2 x 1Tb black caviar SATA and 1 x 1Tb Lacie FW800 (all half-empty), songs are on another black caviar, as the actual OS is, so in total 4 SATAs and 1 FW800 drives.

    On activity Monitor I noticed I always finish my ram, so probably more ram might help? 

    Thanks in advance for your help
  • M
    M
    I imagine you'l hear from Cyril shortly... In the meantime, you haven't said how many instruments this template houses? Which DAW? VEP 5? MIR PRO? Suite? What are your Latency/Buffer settings? Having asked that, buying as much RAM as one can afford is never a bad thing. However 32gigs may be enough. A small SSD for the OS is not bad, but SSD's for your samples are better. SSD's allow your RAM to realize its hidden potential loading those samples much faster. Switching to internal Sata Raid 0 HDD's or external eSata Raid 0 HDDS will speed things up. Then of course there's the ultimate: Raid 0 SSD's Anyway, without more info one can't say.... You may just need to tweak your latency and or buffer settings.
  • D
    D

    SSD will only help if you are experiencing dropouts due to too many instruments streaming from one drive. I can stream a whole orchestral template from 2 x 7200 drives, so this is unlikely to be the problem.

    If your CPUs are maxing out, raising the soundcard buffer might help.

    Increasing the amount of RAM will only help if you are getting close to using it all for your samples. Remember that OSX requires quite a large amount of extra RAM just for itself. If you are trying to use all your RAM, and not leave enough for the OS, you will definitely have issues with clicks and pops.

    DG
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC
    last edited
    last edited

    @BeatlesForever said:

    Hello !!

    Let's say I have on the mac pro 12 core 2.93 GHz a template which is so ridicolously heavy lol that no cpu threads allocation selection prevent me to reach the 100% cpu usage (with clicks,pops and so on...).

    Clicks pops and hanging notes are produced because of I/O bottleneck and "not enought Memory"

    You must watch the "swap used" in Activity monitor / Memory

    If you have a value this show you dot have enough memory for the Pre-load buffer size you have defined

    You can reduce pre-load buffer size if you have fast disk (raid 0, SSD or a raid 0 of SSD)

    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • M
    M
    DG May I ask how many instruments make up your "whole orchestral template"? Also, are your 2 x 7200 drives, separate or Raid 0? I ask about the drives because some in these forums act as if good old fashioned HDD's are dead. I do not agree. Good old fashioned HDD's have, and continue to serve many professionals very very well.
  • B
    B

    Thanks to the all of you who replied to my enigma !!

    Better I tell you what kind of experiment I'm doing to test the power of my system/template:

    To start, I wanna say I'm very lazy and just want all my instruments to be ready when I start recording, in order to just click the "record" button on each midi track and go...so I created an APOCALIPTIC metaframe, composed by 2 x 64bit VEPRO instances/vframes (126 outputs, 14 midi channels each) , each hosting several K502 instances for a total amount of about 26 Kontakt instances (each one hosting 16 instruments), plus about 30 spare V.I. synths..

    ...in overall single midi tracks terms, I loaded exactly 440 instrument lol (articulations, alternative models instruments, different brands of synths and so on...)

    for what regards the Kontakt counterpart, all instruments are obviously purged, being this I'm doing just an "idea" of standard template I'm going to apply to each of my songs (then I just reload the samples I need, based on the song)...the important for me was having a starting point with all I need already provided, and then subtract/exclude what I won't use (also to test the power of the 2.93GHz dual hex mac pro, with 32 gigs of ram)

    The test, performed hosting 2 x VEPRO RTAS plugins from the VEPRO 5.0.10638 64bit server in Pro Tools 9.0.3 with Complete Production Toolkit 2, consist in this:

    I set both the VEPRO plugin instances to x2 buffers (default) and set the Pro Tools/RME FF800 buffer to 1024 sample (max), then I record some midi data which consist in my hand going up and down on the keyboard fastly, touching all notes of all available octaves, in order to trigger them all...then I copy this data to all of the 440 midi track, changing slightly the starting point, and press play on pro tools...

    the midi data triggers all the instruments, creating an absurd but creative cacophony which sounds like a mad waterfall,that reveals if the system is able to keep up...

    the result of this crazy test is that maxing out everything I can make (more or less) working without artifacts about 400 istruments of all the bloody total 440 ones ,with very high cpu usage that reaches peaks of 97%....

    ...the triggering of all these instruments eats my ram after a while, and looking at the activity monitor, I notice I get swap of  about 10 megs and VM is about 153 Gb...

    ..but the fact is that I get cpu overloads already before to run out of ram, but was asking myself ( to win this test ) if adding a comic amount of ram (96 Gb OWC ram) would someway help to reduce the cpu usage ( its idle, for instance), and oc helping me to purge less samples in Kontakt (which is set to 16 core multiprocessing, condition necessary to make this work, at least for my setup)

    But might be that the only solution is to reduce the template, but this would be a pity, cuz I'm very lazy, and day-by-day even lazier, so I hate to load new instruments outside the template.

    I allow you to laugh on me and think I'm crazy, which probably is the truth, but I'm this way and cannot change hehe
  • M
    M
    440 instruments... I imagined something large but this makes my head hurt. How about 64gbs of ram on your host Mac. Then 2 more 12 core Macs with 64gbs of ram each. Now run 150 instruments on each Mac. Experiment or not, I don't think this can be done on one machine... But that's just me.
  • B
    B
    last edited
    last edited

    @Mike B Studios said:

    440 instruments... I imagined something large but this makes my head hurt.

    How about 64gbs of ram on your host Mac. Then 2 more 12 core Macs with 64gbs of ram each.

    Now run 150 instruments on each Mac.

    Experiment or not, I don't think this can be done on one machine... But that's just me.

    hehe....if Steve Jobs has a daughter, I could always try to engage her in order to inherit Apple, then I will slave 30 x 12core to my machine...but I've become very lazy also in engaging women..

    Mike, my "in-real-life" idea was not to run all 440 instrument together, but just to have them all ready and loaded, depending on the project / song...so this test was just meant to "benchmark" the system...in fact I'll never play in a song 400 series of furious fast notes at the same time just to trigger all the samples of all the libs, but I thought this was a funny method to stress the power of a system...then, seeing in the end IT SEEMS I might run 10/11 of all those instruments in that crazy way, but noticing that infamous usage of the cpu, I wondered what would happen maxing out/ buying 96 gigs of ram ( which seems to me still the best bang for the buck, compared to all the other very expensive solutions)...in the end, if you think of it, what would be the sense of life if a mac pro which can be equipped with all that ram is not able to fully handle it?

    I mean, all other apps can benefit of much less ram, but audio and samples are made for ram, no??

    Some days I wake up thinking maxing out ram can free the cpu from the stress, but other days I fear increasing ram will only lead to bottlenecks and issues...so I'm asking to the experts here if anybody ever experimented this, or if anybody here knows if "de facto" whatever boost of ram can help in this very case, without shade of a doubt.
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @Mike B Studios said:

    DG

    May I ask how many instruments make up your "whole orchestral template"?

    Also, are your 2 x 7200 drives, separate or Raid 0?

    I ask about the drives because some in these forums act as if good old fashioned HDD's are dead.

    I do not agree. Good old fashioned HDD's have, and continue to serve many professionals very very well.

     

     My template has shrunk somewhat recently, but is around 90 instruments. I then add other things as necessary.

    I use normal 7200 drives. No need for anything fancy with VSL.

    DG
  • B
    B
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    I use normal 7200 drives. No need for anything fancy with VSL.

    This makes me absolutely happy and in peace with myself...many times I thought to sell all my dresses, for buying 1 x 64 Gb SSD for OS and 3 x 480 Gb SSDs to store all the samples libs I purchased over the years..but the idea to be naked during the winter pushed me far from this dramatic decision
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    I use normal 7200 drives. No need for anything fancy with VSL.

     3 x 480 Gb SSDs to store all the samples libs I purchased over the years

    It will be cheaper to by 256 GB an mount then on a raid 0 [:)]

    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC
    last edited
    last edited

    >

    @BeatlesForever said:

    Some days I wake up thinking maxing out ram can free the cpu from the stress, but other days I fear increasing ram will only lead to bottlenecks and issues...so I'm asking to the experts here if anybody ever experimented this, or if anybody here knows if "de facto" whatever boost of ram can help in this very case, without shade of a doubt.

    read what I wrote before !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • B
    B

    yep Cyril you wrote this:

    Clicks pops and hanging notes are produced because of I/O bottleneck and "not enought Memory"

    but I yet not understand if both things are needed to be corrected or just THAT boost of ram I am thinking to purchase can solve the issue...in other words I yet haven't heard :

    "with 96 Gb alone, you are more than done"

    this is what I want to hear from you, only if it's true, of course..

    ..that's why I am still doubtful , Cyril
  • B
    B

    ...or if such stellar template I'm trying to fulfill is simply utopia and impossible to realize with a single machine of the specs I have provided..
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC

    How do you want me to say : buy this or that ! somebody that will say that will be stupid and will fool you

    You must test using your templates. (I can test your template when I return from holiday after 15/08)

    In K4/K5 there are some sounds that are more gready than others

    VSL depends of your template, if you use MIR, if MIR is in stereo, 5.1 or 7.1 and needs a balance between a lot of ram, fast cpu and VERY fast disk I/O

    Also with Kontakt I will test if it is not better to use Kontakt in standalone ! 

    It's a trial and error !

    If I was you I will start to put my Libs on a raid 0 of SSD and see how your system react e.i. see if swapp is still used, I will then reduce pre-load buffer until swap is not any more used, if I still get click and pops I will put more memory

    MacBook Pro M3 MAX 128 GB 8TB - 2 x 48" screen --- Logic Pro --- Mir Pro 3D --- Most of the VI libs, a few Synch... libs --- Quite a few Kontakt libs --- CS80 fanatic
  • B
    B

    Thanks Cyril for this last message, in other words you are telling me to upgrade my system in order to make it balanced & stronger in all its aspects, not just about the ram...

    ...and I can understand this is your strong starting assumption , and oc I would follow this way too, but before, assuming I don't use MIR , and I am not yet setup for surround, I need to know:

    - seeing I LOVE all my K libs, I bought a lot of them and I need to use them all,  how much will cost me to replace all my 3 x half full 1 Tb 7200 HDs from which I stream all my "treasures", with 3 x half Terabyte SSDs ?? (I wanna STILL  play with all my libs & toys, I'm like a baby)

    - how  to make a bloody RAID 0 of them all ( the word "RAID 0" makes me tremble of fear lol, sound like a mortal weapon to my ears)

    - in case all of these upgrades won't cut to make my template works as I expect, will I still have 1300 $$$ to max out the ram ?

    - in case maxing out the ram won't cut again, will you come to my funeral to mourn me??

    About replicating my template, I don't know how you can do this, assuming you probably don't have the K libs I have (probably you mostly use VSL), nor you use Pro Tools 9 CPTK2 as DAW ...anyway it would be a great loss of time and health to do this for me, so for God's sake, DON'T DO !!

    ....Life is beutiful my friends....

    and yes...some K libs are really like those peeps that don't eat for two weeks...stunningly HUNGRY !!
  • B
    B

     there's also to say PT9 seems to not support RAID, nor Usb...the only accepted connections are internal Sata drives ad FW800 disks with oxford chipsets...instead, from v10, also RAID is accepted...

    ...at least for what I know, please correct me if I'm wrong....
  • M
    M

    I believe it was PT8 that had no OSX Raid 0 support. 

    PT9 and 10 are fine...
  • D
    D

     Thank you guys ! I too have a problem regarding my orchestral (70 x VI 2, Kontakt and Play) template but I never though it could be an harddrive problem...

    All my libraries, projects, third party VSTi are on 1 x 7200 SATA II drive lol

    It'll be time for some SSD !
  • M
    M

    One hard drive is never good... But what is the problem?