You are on page 1of 8

Re: i7 with GIGABYTE GA-EX58-DS4 (LGA 1366 Intel X58).

Postby rreuscher » Mon Feb 09, 2009 8:02 am Hi, I build last weekend my new DAW on a Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 with a intel i7 920. I use UAD-2 QUAD and UAD-1 card. Furthermore i run a RME fireface 800 with all in put/output channels used (via adat). I run Cubase 4 on XP without any problems. Compared to my previous ( P4 system ) this is realy great performance. The cards perform very good. Another positive thing about the Gigabyte board is that it uses Texas Instrument s chip for firewire, so there are no problems in that area. The only issue i had was that the internal audio card has an memory access viola tion with the fireface drivers. Well i don't use the internal audio anyway, so d isabling it in the bios solved that issue. Furthermore, this board is great for overclocking. You can overclock the i7 920 without any problems to 3.6 GHz, so there is no need to buy the more expensive 9 40 or 9... !!! Also Steinberg advice is the disable the hyperthreading, because the overhead of "synchronizing the 8 cores" will take to much time, and could have a negative e ffect on latency. -------Performance with Hyperthreading on is better. I tried both and achieved more plu gs at lower latency with it on. Also, make sure the bios is set to standard and not turbo or extreme. Not sure why, but standard seems to work best. ---------KVR: Ingo Leif Software releases GPU Impulse Reverb v0.26 e bionicfx: GPUs rule at this type of math. ust installed it in my DAW. With my nVidia 8500 (fanless and noiseless ) I got a round 8% GPU usage per instancewith no CPU load!amazing given this whole CUDA th ing is in its infancy still Wow, so you could run like 12 instances on one cheap nVidia 8500. I would LOVE t o know how much instances would be able to run on a 8800 GTX :-) I have a 9800 GTX. Might have to give this a gO Lives for gear Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 747 i just got a spam email with a 9800 GT for a price of $109. My faith is in a mat ure Nebula with CUDA, we won't need UAD cards anymore. It they could only make all VST plugins to run on a GPU, that would be SWEET!! The 8% was only for on of the impulse responses I tried. Some IRs used only abou t 4-5% of the GPU! Good news indeed

This stuff is amazing.. even though one might have plenty of cycles available on your CPU (speed) that are faster than a SHARC DSP. I actually liked the simple GUI for the first time. bu t I am having fun trying.. the cost nearly as much for Native plug ins. maybe because we have had lots of pretty GUIs during the past few years.. And you could say thats why DSP cards like the UAD ones cost more. --I never really thought about it from an anti-piracy standpoint But it also costs more for the manufacturer to make . running Sonar 8.. frees up your CPU to process other stuff. I am working on a project with over 100 plugins (70 of the UAD stuff) and 5 inst ances of Amplitube. ----------As far as the UAD-2 goes.1 in Vista x64 runs at abou t 20% CPU. . never used duende but NEVER GET POWERCORE VIRUS PLUG!! (crushes all the time) --UNIVERSAL AUDIO UAD-2 QUAD hardware DSP plug-ins UAD-2 QUAD è l'ultimissimo upgrade per gli utenti DAW che da la possibilità di utili zzare il rivoluzionario hardware DSP in combinazione con i plug ins proprietari ad un prezzo alla portata di tut. audio will be processed faster on a SHARC having the processing intensive audio routines off loaded onto a UAD2.. ---maggio 2009 . but look at Waves studio classics. 5 instances of KONTAKT. Disponibile 1466.00 ----SHARC processors are optimized for DSP (Digital Signal Processing) which allow v ery low level functions needed to increase the effeciency of processing audio. Better driver compatibilty with REAPER. But I still can't make good music with all this stuff. Thus... Plenty of overhead to even MASTER in real time. not only the plug ins are in a w hole diffrent level i can run a whole mix and master at 96K on the card alone!! plus those are the most stable plug ins i'v ever used.. more power and a more advanced feature set as well. it was transparent and sounded like the IR I put in.. ----> You can buy Waves bundles at 50% less with december discounts gives you basically each plugin for 130 USD if you look for UAD alternatives ------(HA UN DUAL XEnon) i just got a UAD 2 Quad and i have to tell you. 10 instances of a convolution reverb (for amp cab IRs) and 2 instances of Music row's Vintage Piano and my i7 860.. UVI workstation. Superior Drummer 2.As with most IR reverbs..5. I have one and it is the better solution if you can af ford one.

. but apply the 1176 SE to nearly everything.. If I was going to be getting my first UAD it would be a UAD-2 and not a UAD-1. --I could never have dreamed about getting all my previous (4) UAD-1 cards fully l oaded to play crackle free @ 128 before... like my Line 6 UX2 and I was not actually using it (instead using my Del ta 66 as my main audio device). to include the Neve 88-RS. O h! I am currently doing hard rock.2-SOLO: 399$ (MAGGIO 2009)and it comes with the 5 basic free plugs -UAD-2 Nevana (32 Channel): this is nothing more that the UAD-2 solo with the bas ic 5 effects.. you need to get a UAD. with REAPER's default sett ings. using it on a quad core in vista... that alone creates a fine-tuned and sonic mix-down.. strange! --uad. electric flying gu itars and fat bass tracks. cleaned up in a breeze! ---"Well. as opposed to the PCI. but just not in the same way as PCI. everything really went smoothly (thou gh not quite as smooth as the UAD-2). loaded the card up to 90%. but get up to 86% DSP load (equi vilant DSP to about 9-10 UAD-1 cards) with crackle free playback. It's ju st bliss" When I had "gap" issues in my renders it was always related to either IRQ sharin g (video card. One nice advantage to using the PCIe cards. Oh well.. So those drum set signals. ---2008: from what I understand. even used with reafir's creating more latency to be compensated. had no problems whatsoever. USB Host controller) or when I had a certain USB audio device con nected. used a bunch of plugs. I am just learning it. so that the IRQ sharing is not an issue anymore. My little uad-2 solo has so far rendered 100% perfectly. then I had clean pristine renders everytime. the UAD-2 driver has been built from the ground up based on a new DSP architecture (SHARC DSP) with multiprocessing compatibility as par t of it. if you want true pro-level mix-down in Reaper or most any other DAW. folks. Once I made sure my UAD-1 PCI cards were not IRQ sharing with other devices and my Toneport was not connected if not actively us ed..I picked up one of the UAD-1e cards that are $99 now. --GEN2007: Here is a reply from Aleksey at Voxengo re: the potential of CUDA. live and learn. On a good day I could get maybe a 60% D SP load on my four cards @ 128 and remain crackle free using Synchronous FX & UA D-1 Synchronous modes. is you do not have to worry about pesky IRQ sharing issues anymore:They still use IRQ steerin g on the PCIe bus.. I mostly use the 1176SE and ProVerb or whatever the basic reverb is called. and I must say. I do have to say. . Now with my UAD-2 Quad that dream has become reality as I have been able to not only use AFX mode @ 128. no more. So I could have saved myself $200 if I coul d have gotten my basic questions answered.

............ Beside that....only 32-bit floating points are supp orted which means no high-quality convolution can be expected for audio uses.. many hardcore gamers are running two or even four high-end grap hics cards in their rig using what is called SLI mode. it was born wit h an unfortunate limitation for precision . ... ----Does Windows XP have a problem with multiple Graphic cards in one machine? Nope Amberience. or Crossfire if you use A TI cards... From what I can tell. For a comparison between something like a UAD and a modern graphics card.... or Crossfire if you use A TI cards........ 64-bit is coming.. indeed. things like UA Ds and PT DSP cards aren't even in the same league... CUDA can do convolution calculations ........ The fact is that video card performance has........voxengo... I hope that memory transfers from CPU to GPU and back is not a problem anymore ....... it is a bit too 'beta' still.. a quic k search on the UAD reveals that it is based around a 125mhz DSP chip that was o riginally intended for hardware DVD decoding. This would make every board with a PCI-Express slot effectively a dual-socket board.... but they won't be very precise and may be a bit noisy (free SIR impulse reverb i s an example of such performance). When it is available we can have like 50 CPUs performance on a single gf x card........... In summary.. if you could run VSTs on a modern video card.... then adding a video ca rd would be probably equivalent to adding a new CPU at the least... and will be checking things myself .. if anything. and the RAM was EDO DRAM clo cked at 100mhz.......... I couldn't find any numbers on how much RAM is onboard.. I will be ordering Nvidia 8800 GTS card . ..... .. Fourier transform (a very important step of efficient convolution) is best perfo rmed at high precision. as I've read. convolution calculation performance can be fantastic with CUDA... Nope Amberience... been increasing FASTER . The current line of Nvidia cards run their CPU core at 500+mhz......even with a pretty long reverb impulses.. a top of the line video ca rd in 1998 (around the same time the UAD-1 came out...... On the other hand. many hardcore gamers are running two or even four high-end grap hics cards in their rig using what is called SLI mode.. I believe) had either 8MB o r 12MB depending on which configuration you bought...... because it has a lot of 'in-place' calculations: multipl ications and summing.. and won't be a limiting factor..... They also come wi th 640mb-768mb of on-board RAM (which is GDDR3 clocked at 1800mhz).... but for reference the Voodoo 2.http://www. and most boards have 32 lanes availabl e...... and can probably do around 100 times as much work per CPU cycle as a Voodoo 2.. a single PCI-Ex press lane is twice as fast as a PCI bus. which is orders of magnitude faster than PCI...... and they're PCI-Express based... but it should be here before it can be p lanned. and a dual-socket board with SLI capability would be a quad-socket system. without quality compromise.....

For a new video card.than CPU performance in recent years. prices on last year's models drop like a stone. a nd I will say right now that if Justin starts working on this feature and is loo king for people to beta test it. AGP has been around since 1997. since obv iously Digidesign wants people to keep buying DSP cards from them. I think that adding something like a wrapper that lets you run VST s on video cards would put Reaper in the position of being the most powerful DAW available. despite all its problems. but there's another benefit: it's easy to install. Nvidia will probably do a major revision and add a n 8900 as well as possibly an 8800GS (slightly weaker version of an 8800GTS). .nvidia. Buildi ng Rea-mote into the host app is fantastic. but it has me drooling at the po ssibilities . even if it was at the expense of workflow efficiency while I got used to the differences. plus you have to reinstall Windows. Sometimes a CPU upgrade is just a drop-in. I've been waiting for something like this to happen for years. imagine how much more power that would give us t o run effects! The downside is that it only applies to Nvidia cards.html This is admittedly way outside of my expertise. It also seems like something that only Reaper is in a position to add. That's 10 years. or freezing tracks on ly to need to unfreeze them later when I want to change something. To be honest. the 8800 series starts at aroun d $300. If Justin did it on his own anyway. and for your averag e studio it's more than they're going to do on their own. Obviously i t's not that simple if you're still running a system with AGP or even PCI graphi cs. --Has anyone read about CUDA? http://developer. you just swap out your old one and you're set. but m ost of the time if you aren't buying bottom of the barrel consumer PCs you alrea dy have a CPU that's near the top of what your motherboard can handle. Those are the type of things that make Pro-Tools HD look good. and th e 6600 before it. That's a lot of work even for experienced PC techs. And since it's a mainstream consumer prod uct instead of an esoteric professional product like audio DSP cards. I'm perfectly happy to upgrade my 7900gs to an 8800 series to try it out and provide feedback. so now you're hiring a guy to do it for you. the mainstream models like the 860 0 will have all the same featureset (including CUDA) at a slightly lower perform ance level (only the equivalent of 25 CPUS instead of 50?) and should retail at about $150 right off the bat. This mean s that a new CPU usually ends up needing a new motherboard (another $100 or so). but the good news is that graphics interfaces last WAY longer than CPU socke ts. but that's the top end of the series. but this is something that's not even available somewhere else. as far as processing is concerned.if it's feasible. I'm jus t so sick and tired of making compromises with EQ quality. CPUs are usually only m ade for a socket for a couple years at best before it's phased out. and if you're lucky you don't need new RAM as well. or bringing t he session to a halt because I wasn't watching the performance meter. then he doesn't ow e them anything and he might as well pull the market out from under them. and new motherboards with modern sockets are still being made with AGP slots If it worked reliably I'd probabl y switch over to Reaper from Cubase for all my audio projects. Right now. pu shing the 8600 into the $100 or even less range (like the 7600 right now.) So the price ends up being considerably less than a new CPU. and even comp anies like Steinberg depend on Universal Audio and others to help them make thei r products work together. and really makes a lot more sense th an letting a third party do it.

so it's not a time right now to make final conclusions. from complex audio project perspective.. but practi cally this may not be achievable for all audio calculations. as far as simple 'biquad' equalizer goes. ------Creator: Aleksey Vaneev Date: Mar 19. Still. However. Of cours e. but I would guess that a video card with 768MB of RAM would be able to handle a fantastic sounding piano sampler wi th much lower latency and no load on the CPU --there is an ati version too called stream btw. ----Besides.. and those nice people who make the impressive. this is theoretically correct. as I've replied earlier.000 Steinway. and I've studied it eno ugh to make intermediate conclusions. Of course.Oman-please be true. lol. b ut it would be friggin' awesome to be able to have so many delays that you would n't know what to do with! But hey. these are a huge hit on your RAM and CPU. I'm a post-rock fiend. Not that I disagree when you use this comment in reply to the EQ-happy dude. CUDA is still in beta. CUDA is in beta. it is very probable that most audio processing elements can be combined into 'packets' and thus processed with a higher performance. it is really possible to process 384 channels ea ch having 25 bands (ouch) at 192kHz per second (may be degraded further by memor y accessing performance limits). 5:17pm. 2007. I have Nvidia 8800 GTS graphics card with edited 1 time(s). ---More plugs = bad mix and incorrect recording to begin with. there are plenty of situations where having additional processing power lets you get a nicer "natural" sound. which cannot be accommodated by CUDA's archit ecture easily. complex audio plug-ins may not be able to utilize such huge performan ce due to their complex data flow. Not everybody has the room or money for a $150. nebula plu gin say they plan cuda support :) http://www. last modified on Mar 19. I'm now saying with confidence that it features 32-bit floating point only. And CUDA examples are working fine. 2007. but very power hungry. However.acusticaudio. so they turn to a quality sampled piano for a part. On the other hand. This would be a revelation and a revolution.php?name=Products&file=nebula2free . As for the like '50 CPUs' performance. 8:1 1pm OK.

and almost no useful audio processing can be para llelized by sample. but Cuda seems to have ta ken a back seat to other Latencies will be pretty high app arently but for mixing I don't find latency a problem as long as its compensated . I have an Nvidia 8800 with 640 meg of mem. I think a lot of the potential would depend on the developers of graphics cards getting behind it. An EQ filter depends on all the previous samples. ---And for the person who needs a really. but to really make GPU processing work you'd want parall elization at the sample level.--Release of the 1. . really humongous amount of plugs: http://www. etc. Jobs like "t ransform each of these 2 million pixels in a similar way.html see also: http://www. CUDA could easily run several of the Nebula effects with no problem.html I am really excited at the idea that it would be possible to use the power of my Go 7900GS for something useful ! (I am not a version : http://developer.).nvidia. You can get some paralle lization at the track level (though you still need to bring everything back toge ther for bussing.nvidia. If it really takes off then i'm sure Reaper can incorporate some funky compens ation gizmos to make it easier to use :) ----11-20-2007.. but none of the transf ormations depends on the results of the others" are exactly perfect for GPU proc essing. bec ause signal processing is so ( Imho not that likely. etc). The whole GPU architecture is designed for massive parallelization. money would be an incentive ) ---- schwa 11-21-2007. really. 03:50 PM The developers of Nebula have it implemented. because each transformation can be spun off into its own thread. compressor attack/release depends on the previous dynamics.html ------It remains to be seen how well this will work. Since that time Nebula has made dramatic improvements. Cpu useage was lower than the same effects used as a straight ahead Vst in Reaper.nvidia. Edit: Nebula used most of the fairly recent generation of Nvidia cards The more memory and the more pipelines the processor had influenced the results.. DSP seems to me particularly unsuited for massive parallelization like this. 11:45 AM I looked into this a little bit from a VST developer point of view and came away thinking there was not much usefulness there.and state-dependent.

com/object/product_tesla_d870_us .nvidia.eqs and compressors for e xample.html ---I don't know exactly how he did it. Nebula can run on the GPU so can this http://www. I doubt we'll see synths.tgdaily.. also see: http://www. Just choose tesla and windows xp. Multiple fast cores on the other hand are very well (apologies if this was discussed earlier in the thread and I missed it) ------------It's already availble today.kvraudio. but not so mu ch from parallelizing 2 million easy jobs.nvidia.. It's called CUDA where you can run parts of the app lication on the http://www.php?t=2229 78&start=0 Running stuff on the GPU is only really valid for stuff that can be heavily para lellized such as --------------- . (Once you've bought one. somehow..That's my read anyway . I just know he did it . You ca n almost always get a benefit from parallelizing say 32 hard jobs. of course!) Here's where you can dow nload: http://www. I don't think GPU offloading offers much for most audi o processing. You just have to download and install drive rs for the blades. They don't make much sense to run on the GPU. ----------it's definitely compatible with current intel architectures and runs under windo ws xp and xp-64 bit just like a gpu.