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

Notification

Icon
Error

Forum Jump  
First Test results for Vienna Instruments on PC
Last post Mon, Apr 13 2009 by Paul, 40 replies.
Options
Go to last post
2 Pages12>
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 17:35
by Paul
Joined on Sat, Aug 03 2002, Vienna, Posts 13900
First Vienna Instruments Stress Test results on PC

We have tested the Vienna Instruments on various computers and doublechecked on similar machines. All computers are fully equipped DAW´s that are used in everyday studio work, no additional tuning.

More tests are in the works, with different processors and hosts. Our tests with Sonar, FX Teleport, Chainer, Plogue Bidule, Forte showed the same results, the Vienna Instruments behave the same way as in Steinberg Cubase SX or Vstack.

The test results for Audio Units on Apple will follow as soon as possible.

Please bear in mind, that the RAM available is also used by the hosts (around 300 MB) and Windows (another 300 MB), which is why the limit of RAM usage is 1.3-1.5 GB for the Vienna Instruments in a computer equipped with 2 GB RAM.

The testing routine: Play a (really stressy!) stress test song with different loading options (more instruments, less RAM, and the other way around). All instruments are playing all the time, using all kinds of matrices and patches, and of course including additional MIDI data like ModWheel and different assigned sliders.

You always see the maximum Vienna Instruments possible in the given setup without any sonic trouble.

TEST COMPUTER 1

Processor: Pentium 4, 3.2 GHz,
Ram: 2 GB
Data storage: internal SATA
Host application: Cubase SX3
Soundcard: RME HDSP Multiface


Latency at 512 Samples (12ms) / 1.2 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 24 (CPU 75%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 75%)

Latency at 256 Samples (6 ms) / 1.3 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 20 (CPU 70%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 75%)

TEST COMPUTER 2

Processor: Pentium 4, 3 GHz,
Ram: 2 GB
Data storage: Firewire 400
Host application: Cubase SX2
Soundcard: RME DIGI 9652


Latency at 1024 Samples (24 ms) / 1.3 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 24 (CPU 50%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 60%)

Latency at 512 Samples (12 ms) / 1 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 18 (CPU 50%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 60%)

Latency at 256 Samples (6 ms) / 1.2 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 14 (CPU 60%)
Maximum polyphony: 180 stereo voices / (CPU 65%)

TEST COMPUTER 3

Processor: AMD 2.6 GHz,
Ram: 2 GB
Data storage: Firewire 400
Host application: Cubase SX3
Soundcard: Creamware Pulsar & Luna


Latency at 13ms / 1.3 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 20 (CPU 70%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 70%)

Latency at 7 ms / 1.2 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 16 (CPU 65%)
Maximum polyphony: 174 stereo voices / (CPU 60%)

TEST COMPUTER 4

Processor: Pentium 4, 2.8 GHz,
Ram: 2 GB
Data storage: internal SATA
Host application: VSTack
Soundcard: RME DIGI9632


Latency at 512 Samples (12ms) / 1.4 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 16 (CPU 70%)
Maximum polyphony: 180 stereo voices / (CPU 70%)

Latency at 256 Samples (6 ms) / 1.4 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 8 (CPU 55%)
Maximum polyphony: 160 stereo voices / (CPU 70%)

TEST COMPUTER 5

Processor: Pentium 4, 2.4 GHz,
Ram: 1.5 GB
Data storage: Firewire 400
Host application: VSTack
Soundcard: Steinberg VSL 2020


Latency at 512 Samples (12ms) / 1 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 16 (CPU 60%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 80%)

Latency at 256 Samples (6 ms) / 1 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 14 (CPU 60%)
Maximum polyphony: 200 stereo voices / (CPU 80%)

TEST COMPUTER 6

Processor: Laptop Pentium M, 2 GHz,
Ram: 2 GB
Data storage: Firewire 400
Host application: Cubase SX3
Soundcard: RME HDSP Multiface


Latency at 512 Samples (12ms) / 1.2 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 14 (CPU 65%)
Maximum polyphony: 160 stereo voices / (CPU 65%)

Latency at 256 Samples (6 ms) / 1.1 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 10 (CPU 55%)
Maximum polyphony: 150 stereo voices / (CPU 65%)

TEST COMPUTER 7

Processor: Pentium 3, 1 GHz,
Ram: 2 GB
Data storage: Firewire 400
Host application: VStack
Soundcard: RME DIGI 9632


Latency at 512 Samples (12ms) / 0.6 GB Ram usage
Maximum Vienna Instrument instances: 5 (CPU 70%)
Maximum polyphony: 90 stereo voices / (CPU 65%)
Paul Kopf
Product Manager - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 20:32
by timkiel
Joined on Fri, Jun 06 2003, Posts 629
Thanks Paul - its good to have some data at last.

Would you mind please clarifying what a typical load of "patches" was in the tests. Obviously you wouldn't be able to load 24 Universal instrument patches onto the top specced machine - or maybe you could.....

Regards


Tim
MacbookPro M1 Pro Max 32GB, Logic 10.7.3 (Rosetta Mode)
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 20:47
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608
Hi Paul

It's good to have some data at last. However, I'm slightly disappointed that the results weren't better using FX-Teleport. In theory every instance should have a limit of 2Gb, therefore one should be able to load in excess of 3Gb on a machine that has 4Gb RAM. Did you test for this, or were your tests limited to 2Gb machines?

DG
Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 20:52
by fitch
Joined on Tue, Jun 17 2003, dublin, Posts 143
will you be posting mac results soon too Big Smile
cheers, fitch
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 20:55
by Peter Alexander
Joined on Wed, Aug 21 2002, Virginia, Posts 642
We're the P4s dual core?
Peter L. Alexander
Author, Professional Orchestration Series
www.soniccontrol.tv
www.alexanderpublishing.com
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 21:21
by Christian Marcussen
Joined on Mon, Nov 10 2003, Posts 1508
Hi, thanks for posting.

I agree with Tim - whats really important is how many samples can you load with this as opposed to GS3.
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 22:57
by julian
Joined on Fri, Jan 07 2005, UK, Posts 720
What looks really worrying in the first instance is the max instances of VI achieved - 24 max. I have regularly used 100 EXS 24 instruments in a score now I know the VI's with their matrices reduce the requirement for channels. But in an orchestral line-up"
Strings 5, Wind 7, Brass 6, Harp, Piano Percussion (4) and now we've run out before we think solo's, choirs, and all the other instruments often used.

In Logic on a mac if you run out of voices, RAM or CPU you can always freeze the most important thing you can complete the largest orchestrations on one computer.

If there is really a score limit of 24 staves (24 instruments) this could be an issue.

Let's hope the mac performances are a little more revealing when they are published.

Julian
Posted on Tue, Feb 07 2006 23:24
by timkiel
Joined on Fri, Jun 06 2003, Posts 629
julian wrote:
Let's hope the mac performances are a little more revealing when they are published.

Julian


Mac will be far worse Stick out tongue
MacbookPro M1 Pro Max 32GB, Logic 10.7.3 (Rosetta Mode)
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 07:48
by Stéphane
Joined on Tue, Mar 11 2003, Nantes, France, Posts 149
Hi Paul,

Do you think it will be possible to let this "test song" available for the end user ? Then we could post our results here.
Stéphane Péneau
CASAWAVE
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 08:39
by nliberg
Joined on Fri, Dec 02 2005, Posts 232
Peter Alexander wrote:
We're the P4s dual core?

... and where are the dual core AMDs?
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 09:18
by cm
Joined on Fri, Dec 20 2002, vienna, Posts 9146
a basical comment on hyperthreading (= virtual dual processor), dual processors and dual core processors ....

as you might know audio applications run in fact not multi-threaded, this means an audio-related working process cannot be split across processors (be it hyperthreaded, dual or dual core processors). the work has to be done by one processor - this goes so far, that even processes of a sequencing and sampling application have to run both on the same processor if audio (and sometimes also midi) flows between them.

although some work can be done by a second processor: rendering and updating the grafic interface, file-access, streaming, ect.
in this sense the Vienna Instruments are supporting multiple processors.

christian
and remember: a CRAY is the only computer that runs an endless loop in just four hours ...
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 10:25
by Paul
Joined on Sat, Aug 03 2002, Vienna, Posts 13900
Hi all,

this is the first test series we have made, more results will be published, when the second run is through (AMD dual core, P4 double core, I´m trying to get a hold of the fastest machines I can find).

Quote:
Would you mind please clarifying what a typical load of "patches" was in the tests. Obviously you wouldn't be able to load 24 Universal instrument patches onto the top specced machine - or maybe you could.....


Hi Tim, setup was always a little different, everything from staccato patches to complex matrices playing back different MIDI tracks - no prisoners taken.

Quote:
Do you think it will be possible to let this "test song" available for the end user ? Then we could post our results here.


Stéphane, you don´t want to listen to it, believe me, MIDI notes all over the place Cool. Purpose was to really stress the Vienna Instruments....


Quote:
However, I'm slightly disappointed that the results weren't better using FX-Teleport. In theory every instance should have a limit of 2Gb, therefore one should be able to load in excess of 3Gb on a machine that has 4Gb RAM. Did you test for this, or were your tests limited to 2Gb machines?


DG, I will look into that, more to come....


Quote:
I agree with Tim - whats really important is how many samples can you load with this as opposed to GS3.


Christian, as mentioned in our FAQ´s here:

"Q:
What’s the difference in the amount of instruments you can load in VI vs GS3?
A:
On a PC with 2 GB RAM, Vienna Instruments can load about double the number of instruments. Or, to be more exact, in a Windows environment you can load up to 25,000 samples; on a Mac, the number is about 38,000 – provided your RAM holds out, of course ... Detailed testing informations will follow."

We keep on testing and sharing the results, of course...

Quote:
What looks really worrying in the first instance is the max instances of VI achieved - 24 max. I have regularly used 100 EXS 24 instruments in a score now I know the VI's with their matrices reduce the requirement for channels. But in an orchestral line-up "Strings 5, Wind 7, Brass 6, Harp, Piano Percussion (4) and now we've run out before we think solo's, choirs, and all the other instruments often used.

In Logic on a mac if you run out of voices, RAM or CPU you can always freeze the most important thing you can complete the largest orchestrations on one computer.

If there is really a score limit of 24 staves (24 instruments) this could be an issue.

Let's hope the mac performances are a little more revealing when they are published.


Julian, you can make use of RAM Optimize to stay on the MIDI level, when your RAM reaches the limits. We would like to see the perfect orchestration computer that never runs out of RAM ourselves...

I can´t wait to have the final figures for MAC as well, I just really want to make sure that everything is doublechecked, so that you know what it really looks like....

Thanks for your input, everybody!

Best wishes, Paul
Paul Kopf
Product Manager - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 11:34
by julian
Joined on Fri, Jan 07 2005, UK, Posts 720
Quote:

Julian, you can make use of RAM Optimize to stay on the MIDI level, when your RAM reaches the limits. We would like to see the perfect orchestration computer that never runs out of RAM ourselves...

I can´t wait to have the final figures for MAC as well, I just really want to make sure that everything is doublechecked, so that you know what it really looks like....

Thanks for your input, everybody!

Best wishes, Paul


Hi Paul,

The inportant number for me is instances of VI - how many will I be able to run. RAM or CPU is actually less of an issue as with freezing or RAM optomization there are ways round this. Where only 24 VI instances would be a problem would be in only having 24 arrange tracks available for Logic automation - only having the equivalent of 24 staves in a score - what happens when you have inserted the 24th
VI and you still need 2 or 3 extra instruments. With the current VSL library this is not an issue - freeze a track or two and insert more EXS 24's but if you reach the instances limit with VI there is nowhere else to go particularly as VI's won't run as a node.

I admit it's early days and we must give you guys time to do your tests and perhaps optomize the software but one question I would like to ask is what is the maximum number of VI's that can be inserted on a top flight PC with very low instrument content (i.e. each VI only has a minimal instrument/sample load)

thanks

Julian
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 11:59
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608
Paul wrote:
Quote:
However, I'm slightly disappointed that the results weren't better using FX-Teleport. In theory every instance should have a limit of 2Gb, therefore one should be able to load in excess of 3Gb on a machine that has 4Gb RAM. Did you test for this, or were your tests limited to 2Gb machines?


DG, I will look into that, more to come....


Hi Paul, I didn't mean to hassle you, it's just that there are so many options, and in this period of calm before the storm I want to prepare as much as possible before D-Day (talk about mixed metaphors Confused ).

The other thing to be aware of is that Cubase SX3 (and Nuendo) are both Large Address Aware, so that with the 3gig switch (I think) one can access up to about 2.7Gb RAM. It would be interesting to see how the number of samples in this instance stacks up to the figures quoted for MAC. I think that this will eventually be helpful to users, as at the moment with no MAC figures about performance we don't really know. For example, number of instances might be more important than RAM use to some people; maximum number of samples might be of more interest to others. I think that the polyphony looks OK, but obviously it depends on how VI deals with multi-layer cross-faded instruments. The only time I get close in GS is when I have multiple keyboard instruments running, and there ain't non of them in VI Big Smile

DG
Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 16:37
by Nick Batzdorf
Joined on Tue, Apr 29 2003, Los Angeles, Posts 2546
Vienna Instruments run all the articulations you need for an instrument in one player. Therefore I assume "instruments" really means *instruments* - i.e. violins, violas, and oboes = 3 instruments.

So when you say 20 - 24 instruments, you're talking about the equivalent of five billion programs.

Ja?
Mac Pro 5,1 12-core 3.46 GHz, 64MB RAM, latest macOS available. Metric Halo 2882 interface.

VisionDAW Windows 7 Pro i7 950 3.07 4-core, 24GB RAM. Has an RME Hammerfall HDSP9632, but I just use VE Pro. Also several ancient P4 XP slaves, rarely used.
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 17:06
by Peter Alexander
Joined on Wed, Aug 21 2002, Virginia, Posts 642
julian wrote:
What looks really worrying in the first instance is the max instances of VI achieved - 24 max. I have regularly used 100 EXS 24 instruments in a score now I know the VI's with their matrices reduce the requirement for channels. But in an orchestral line-up"
Strings 5, Wind 7, Brass 6, Harp, Piano Percussion (4) and now we've run out before we think solo's, choirs, and all the other instruments often used.

In Logic on a mac if you run out of voices, RAM or CPU you can always freeze the most important thing you can complete the largest orchestrations on one computer.

If there is really a score limit of 24 staves (24 instruments) this could be an issue.

Let's hope the mac performances are a little more revealing when they are published.

Julian



Julian, with all respect, I feel your comparison at this date is unfair. THe PC is not the Mac. Today, from my seat, with all you can do, 24 instances on a single PC machine looks impressive, especially with the simple specs needed to run VI

I also point out, that the 64-bit systems on the PC are not yet feasible, especially in price, and probably won't be for half a year or more. WIth what I'm reading, with three smaller dedicated PCs you can set up one "whoppe"r of an orchestra!

PA
Peter L. Alexander
Author, Professional Orchestration Series
www.soniccontrol.tv
www.alexanderpublishing.com
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 17:14
by Peter Alexander
Joined on Wed, Aug 21 2002, Virginia, Posts 642
I really want to thank Herb, Paul, Chris and Company for taking the time to do these tests and for taking the time to post them. This is exceptional. No other company has ever done this and for one, I really appreciate your efforts. That you went and tested a PII and a PII is also fantastic given the number of composers who have those machines because of GS2.54, and now find that they can still get some use out of those systems.

This to me is corporate responsibility in action.

On the P4s, it would be great to know if you were using the P4 with HT or the dual core, and the motherboard type (915, 925, etc).

Again, many, many thanks.

PA
Peter L. Alexander
Author, Professional Orchestration Series
www.soniccontrol.tv
www.alexanderpublishing.com
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 17:19
by Peter Alexander
Joined on Wed, Aug 21 2002, Virginia, Posts 642
Nick Batzdorf wrote:
So when you say 20 - 24 instruments, you're talking about the equivalent of five billion programs.

Ja?


And two bratworsts with a Diet Coke.
Peter L. Alexander
Author, Professional Orchestration Series
www.soniccontrol.tv
www.alexanderpublishing.com
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 18:52
by DG
Joined on Wed, May 12 2004, Posts 8608
Peter Alexander wrote:
I really want to thank Herb, Paul, Chris and Company for taking the time to do these tests and for taking the time to post them. This is exceptional. No other company has ever done this and for one, I really appreciate your efforts. That you went and tested a PII and a PII is also fantastic given the number of composers who have those machines because of GS2.54, and now find that they can still get some use out of those systems.

This to me is corporate responsibility in action.

PA


I couldn't have said it better myself.

DG
Nuendo 6.03, 4.3
2 x Intel Xeon x5675 3.07GHz Hex Core
48GB RAM
Windows 7 (x64)Pro
RME Multiface II
Intensity
ATI HD5400 series graphics card
Posted on Wed, Feb 08 2006 19:07
by Paul
Joined on Sat, Aug 03 2002, Vienna, Posts 13900
Thanks, and I am in the middle of further tests...

I´m actually not that much of a techie to answer all specific computer questions, but I will look into it and we will test all configurations within our reach.

As far as the dual cores are concerned, Christian Marin has already posted on the first page of this thread and I don´t really have anything to add...

To my knowledge we can adress up to 1.5 - 1.7 GB of RAM, and all suggestions here on the forum seem rather theoretical to me... If anyone has experience with adressing more than 1.7 GB of RAM with a streaming sampler on a PC, please share your infos.

Best, Paul
Paul Kopf
Product Manager - Vienna Symphonic Library
2 Pages12>
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.