VST perfromance - does this seem right - solved!!!

For users of legacy Steinberg Cubase software
gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

VST perfromance - does this seem right - solved!!!

Post by gmontano »

Hi All,

64 bit windows 7, 3770k i7 3.5gz, gigabyte mobo, 16 gig ram, RME UFX at 2048 samples, Cubase 7.5.20

I have the latest USB, video and every driver imaginable, tweaked out powersaving plan, tried with ASIO guard on and off. .

I have small 5 track 24 bit /44.1k project using the following resources

live tracks
1) 1 instance of EZ Drummer 2
2) 1 instance of brainworx rockrack
3) fx track with S-Gear 2.41 on on it
4) master bus with exmix 2

frozen tracks
1) i track with Amplitube 3 frozen
2) 1 track with nectar 2 frozen

With just this my average load is almost 50% and my real time peak meter goes just over 50.

My windows performance shows an average use of about 9% across the cores, but core 1 is a little high hovering around 50%.

I feel like I am not using much but can barely scale above this.

Update

Ignore my thread! I had inadvertently throttled down CPU performance!
Last edited by gmontano on Sun Jul 27, 2014 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

lol
New Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:57 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by lol »

Same here with almost the same specs. 5-6 instruments with a couple of valhalla reverbs.

It got a little better when i disabled the Asio Guard.

MrSmith
Junior Member
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:57 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by MrSmith »

gmontano wrote:I feel like I am not using much but can barely scale above this.

Welcome to Cubase :)

Remove the plugins until you see your load change, then you'll know how much each one is eating up. See if there's a setting you can tweak on the offending plug-in. Raise your buffer (Usually what you need to resort to).

Jeff Deno
Moderator
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:22 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Jeff Deno »

Hello,

Are you running Cubase in 64 bit? If so are you only using the 64 bit version of those plugins?

Thank you
Jeff Deno
Application Specialist
Steinberg US Support

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

Yes 64 bit Cubase and all 64 bit plugins. This was running at the highest latency. Doesn't seem to be using all the cores.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

Jeff Deno
Moderator
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:22 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Jeff Deno »

Hello,

In Cubase go to devices, device setup. VST Audio system. Looking at the bottom section you will see your advanced options. Can you run me down through your settings?

Thank you
Jeff Deno
Application Specialist
Steinberg US Support

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

I'll report back later tonight.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

User avatar
Hedshaker
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 4:54 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Hedshaker »

gmontano wrote:Yes 64 bit Cubase and all 64 bit plugins. This was running at the highest latency. Doesn't seem to be using all the cores.
Have you disabled core parking?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl3u9eiskM4
Asus P9X79 I7 - 4930K @340GHz, 16 GB Ram. Windows 10. EMU 1820m. Cubase Pro 10.##. UAD quad, UAD Solo PowerCore Element with Access Virus. AN1x, Dave Smith Mopho. Yamaha NS-10m studio Monitors.

https://soundcloud.com/dark-blue-man

Jeff Deno
Moderator
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:22 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Jeff Deno »

Hello,

Disabling advanced power-saving and dynamic performance options for the cpu is a good optimization. Here are other things to consider:

https://www.steinberg.net/nc/en/support ... -daws.html

Thank you
Jeff Deno
Application Specialist
Steinberg US Support

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

Thanks, I have applied all of these tweaks. I am pretty fanatical about the PC and have my DPC latency down to under 500 when cubase isn['t running

advances settings, audio priority: normal, multi processing and ASIO guard checked. Cubase Power Scheme is not checked. I created a custom power scheme that went a little deeper than Cubase's Power Scheme. Disk preload 2 secs, adjust for record latency is checked. 0 samples Record shift.

Disabling ASIO Guard doesn't make much a difference.

DPC latency without cubase running hovers around 60-80. With cubase on it goes to the 500-600 range.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

For kicks, I just downloaded reaper and with the same exact plugins loaded I am getting 10% CPU utilization!
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

Jeff Deno
Moderator
Posts: 120
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 9:22 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Jeff Deno »

Hello,

Before creating your own power scheme did you try checking the Steinberg power scheme box?

Thank you
Jeff Deno
Application Specialist
Steinberg US Support

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

I did try the Cubase power scheme first with the same results. My power scheme is basically the Steinberg Power scheme with their addition of not having USB able to go to sleep mode. The difference is striking from Reaper. I am a long long time Cubase user, but can barely use my plug-ins. I also tried deleting my preferences last night and that didn't make any difference.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

Arksun76
New Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 4:26 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Arksun76 »

Threads like this make me nervous, literally just bought upgrade to 7.5 from 5.5 and dreading seeing similar results. It just doesn't make sense why Cubase 7/7.5 would ASIO overload soo easily with low cpu consumption yet Reaper works perfectly fine on exactly the same system setup. Especially given that we're talking about RME audio interface here, sound drivers don't get more stable than theirs.


I take it you've done all the energy saving disabled tweaks in bios too right. Also have you tried running Cubase with Windows Aero acceleration on and off to see a difference?
Win7Pro 64-bit, i7 4790K, 32GB 1866mhz CL9 RAM,Asus Z97 Pro Wifi, 4xSSD, MSI GTX750ti OC
RME UFX, Lavry DA11, PSI Audio A21M
Cubase 7.5.2 64-bit

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

I have done all the bios tweaks. I believe I am running with Aero on right now because for Windows 7 that is what is preferred.

I have used Cubase since the Atari ST days. I have been tied up with work and family the last few years and haven't been recording in earnest as much as I would have liked to. I am now hunkering down again and starting to deep dive into things. I find that Cubase is adding a lot of overhead. For example if I play BFD3 standalone, I can comfortably play my edrums at 48 or 64 samples. Loading one instance of BFD3 into an empty project enduces pops at the same latency.

I supposed I could uninstall and reinstall everything. I have a ton of plugins I have bought over the years, but I would think that should not matter if they are not loaded into a project.

I also have a UAD card. Maybe I will try to disable as yanking it doesn't appeal to me right.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

Arksun76
New Member
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat May 17, 2014 4:26 pm
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Arksun76 »

Also seems strange that simply loading Cubase causes dpc latency to jump from 50 to 500. Is that checking with 'DPC Latency Checker' , or 'LatencyMon' ? If its LatencyMon then I wouldn't worry too much as that programs meant to be run standalone without other audio software running.

Whats the performance like in a project using totally different plugins to those, still get the same ASIO overload at similar low cpu levels or is there an improvement?
Win7Pro 64-bit, i7 4790K, 32GB 1866mhz CL9 RAM,Asus Z97 Pro Wifi, 4xSSD, MSI GTX750ti OC
RME UFX, Lavry DA11, PSI Audio A21M
Cubase 7.5.2 64-bit

vespesian
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:58 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by vespesian »

Have you tried setting the RME driver with a lower buffer? 2048 seems kinda high.

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

It's worse with a lower buffer.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

Limit54
Member
Posts: 229
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 3:44 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Limit54 »

7.5 is bloated and I don't know why. 64bit or 32bit, makes no difference. I'm on a 32 bit system and so far I'm running a little hot(50-65%) and on cubase 5 it was minimal. A lot of people tell me to go 64bit but I keep seeing the same thing over and over...I'm on 64bit and asio is high. 64bit at this point is great for running a lot of plugins that are pigs on the graphics. I'm old school so I don't mind freezing and bouncing down tracks. I actually prefer it since I do it anyway for the final mix.
AMD Quad Core 4.2 12 gigs of ram Windows 7 64bit---macbook pro 2.6 i5 8 gigs of ram
Cubase 9

https://pro.beatport.com/artist/steve-quadra/319913
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Steve-Qu ... 356?ref=hl

vespesian
Member
Posts: 358
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:58 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by vespesian »

gmontano wrote:It's worse with a lower buffer.

Hmmm. Weird. Does your RME have an "optimization/reduce CPU/stability" setting within the device itself, by any chance? The reason is ask, is that with my (crappier) roland q. capture, this option actually made things much much worse in C7.5, and other DAW's as well. Just a stab in the dark here...

bigmalh64
Junior Member
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2014 11:42 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by bigmalh64 »

hi its our old friend dongle protection all those calls take resources you cant start with dongle in then remove it after cubase has loaded do therefore it must be checking constantly as you say reaper isnt protected yet 5x more efficient hmmm
anyone from steinberg care to comment

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

I have been tinkering around and so far:

1) disabled UAD (no difference)
2) Pulled out iLok (no difference)
3) Uninstalled Cubase and reinstalled (no difference)

It does seem to boil down to several plugins especially S-Gear.

in Cubase S-gear alone uses 25% CPU on the Cubase meter and about 15-18% on the Windows CPU meter with the bulk on Core 0

in Reaper, S-gear alone uses 3% CPU on the Reaper meter and about 5-6% on the Windows CPU meter evenly distributed across the cores.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

Norbury Brook
Member
Posts: 866
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:40 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by Norbury Brook »

Have you tried putting S gear on a regular audio track insert? Reaper doesn't have FX tracks.

Seriously I've never needed to use a buffer size that large, you should be able to run at 128 no problem with a project that small. Are you sure none of your plugins are the 32 bit versions running bridged without you realising?


The ASIO metre in Cubase isn't directly related to the windows performance meter, as you see loading just 1 core will make the ASIO meter rise because overloading just 1 core will give you an audio dropout.

Just thinking off the top of my head here :D



MC
ASRock x570 Taichi -Ryzen 3950x-16 core -32 gigs 3600 DDR4- AMD 580- Windows 10 x64-OSX Mojave- AXR4-Euphonix mix,Transport-CC121-Cubase 10.5.x

gmontano
Junior Member
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:50 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by gmontano »

Thanks for the reply. S gear is definitely the 64 bit version. For testing purposes I tried it both as an insert and as an insert on an fx channel. I usually use the fx channel because it's a stereo effect and my guitar tracks are usually mono.

I know the Cubase ASIO performance meter hit is real because I'll start getting crackling at around 80 percent. Other plug-ins like guitar rig use negligible amounts of cpu. What's odd with s gear is that I get similar cpu hit at any latency 256 and above.

Anyone on this thread using sgear?

I have a similar issue using brainworx rock rack pro.

I installed the demo of studio one pro last night as well. In Studio One s gear uses about 16 percent on the performance meter. Not as good as reaper, but better than Cubase.

Of course, Sgear is my favorite guitar plug in. I've used Cubase for what seems like 20 years, I really have no desire to use other software in conjunction with Cubase, but it's tough needing to freeze everything when needing to work on one or two tracks.
6950x, 64 GB RAM, ASrock x99 mobo, 1050 Ti video card, Windows 10, RME UFX, Cubase 10 Pro.

teknatronik
Member
Posts: 302
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: VST perfromance - does this seem right

Post by teknatronik »

Mine runs a little above average, but I cannot notice during playback or writing... Meaning, it does not skip or cause any issue above seeing the meter being high... Maybe my situation is odd.

Post Reply

Return to “Older Cubase versions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests