New Logic Multitrack Benchmark Test

[Ploki]

Most u-he (modelling one) are notorious for having high CPU usage, Diva and Repro being the worst offenders...

Hive on the other hand is marketed as being extremely light on CPU.

 

I don't see why 3rd party plugs would get more demanding "just because".

They will when they introduce better features. Always have.

 

The 2015 6-core Mac Pro has probably 30%-40% less than the 2018 6-core Mini tho, which is very affordable.

 

so... half-truth.

Native Access is a license manager. No wondering some people run cracked versions of software they own - some of the more intrusive licensing methods are heavy-handed on the CPU.

[fisherking]

i don't get that; are you seeing cpu usage from the NI license manager (or any license manager) when that app is not open? really, there's never an excuse to run a cracked plugin.

[Sascha Franck]

By default, some NI stuff will load via the startup objects, for instance "NIHostIntegrationAgent". It's using 0.1% of my CPU on a 2010 2x2.66 cheesegrater, I can live with that. Might be possible to simply delete it from the startup objects but so far I haven't bothered.

[fisherking]

By default, some NI stuff will load via the startup objects, for instance "NIHostIntegrationAgent". It's using 0.1% of my CPU on a 2010 2x2.66 cheesegrater, I can live with that. Might be possible to simply delete it from the startup objects but so far I haven't bothered.

 

interesting; i don't have that in my startup items. & i see no usage from any license managers in activity monitor (altho there is a 'licenseDaemon' in the list... using 0% cpu)...

[Ploki]

I have to check, i only have Antares, Fxpansion and iZotope Product portal tho. no Pace. f*%@ pace.

[fisherking]

i have license managers for fxpansion, izotope, NI, plugin alliance, waves... even the (dreaded) pace software, and none show up in activity manager when not open.

[TTOZ]

I appreciate these benchmarks. however. I can cripple my 2015 - 6 core mac pro with 8 instances of a U-He virtual instrument, with automation on it. I can get 100 or more tracks with less CPU demanding virtual instruments, and audio tracks. Some UVI instruments also can get pretty demanding.

 

Turning virtual instruments to audio, and saving channel strips, then nulling out, I can get over 100 tracks going. A lot depends on which virtual instruments. I have never been able to get an Apple salesman to certify how many tracks a machine can run, because of the extremely wide variation of CPU demanded by different 3rd party VI's.

 

And rest assured, as soon as the 2019 gets more units sold, 3rd party plug-ins will get more cpu demanding. I cringe at how many processes are running in the background, with extremely cryptic names, so you can never figure out what they are.

 

I once had my machine, completely bogging down a lot. I sent some core dumps to Apple. Came back with the message to cut out some processes, one was Native Instruments, access.

 

 

don't feel bad! The new 16 core Mac pro is crippled with 6 instances of U-HE Diva playing 8 voices each.. too much for single core load so it can only load 6 and leave all the other cores free.. it's the single core performance that is at fault here.. My iMac pro gets 6 also, yet my MacBook pro gets 15.. yes an 8 core MacBook pro gets 15 x 8 voice divas all playing back without logic overloads, vs 6 in a mac pro configured to about 14 grand.. There's a large topic at gearslutz explaining it all (the last 5 or so pages are the ones to read about this from memory), but basically OS X is not allowing the Xeons to keep a steady all core turbo speed and drops below Intel's actual rated speeds, whereas Windows is letting them perform at their maximum. For example in my iMac pro, i get 12 divas in Pro tools/bootcamp vs 6 in Pro tools/Mojave. It's a power limit issue in OSX and we all hope it gets worked out. The reason the MacBook pro gets one per available thread in Logic is because there is enough headroom left over after each one, to put the next one on.. With the mac pro's, the reason they can only play 5 or 6 is because even though those first few instances can be loaded on one core each, every new instance adds overhead even to previous cores, just slightly, but there is no headroom left in the single core performance so it flakes out much quicker. The 9900K gets like 20 or something.

 

Yet, with omnisphere, there is a demo of the new mac pro playing 80 of them and all 16 cores/32 logical cores getting hammered to the max. So really, it's only U-HE synths that seem to not be able to be fully taken advantage of on the Xeons.. I have other heavy cpu synths and I can use them all.. just not Diva.

All the Arturia stuff is fine, Dune 3, the legend which sounds *amazeballs* used about 1/5th the cpu of DIva's moog filter mode. Try the legend, you will love it.. Only 8 voices but he used an AVX trick to get it to perform like other synths with one voice!

 

Just one disclaimer, I only use the demo of Diva, I sold my purchased copy yonks ago and never re bought it, but I doubt he would cripple the demo with higher cpu load.

[Dewdman42]

Very interesting. Thanks for the report.

[kingminotaur]

With "custom built" desktop hex core 8770 water cooled cost $1500 16gb men crucial 1TB ssd built 2 years ago getting about 300 tracks

without error. activity monitor showing about 700%

 

Geekbench 4 gives about 5000 single core 25000 multi core.

 

edit: it cost about $300 in consultant costs to build.

 

my iMac pro gets 5300 GB4 single core and 30,400 multi.

 

it gets 155 in this test.

 

You are doing something wrong and not unmuting tracks.. i bet you you just duplicated to 300 tracks but only the default amount are playing.LOL.

 

You must be right, I did it very quickly , don't remember unmuting, and your math makes sense , my max projects are maybe 25-30 simultaneous tracks so I never have trouble, sorry if I confused anyone.

[Ploki]

i have license managers for fxpansion, izotope, NI, plugin alliance, waves... even the (dreaded) pace software, and none show up in activity manager when not open.

 

none of mine show up either.

 

 

don't feel bad! The new 16 core Mac pro is crippled with 6 instances of U-HE Diva playing 8 voices each.. too much for single core load so it can only load 6 and leave all the other cores free.. it's the single core performance that is at fault here.. My iMac pro gets 6 also, yet my MacBook pro gets 15.. yes an 8 core MacBook pro gets 15 x 8 voice divas all playing back without logic overloads, vs 6 in a mac pro configured to about 14 grand.. There's a large topic at gearslutz explaining it all (the last 5 or so pages are the ones to read about this from memory), but basically OS X is not allowing the Xeons to keep a steady all core turbo speed and drops below Intel's actual rated speeds, whereas Windows is letting them perform at their maximum. For example in my iMac pro, i get 12 divas in Pro tools/bootcamp vs 6 in Pro tools/Mojave. It's a power limit issue in OSX and we all hope it gets worked out. The reason the MacBook pro gets one per available thread in Logic is because there is enough headroom left over after each one, to put the next one on.. With the mac pro's, the reason they can only play 5 or 6 is because even though those first few instances can be loaded on one core each, every new instance adds overhead even to previous cores, just slightly, but there is no headroom left in the single core performance so it flakes out much quicker. The 9900K gets like 20 or something.

 

Yet, with omnisphere, there is a demo of the new mac pro playing 80 of them and all 16 cores/32 logical cores getting hammered to the max. So really, it's only U-HE synths that seem to not be able to be fully taken advantage of on the Xeons.. I have other heavy cpu synths and I can use them all.. just not Diva.

All the Arturia stuff is fine, Dune 3, the legend which sounds *amazeballs* used about 1/5th the cpu of DIva's moog filter mode. Try the legend, you will love it.. Only 8 voices but he used an AVX trick to get it to perform like other synths with one voice!

 

Just one disclaimer, I only use the demo of Diva, I sold my purchased copy yonks ago and never re bought it, but I doubt he would cripple the demo with higher cpu load.

 

it's not that Diva can't take advantage of xeons, it's just a very CPU demanding plugin...

Omnisphere is (fwiw) a rompler with a decent synth engine nowhere near the quality and demand of diva, Dune 3 is a WT synth. The only comparable synth from all you listed is The Legend - but it has one model, Diva has 5 - and while The Legend is GREAT, i think diva still sounds better.

 

I can use Diva just fine on my 2018 Mini or my 2018 13"

[Sascha Franck]

I can use Diva just fine on my 2018 Mini or my 2018 13"

 

It's because your Mini has better single core performance than even the most expensive Mac Pro. Would be funny if it wasn't that sad.

[Dewdman42]

I can run diva just fine on my 2010 macpro

[kingminotaur]

I tried testing again:

 

i7-8700K hex core 3.7 unlocked/ custom build/ 16GB /Fatal1ty gaming motherboard /SSD 1TB boot with all libaries app files there/ water cooled /RX560 video/ in a mini case,

 

I only have one slot so there's no expansion .

 

making sure tracks were all playing regions, got 101 playing OK for about 30 seconds, when I tried to scroll up and down in main window it would overload so it's close to the limit.

 

Here's a video

[Ploki]

I can use Diva just fine on my 2018 Mini or my 2018 13"

 

It's because your Mini has better single core performance than even the most expensive Mac Pro. Would be funny if it wasn't that sad.

my i5 MBP doesnt tho

[Ploki]

I tried testing again:

 

i7-8700K hex core 3.7 unlocked/ custom build/ 16GB /Fatal1ty gaming motherboard /SSD 1TB boot with all libaries app files there/ water cooled /RX560 video/ in a mini case,

 

I only have one slot so there's no expansion .

 

making sure tracks were all playing regions, got 101 playing OK for about 30 seconds, when I tried to scroll up and down in main window it would overload so it's close to the limit.

 

Here's a video

so 15 tracks more than on my mini 8700B. That's not that great to be honest, i was expecting you'd get at leasgt 40% performance bump.

 

And how much did the rig cost?

 

i'm planning on applying liquid-metal on the heatsink and opening the bottom up and i' sure i'll get 5 more tracks out of it.

[Falk]

MacBook Pro (16-inch, 2019)

2,3 GHz 8-core Intel Core i9

32 GB 2667 MHz DDR4

97 tracks

[kingminotaur]

I tried testing again:

 

i7-8700K hex core 3.7 unlocked/ custom build/ 16GB /Fatal1ty gaming motherboard /SSD 1TB boot with all libaries app files there/ water cooled /RX560 video/ in a mini case,

 

I only have one slot so there's no expansion .

 

making sure tracks were all playing regions, got 101 playing OK for about 30 seconds, when I tried to scroll up and down in main window it would overload so it's close to the limit.

 

Here's a video

so 15 tracks more than on my mini 8700B. That's not that great to be honest, i was expecting you'd get at leasgt 40% performance bump.

 

And how much did the rig cost?

 

i'm planning on applying liquid-metal on the heatsink and opening the bottom up and i' sure i'll get 5 more tracks out of it.

 

It cost about 1500 in parts about 2 years ago, and about 300 in consulting cuz I don't know custom building. I think there may be more potential,

because the verbose boot up complains of a lot of misconfiguration, I just can't afford the consulting to optimize, and I never go over 50 tracks anyway.

I wanted to be able to do 4k also for indie micro-budget, so I needed a slot for a discrete card, but 2 years later integrated video is a lot better.

 

At this point unless someone is doing huge scores 4K or 8K, or if you're smart enough to config yourself (I'm not-- I used to be a programmer but still don't want to do it, I figure at least 100 hours study, download and debugging to get it working) I don't think it's worth doing custom build. I just found it interesting and the same power was more expensive two years ago.

[JakobP]

I tried testing again:

 

i7-8700K hex core 3.7 unlocked/ custom build/ 16GB /Fatal1ty gaming motherboard /SSD 1TB boot with all libaries app files there/ water cooled /RX560 video/ in a mini case,

 

I only have one slot so there's no expansion .

 

making sure tracks were all playing regions, got 101 playing OK for about 30 seconds, when I tried to scroll up and down in main window it would overload so it's close to the limit.

 

Here's a video

Noticed on your video that you have set one of the tracks in live mode, you could probably squeeze out a couple of more tracks if you keep the audio track selected.

[eskmo1]

We just did the test this am and got 275 tracks on the nMP 16 core.

 

FWIW we are having major issues running more than even 7 instances of Massive X. Something is up with it (and perhaps diva) in terms of utilizing threads properly or because its Catalina or something. No idea as of yet. Will update.

[Ploki]

275

holy s#!+, nice.

[TTOZ]

i have license managers for fxpansion, izotope, NI, plugin alliance, waves... even the (dreaded) pace software, and none show up in activity manager when not open.

 

none of mine show up either.

 

 

don't feel bad! The new 16 core Mac pro is crippled with 6 instances of U-HE Diva playing 8 voices each.. too much for single core load so it can only load 6 and leave all the other cores free.. it's the single core performance that is at fault here.. My iMac pro gets 6 also, yet my MacBook pro gets 15.. yes an 8 core MacBook pro gets 15 x 8 voice divas all playing back without logic overloads, vs 6 in a mac pro configured to about 14 grand.. There's a large topic at gearslutz explaining it all (the last 5 or so pages are the ones to read about this from memory), but basically OS X is not allowing the Xeons to keep a steady all core turbo speed and drops below Intel's actual rated speeds, whereas Windows is letting them perform at their maximum. For example in my iMac pro, i get 12 divas in Pro tools/bootcamp vs 6 in Pro tools/Mojave. It's a power limit issue in OSX and we all hope it gets worked out. The reason the MacBook pro gets one per available thread in Logic is because there is enough headroom left over after each one, to put the next one on.. With the mac pro's, the reason they can only play 5 or 6 is because even though those first few instances can be loaded on one core each, every new instance adds overhead even to previous cores, just slightly, but there is no headroom left in the single core performance so it flakes out much quicker. The 9900K gets like 20 or something.

 

Yet, with omnisphere, there is a demo of the new mac pro playing 80 of them and all 16 cores/32 logical cores getting hammered to the max. So really, it's only U-HE synths that seem to not be able to be fully taken advantage of on the Xeons.. I have other heavy cpu synths and I can use them all.. just not Diva.

All the Arturia stuff is fine, Dune 3, the legend which sounds *amazeballs* used about 1/5th the cpu of DIva's moog filter mode. Try the legend, you will love it.. Only 8 voices but he used an AVX trick to get it to perform like other synths with one voice!

 

Just one disclaimer, I only use the demo of Diva, I sold my purchased copy yonks ago and never re bought it, but I doubt he would cripple the demo with higher cpu load.

 

it's not that Diva can't take advantage of xeons, it's just a very CPU demanding plugin...

Omnisphere is (fwiw) a rompler with a decent synth engine nowhere near the quality and demand of diva, Dune 3 is a WT synth. The only comparable synth from all you listed is The Legend - but it has one model, Diva has 5 - and while The Legend is GREAT, i think diva still sounds better.

 

I can use Diva just fine on my 2018 Mini or my 2018 13"

 

Bleh.. read the post properly before defining it so simply..

 

If Diva used AVX 512, it would take advantage of xeons. .That's what that part meant.

 

Maybe i worded that one line wrong, but the mac pro can't sustain clock speeds fast enough to use a lot of Diva, i.e single core performance, which was pretty clear in the rest of my post.

 

Diva sounds great but is not worth the cost, I have tons of alternatives that WILL work properly on the mac pro. The point of my post was to tell that fellow who loos u-he stuff, not to worry that he can't afford a new mac pro, as it runs u-he stuff crap anyway.

[Dewdman42]

Diva also has a multicore setting you can turn on which I have found helpful. I was able to run 40 instances of Diva on my 2010 MacPro, and I could have added more I just got tired of copying tracks. My 2010 MacPro has Xeons in it, but older Xeons without the Turbo feature I guess. Maybe somehow Diva is doing something that doesn't allow the new Xeons to kick up to higher clock speeds somehow. That would be the case with the i9 Macs too, by the way, which also rely on turbo modes to get the full clock speeds. But there could be something about the new macPros that isn't dialing up the clock speeds optimally, that is what some on gearslutz are theorizing now.

 

I think an i9 mac would slay a nMP when you take a single Diva instance put it on full quality mode, add a bunch of heave FX also and try to record a track with it on the live track..with lots of FX added and Diva in full quality mode, driving that killer filter on it while you are recording the track. The i9 will have more ability to do a little more with that at lower latency. Outside of that, there are lots of ways to spread the processing around when mixing tracks.. etc.. And the new Xeons will have a lot more ability to do that then the 8 core i9's... that's why we can see these reports with 275 tracks being mixed or whatever...not that anyone needs to actually mix 275 tracks, but anyway its just a benchmark. You can split a channel across a couple AUX's and each AUX will go on its own thread (when its not live), and so if you know what you're doing you can cram a lot of plugins into a mix on a multicore monster like the nMP. But it will never be able to keep up with an i9 for the live tracks you are recording in live mode,

 

I think its possible that the nMP has some problems where its not ramping up the cpu to turbo mode aggressively enough, and everyone can hope Apple will fix that somehow in the future through the motherboard or OSX settings..let's hope. I think the reports on GearSlutz about this are concerning for audio work.

[TTOZ]

We just did the test this am and got 275 tracks on the nMP 16 core.

 

FWIW we are having major issues running more than even 7 instances of Massive X. Something is up with it (and perhaps diva) in terms of utilizing threads properly or because its Catalina or something. No idea as of yet. Will update.

 

 

Nothing to do with Catalina.. I have replicated all of those issues on my iMac pro in High Sierra and Mojave.

 

Apple is not allowing the Xeons to hit their rated speeds under load (they DO in windows on the very same mac).. it has been proven now on video with the new mac pros.. windows is allowed higher watts draw and better single core performance.. when I said at gearslutz it was a power limit issue everyone basically called me crazy but it turns out I was right.

 

This affects iMac pro and mac pro computers.

 

when you see 32 logical cores in Logic's meter for a 16 core mac (for example), it's not that simple to just think they all have even performance. There is overhead with each new one used.

 

Massive can basically *just* be played on the new mac pro, using whatever patch you are using. One instance is using an entire core, right?

 

Then when you duplicate it, each one adds a bit of processing overhead to the previous "thread" and it tips over.

 

If the mac pro was sitting at 4ghz all the time for the 16 core, which is the all core turbo it should be hitting, this would not happen, as there'd be enough headroom to duplicate.

 

This is why the MacBook pro kills the mac pro in Massive X and Diva, cause it's single core performance is better.. It really is that simple. I am in Catalina on the macbook pro and it is destroying my Mojave iMac pro with these synths.

 

However, in stuff that is well optimised, the iMac pro kills it.. The logic score is 155 iMac pro vs 99 MacBook pro 16" for example.

 

This is why DAW builders, in any case, say single core speed matters.

 

The best mac for DAW overall, if you use heavy algorithmic VIs (as in not samplers first and foremost but VA's and the like) is currently the 9900K iMac. If apple improve the cooling and put in the imminent 10900K, that will be the one to get.

 

All of this said.. it is kind of ridiculous though.. that native instruments and u-he expect everyone to have super computers to play 8 voices of their synth. Just say no, and use alternatives..

Listen to the legend, for example.. 8 voices uses about 1/12th the cpu that 8 voices of diva does, and it sounds wonderful. I can get like 71 of them on my iMac pro vs 6 Divas (same issue as the mac pro).

 

In bootcamp, the core speed fluctuation problems are removed, and I get 12, but the all core turbo speed of my iMac pro is 3.93 ghz and it's still not enough to quite put one instance on every core like the MacBook pro can.

 

The ultimate thing as VI users, that WE want, is something like 16 cores at 4.5ghz.. when that sort of solution (without overclocking) comes out, we'll be laughing, as it will be the jack of all trades.

 

What Apple needs to do is stop this nonsense on the iMac pro and mac pro of dropping from 4ghz to 3.2 out of nowhere (for example) when the cpu is at like 45 degrees and there are no thermal issues. They COULD fix this 100% with an EFI update.

 

PS if you used CPU setter to disable hyper threading, you'd probably get more consistent performance per core, and might even get 15 Massive X (logic always leaves a core free in case you arm a track to record). overall you'd lose a lot of performance but for really hungry VI's it might be better. I am going to try it on my iMac pro myself after lunch.

[Dewdman42]

But I can play diva with lots of voices on my 2010 MacPro. hehe. It has low single core performance also. Somehow it sounds like even my old 2010 machine has better single core performance then the nMP when its not in turbo mode? If that's true...that is a catastrophe for Apple on the nMP.

[TTOZ]

BTW, the best way to work with Diva and Massive X right now, it to play and record them and instantly freeze each instance as you go along. Even if you had the 28 core mac pro and spent 50 grand maxing it out LOL.

 

If Logic had something like S1's track transform, there'd be zero issue to ever have to keep all divas running in realtime.. Track transform allows editing when frozen and then if you unfreeze it, places midi where you have copied and edited audio.. S1 has terrible realtime performance on mac, but this one feature is particularly ingenious. Need to tweak the synth itself? Transform to midi, tweak, then right click transform to audio again. You can always see both midi and audio data when transformed as it displays both in the one clip.

[Dewdman42]

Something like that combined with DP's next gen pre gen combined with Reaper's whatever they call it...I think we'd all be happy. But anyway, the whole point of spending $15k on a new mac is that it would theoretically be so powerful that you don't even have to think about it, but this does not appear to be the case.

[TTOZ]

But I can play diva with lots of voices on my 2010 MacPro. hehe. It has low single core performance also. Somehow it sounds like even my old 2010 machine has better single core performance then the nMP when its not in turbo mode? If that's true...that is a catastrophe for Apple on the nMP.

 

 

Something is seriously wrong there then..

 

you are duplicating the settings and diva is in the same quality mode, playing the same patch with the same midi file, and your 2010 mac pro gets more?

 

I find that impossible and need to see it on video with my own eyes.. I am not saying you are being untruthful, not at all,. but I think there is something different you may have missed because it doesn't make any kind of sense.

 

The 2019 mac pro does not sustain it's correct max all core turbo under load, but it's single core is at least 40% better than the 2010 3.33 and 3.46 models.

In fact it's basically almost double the performance, clock for clock.

[Dewdman42]

No I don' have a nMP, I am just saying...on my 2010, I can play Diva with plenty of voices, its not a problem. Other people are saying Diva is choking on the nMP, I'm just responding.. I don't know why the nMP would choke on Diva when my 2010 MacPro with 3.46ghz Xeons (no turbo mode though), can play it fine.

[TTOZ]

Something like that combined with DP's next gen pre gen combined with Reaper's whatever they call it...I think we'd all be happy. But anyway, the whole point of spending $15k on a new mac is that it would theoretically be so powerful that you don't even have to think about it, but this does not appear to be the case.

 

DP's pre gen is a joke.. I am getting 71 synths in a test I designed, playing in Logic vs 50 in DP 10 of the same midi file and synth, and i waited half hour too in case pre gen wasn't finished rendering. A PROPER pre gen would be good, yes.. where it constantly transforms to audio in the background and updates when you make changes.. disables the VSTi unless you click on the gui to edit it, and so on.. That would mean the DAW is basically playing audio back at all times and you should get 100's of tracks better performance.

 

Reaper's pre anticipative processing also SUCKS. It is good for performance (Logic still pips it) and comes in second amongst all OS X daws for performance, but it adds that 200ms latency every time you move the playhead during playback and so on. It feels sluggish and awful. No thanks.. It also uses WAY more real cpu than the others (you can check on this, it's a known thing) which means heat and noise.

 

Reaper uses 95% real cpu to play back the same amount of VI tracks Logic uses 80% for, as one example.

 

Anyway the infrastructure for pre gen is already there in many DAWs with freeze.. they just need to make it automated so to speak. Whatever MOTU have done, they have not done it well.

[Dewdman42]

Something like that combined with DP's next gen pre gen combined with Reaper's whatever they call it...I think we'd all be happy. But anyway, the whole point of spending $15k on a new mac is that it would theoretically be so powerful that you don't even have to think about it, but this does not appear to be the case.

 

DP's pre gen is a joke.. I am getting 71 synths in a test I designed, playing in Logic vs 50 in DP 10 of the same midi file and synth, and i waited half hour too in case pre gen wasn't finished rendering. A PROPER pre gen would be good, yes.. where it constantly transforms to audio in the background and updates when you make changes.. disables the VSTi unless you click on the gui to edit it, and so on.. That would mean the DAW is basically playing audio back at all times and you should get 100's of tracks better performance.

 

This ^^^^ When DP announced PreGen I was actually shocked that all the DAW's aren't already doing what you just described. That is how they should all be working in some fashion. I agree with you that DP's pregen is hit or miss. Some plugins completely ignore it.

 

Reaper's pre anticipative processing also SUCKS. It is good for performance (Logic still pips it) and comes in second amongst all OS X daws for performance, but it adds that 200ms latency every time you move the playhead during playback and so on. It feels sluggish and awful. No thanks.. It also uses WAY more real cpu than the others (you can check on this, it's a known thing) which means heat and noise.

Good to know. I haven't used it and wasn't aware of the extra 200ms latency its adding to do whatever its doing.

 

Anyway the infrastructure for pre gen is already there in many DAWs with freeze.. they just need to make it automated so to speak. Whatever MOTU have done, they have not done it well.

 

yep. Let's hope they will do it, then my 2010 MacPro can live forever!