Reaktor CPU Issue

Mar · 2022-05-23T15:42:48+00:00

There was an error rendering this rich post.

Greetings, My current ensemble has a lot of CPU overload when in 88200Hz or higher sample rate. Can someone test on there computer if it’s fast enough how much cpu on my windows computer (10 version) I would need to run this ensemble with three multi-timbrals included. Can this ensemble run as multi-timbral with high 96Khz sample rate at 12% CPU in REAKTOR. I run a windows computer at CPU 1.9Ghz 16RAM. Link below to download ensemble. Just click continue to website. Any help would be appreciated.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/96thtecypb2sva5/Moon%20Slug.ens?dl=0.

Find more posts tagged with

Reaktor 5

Comments

colB

look here for tuning tips

https://support.native-instruments.com/hc/en-us/articles/209571729-Windows-Tuning-Tips-for-Audio-Processing

Tweaking some of these settings can make a huge difference to performance depending on your system, I found the biggest chunk of performance in tuning the power settings, of course YMMV

Another thing to remember is that Reaktor depends on single core performance, and 1.9Ghz is pretty slow by current standards

colB

Just had a look inside, and it looks like an 'everything but the kitchen sink' problem, where you've just piled in a huge number of processes, each using some cpu. Trying to run that at high sample rates is going to use lots of cpu. Its the nature of the beast.

Runs at 30% on my system at 88200Hz. Its an old system, but running at 3.5GHz clock speed.. so I can see why you might start struggling at 1.9GHz

Just be more economical with your design, only keep in the things that are absolutely essential!

Maybe try to find ways to turn off components that are not being used in a patch.

Mar

So a higher cpu is needed because I bet the ensemble in Reaktor didn’t overload on your computer. How does Moon Slug cpu operate if you use multi-timbral (3 instances of the Ensemble 3 channels). Could you add it and try it; let me know the cpu status?

colB

3 instances at 44100 settles at about 80%, but there are overloads when it spikes, so unusable.

Basically, there is a limit to how much stuff you can stack into an ensemble. You get to a point where you need more advanced management strategies for optimising. Then you get to a point where that's not enough and you need a redesign.

One thing that might work for multi-timbral is a good DAW. Something like Reaper is very efficient, and you can set it up with instances of the Reaktor plugin on different cpu cores, that way you're not trying to do it all on one. Probably do this on other DAWs as well. PITA though, better to build ensembles that don't use as much juice ;)

arachnaut

"better to build ensembles that don't use as much juice"

Well, I can't let that go by without a comment.

Better still to have a system designed for audio performance.

colB

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/18795#Comment_18795

Better hardware is always a good thing, but it would be easy enough to design an ensemble that will bring any system you could build to it's knees... just saying ;)

arachnaut

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/18304#Comment_18304

I max out running 8 instances at 9600Hz except for an occasional glitch - so I would run fewer instances or lower the clock rate.

My computer is no slouch, but it is rather old. Any modern cpu can easily outperform it.

I almost never concern myself with CPU optimization unless I build for other builders and upload something to the U/L.

But to make something polished for other users is a big step beyond building one-offs for enjoyment.

Not just CPU usage, but many other things need to be addressed that would fill a tome.

In this ensemble, there is a long string of effects, here with CPU load on display:

These could be switched off if not used, or the whole set of effects could be moved into a separate ensemble and laid out in a DAW as a separate instance - which should result in running in separate CPUs.

Paule

I max out running 8 instances at 9600Hz except for an occasional glitch

Jim, 9600 or 96,000?

arachnaut

96000, thanks for that.

Quick links

Unanswered questions