I notice that renoise 2.0RC1 takes up more CPU than 1.9 (for me atleast).
Playing the same VST instrument in 2.0RC1 and 1.9 give different CPU % usage.
Pressing a key in 2.0RC1 gives me +1.3% in cpu usage, playing the same key in 1.9 gives 0%.
I can actually hold down 10 keys at the same time and it’s still 0% in 1.9.
Holding down 10 keys in 2.0RC1 gives me 4%
Actually, it gets really stupid: when i turn my Pitch wheel on my MIDI controller it goes +1%
I have the same settings as in 1.9 and switching the PDC on/off does not do anything.
I have also tried to enable/disable VST compatibility options with no results.
I notice that the VST autosuspend in 2.0RC1 only kicks in +10 secs after sound stops.
This kicks in just after 1-2 seconds in 1.9.
In idle mode (new song), my renoise 2.0RC1 is running 00.7% no damage done so far.
If i have alot of VST instruments, the CPU (in idle) goes to +8% and stays 8% forever depending on how many VST’s i have loaded.
Finaly, when i change from 4 CPU’s to 1 CPU in renoise the CPU % goes DOWN?? (new song / idle).
How can 4 CPU’s be worse than 1 CPU? New song in idle 4CPU = 00.7%, 1CPU = 00.2%
So far you only mentioned numbers… what about actually working, does that feel slower? or how about rendering a heavy tune in 1.9 and 2.0 with a stopwatch? My initial guess is either the CPU indicator changed or the CPU cycles are used for something that’s worth it…
No, it does not feel slower at all, and i know you might want to end the discussion right there, but it registers up to 25% more than in 1.9*
If you have enabled the CPU load & Threshold there might be some problems with these “false?” readings.
I have a Quad extreme @ 3Ghz so i dont really expect renoise2 to be slower or feel slower than 1.9
Sure, you would expect more CPU usage in a newer version, But when playing 10 keys on 1 VST takes up 4% of the CPU you know something is not working right.
Developers, Why does renoise2RC1 take up more CPU when i have 4CPU’s enabled (versus 1)?
Which VSTi uses more CPU than before for you then? This is not a general problem. Some VST might perform better with the static buffer option enabled (see https://forum.renoise.com)). This option was enabled by default in Renoise 1.9.
No specific VSTi. All VST’s use more CPU. I also notice that the Autosuspend is slower.
After stopping a song with alot of VSTi the CPU usage tends to stay at a certain % after playback for 10 seconds or so. But it never goes down to 0% in idle.
The CPU readings in Renoise and in Taskmanager (winXP) are not the same.
Is the Renoise CPU only reading the Audio?
Does all VSTis gets suspended? For example, Predator VSTi in Renoise 2.0 now defaults to Autosuspend OFF due to a bug which makes it skip first note.
And for a 10 note chord 4% CPU usage is reasonable, it’s good actually if you have a high quality VSTi.
I also think the way CPU is calculated is changed in some ways.
Not when the same VSTi in Renoise 1.9 with 12 keys is 0%
The VSTi im talking about in this example is Native Instruments Pro-53 But the “problem” is the same on all VSTi’s.
Never heard of these before. Where/how do i find them.
yes, and i want them to when im not playing them. But the autosuspend kicks in WAY to slow in R2RC1 compared to R1.9 and playing a heavy VSTi song makes the average CPU load float alot higher.
I find alot of my old songs in R2RC1 go +25% higher and stay 10% in idle.
As taktik said before. Try turn on static buffers. Quite many plugins will work much more effective that way.
It can be a huge difference. So please check all plugins (vst and vsti).
I mean really. Do you have real problem? Does the 2.0 start to lag with songs which it didn’t with 1.9? Or the bigger numbers just scare you?
I have much slower computer than you, and some songs actually choke my computer. But when I compared the results in 2.0 and 1.9 the 2.0 seems to be actually faster in some cases.
As said before the CPU display is more accurate now. It counts with some things it didn’t before. I don’t think it takes more CPU. 1.9 just didn’t show how much CPU it really used.
Sure, pitchwheel sends a large burst of realtime data which needs to be processed. The fact that renoise shows you that it’s doing something is not a problem, it’s a feature. The problem would be if you turn the pitchwheel and your song starts to crackle. This doesn’t happen does it?
Compare your OS graphs of 1.9 and 2.0 to see if they are different or not.
A 12 keys chord for no CPU at all? Now that’s a pretty efficient VSTi audio engine. Why don’t all synth developers aim for this “zero tolerance” CPU usage when doing thier synths I wonder? I could use my old Pentium 100 MHz laptop again and throw in tons of instances of Pro-53 without ever choking.
You don’t suspect this to be a miscalculation in 1.9.1?
To measure the CPU usage, Renoise has to use some kind of timer (has to measure how much time it used to calculate the sounds). This “QueryPerformance” thing is a way to measure time. Now in 1.9 we could not use this timer on all CPUs, which means we had to use a low resolution timer. instead This low resolution timer is far less precise than the “correct” one. This is why 1.9 showed 0.0% for you. Because that only was a rough approximation of the CPU usage. 2.0 now simply shows a more precise CPU value.
If you don’t believe me, you can test this by
starting Renoise 1.9, loading a expensive (CPU wise) VSTi.
minimize Renoise and play a lot of notes with you MIDI keyboard
start taskmanager and take a look of how much CPU the Renoise process uses
do the same with Renoise 2.0 and compare the results.
You have to minimize Renoise to let taskmanager only show what the audio engine uses. When the GUI is minimized it will use nearly no CPU.
I know all this is complicated, but there seems to be really no problem beside that Renoise 1.9 showed a less precise CPU usage…
Response time is pretty delayed on this version when switching from other programs back to Renoise, but that’s the only thing I really notice as far as slowdowns in this version.
