I'm in trouble with pulsar....

burdello · Post by **burdello** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:34 am

I have a PulsarII and a Powersampler.
When my projects become very large cubase start clicking but CPU isn't in full usage.
I use SFP as bus effects and mixer, Cubase SX 3 as channel effects and mixer.
I think the problem is related to PCI capabilities.
So I need to set bigger latency to ULLI, but in this way "realtime" is not so "real" and monitoring recordings is really bad.
I found that using ASIO2-24bit instead ASIO2-flt 64 decrease a lot this problem (i think because the data tranfer via PCI is less).
But the problem persists...
This situation is very frustating...
How many channels can you send from ASIO2-24bit to pulsar mixer?
What can I to reduce PCI-related problems?
I have no other PCI cards.

the19thbear · Post by **the19thbear** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:06 am

you can use a program called doubledog.. do a search here.. alot of people use it!

Liquid Len · Post by **Liquid Len** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:30 am

Is this a serious answer? I have the same problems. There is no program called 'doubledog' that I have ever heard of, or comes up on the search engine here.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:40 am

it's pronounced 'dog', he means doubledawg

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:55 am

also close skype when you have it installed. that does lead to clicks on my system also since I updated to a newer version of this software...

may not be your problem but could be...

Post by **garyb** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:05 pm

there are many possible reasons for this problem. the doubldawg solution is the last step. first, you need to open system information(start/programs/accessories/system tools/system information/hardware resources/conflicts-sharing) to see if your scope card is sharing an irq with any other device. if it is, i can give you more instruction. also, it's helpful to go to controlpanel/system/advanced/performance settings/adjust for best performance......

Post by **garyb** » Thu Jan 17, 2008 3:24 pm

burdello · Post by **burdello** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:09 am

Everyone of this idem I've checked exept doubledawg.
But, my videocard is an integrated G945 intel and no PCI tweak is possible.
So, on "advanced - troulbeshoot" video properties I've disabled "wite combining"
Then, on "my computer - properties - advanced - performance" I've checked "adjust for best performance"
Could the problem be related to Powersampler (luna1) working at 4ms?
Powersampler is recognized as "DSP board" and I use 9 DSPs (the right number)
Now I'm thinking to upgrade my system whit a Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3R.
Is the PCI express videocard better than integrated or not?
Integrated G945 stream data directly to nothbridge chip so it should be the same than a PCI express....
It's a mystery....

Post by **garyb** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:20 am

no, integrated is not the same as pci-e. integrated video shares resources with the rest of the computer(memory and additional cpu cycles). the problem is likely the integrated video.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:27 pm

I have no differences between 946 GZ onboard video and a PCIe card (Geforce8600) on a Gigabyte board - PCI performance (in my case, 3 Pulsar 1st gen cards) is the same as for Intel 815 btw.
And yes Gary, I did install XP - not yet activated, tho - I may still bail out

cheers, Tom

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:53 am

yeah, you're right. probably not much pci traffic difference. other resources are likely to be affected.

xp's garbage, but it's useful garbage....

xp is much less trouble than 98, but at a cost, there's a lot more going on. you can strip xp down, but i doubt it's really worth it. setting the advanced system setting to "adjust for best performance"(turns off almost all of the visual gadgets) does what used to take hours to set up in 98, performance-wise. after that tweek, performance improvements are measured with a micrometer.

burdello · Post by **burdello** » Tue Jan 22, 2008 6:24 am

I try to disable onboard video card, install a Radeon X550 PCI express video card but is the same... no difference!
So I back to integrated one..
this evening I'll try with PCI latency tool which permits not only video optimization but PCI-related latency optimization.
In general, What is better? a low or an high latency? 64-96-128, what is the best latency for Pulsar? I have Powersampler and Pulsar2 cards.
bye

burdello · Post by **burdello** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:55 am

I found the origin of my problems.
The first problem was caused by "ASIO2 32float 64" wich involves bigger data transfers on PCI bus. Reduced to "ASIO2 24bit" (max 32 busses) PCI problems was solved.
The second problem is explained here:
Cubase runs everytime at fidex latency, set by ULLI interface.
But, when a lot of VST plugins charge too much cpu, cubase can't automatically increase latency, so it starts clicking.
The only solution is to increase latency from ULLI interface.
What I don't understand is why CPU usage isn't a 100%.

Example: I have a lot of VST plugins in my project, SFP as Bus mixer and Bus effects.
Cubase start clicking at 60% of CPU usage!
The more I set bigger latency, the more I have VST plugins active, but "the breack point" is always at 60~70 % cpu usage.
So, I enabled "multi processor " support, using "freeze" functions I free-up cpu limits, after play VSTinstruments I freeze it, I overclocked my mobo.
My system now is stable, but 24ms latency...
PS: My cpu is a core 2 duo E6320.

valis · Post by **valis** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 2:54 am

I was never able to hit even 85% cpu with cubase myself, and that's using the same RME card that they rebadged as the 'nuendo' interface (rme multiface). Enabling SMP support usually gives a few more plugins but sometimes makes stability even worse... Supposedly things are better with Cubase4 finally, but as I haven't paid for that 'bugfix' I wouldn't know. I can get 95% cpu usage out of Logic 5.51 on one cpu (doesn't support multiple cpu/core in that version without 'hacks') but with cubase I get more like 70%. It's the nature of its 'always on' processing architecture, I usually found myself manually disabling plugins via their automation (automating the enable/disable button) when the track they're inserted on has long periods of silence, this helps somewhat.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:16 am

the CPU load 'meter' is in no way related to how much 'real' or 'sophisticated' processing the thing is performing - it only tells about the degree of locking a process performs.
If I don't pay attention with my developement system, an almost idle loop can drive the CPU to 100% and it's really heating up, too

cheers, Tom