| Author
|
cpu question: DX or VST?
|
e-motion
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
71
Posts :
933
Posted : Sep 27, 2005 20:33
|
|
i have plugins (as everyone) that have DX and VST versions... my doubt is which uses less CPU? |
|
|
Lithium
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
646
Posted : Sep 27, 2005 21:45
|
|
vox
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
114
Posted : Sep 27, 2005 22:13
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-09-27 21:45, Lithium wrote:
dx if you have a dsp sound card
|
|
what the hell are you talking about? where did you hear that?
it depends how are they coded, but they should use about the same amount of cpu. with today's cpus, the differences are too small, even if they exist at all.
 http://myspace.com/voxproject |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Sep 27, 2005 22:13
|
DX is native to Windows so it is usualy more efficient but it really depends on the coders both for the host and for the plugins. For instance, all the Waves plugins are written as DX plugins that get translated by the WaveShell to VST (like most high-end plugins), so they are faster in DX mode. On the other hand, some developers write VST versions first and port them to DX (rare).
In Sonar, DX is usualy more efficient but that is to be expected as they wrote the standard with Microsoft. In Cubase I really don't know. Steinberg wrote the VST standard so I wouldn't be astonished if that runs a bit faster.
I am really guessing anyway, the best way to find out is to just load many instances of the plugins you want to use and see when you run out of CPU. 
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
e-motion
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
71
Posts :
933
Posted : Sep 27, 2005 23:20
|
thanks... well my problem with CPU is that i don't have a today's CPU... Pentium 3 1000mhz hehehe
about soundcard... Soundblaster PCI 64.
anyway guess i'll use VST and leave DX for Waves |
|
|
|
Adrenal Mode
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
308
Posted : Sep 28, 2005 11:35
|
hi e-motion,the diffrent btw VST and DX is that
VST you can control and automete the parmeters
and DX not
and about your doubt
DX uses less 30% from VST , so if you have things that you dont automete like Eq,compressor....its bether to use DX |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Sep 28, 2005 13:58
|
Adrenal Mode, that isn't true. Actually, DX has a higher resolution automation than VST. At least in any host that implements DX automation properly. DX also supports 64 bit interfacing with the host unlike VST.
DX really is a supperior format.
UnderTow
|
|
|
|
Adrenal Mode
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
308
Posted : Sep 28, 2005 19:22
|
UnderTow-agree that DX support 64 bit but you can't automate DX format as far as I know
|
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Sep 29, 2005 15:23
|
Adrenal Mode, Get a better sequencer.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
vajrasana
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
95
Posted : Sep 29, 2005 21:18
|
the truth is that if we speak for cracked plug-ins it depends on the crack code wether it healds a lot of cpu or not
if you are talking for original purchased plug ins then i think that direct x are less cpu "eaters"than vsts cause dir x is a microsoft protocol.it also depends on the sequencer(cubase is better with steibergs protocol-vst)
try to incrase your audio interface buffer size |
|
|
|
vajrasana
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
95
Posted : Sep 29, 2005 21:19
|
|
get off the fu***ng pcs MACHINTOSH rules for audio |
|
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Sep 29, 2005 22:37
|
|
Hayez
Started Topics :
8
Posts :
393
Posted : Sep 30, 2005 03:07
|
Quote:
|
On 2005-09-29 15:23, UnderTow wrote:
Adrenal Mode, Get a better sequencer.
UnderTow
|
|
Yeah, like Sonar... NOT
I'm sure that VST will support 64 bit when there will be a good reason for it 
"a new art came into my mind which only you can create, the Art of Noises, the logical consequence of your marvelous innovations." Russolo, 1913 |
|
|
|
UnderTow
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
1448
Posted : Sep 30, 2005 10:27
|
There allready is a good reason for it: Sound quality.
UnderTow |
|
|
|
Boobytrip
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
39
Posts :
988
Posted : Sep 30, 2005 11:00
|
|
Is the Sonar mixer currently working at 64 bits then ? Or does it still employ 32 bit float processing that is code-optimized to benefit from 64 bit processors ? |
|
|
|
