Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2002 4:03 pm
anyone have no slow down on pulsar graphic when dsp is mostly utilized?
and CPU still at 6~10%
and CPU still at 6~10%
PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com
Scope Users Community
https://forums.scopeusers.com/
the graphic speed
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2002 7:45 pm
yes.
Posted: Mon Apr 01, 2002 8:15 pm
which video card?
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 3:38 am
I'm using an old ATI Rage 128, and Pulsar graphics are very slow when I'm running all my DSP's (7) and Cubase/Battery. (on a P3 1Ghz, 256 MB RAM)
It makes switching between mixer views and synths a pain. It's probably the most annoying thing about Pulsar!
So yes if people don't ahve this problem, please tell me which videocard should I get?
It makes switching between mixer views and synths a pain. It's probably the most annoying thing about Pulsar!
So yes if people don't ahve this problem, please tell me which videocard should I get?
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 5:59 am
thats a bit weird... I get a slowdown on high-cpu (this is normal), but not with full DSP's.. I've tried using a Matrox G400 and a Supergrace GeForce2 MX400 64mb. Both behave very similarly.
Word has it that the new 3.1 software has a slicker GUI. But in any case high DSP usage should not be causing a graphical slowdown, going by my experience anyway (I've set up several Pulsar systems for people).
peace
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dArKr3zIn on 2002-04-02 06:01 ]</font>
Word has it that the new 3.1 software has a slicker GUI. But in any case high DSP usage should not be causing a graphical slowdown, going by my experience anyway (I've set up several Pulsar systems for people).
peace
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dArKr3zIn on 2002-04-02 06:01 ]</font>
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 2:24 pm
Well, maybe it's jsut because heavy DSP usage usually goes hand in hand with lots of different devices on screen so that may be slowing the interface down, rather than the DSP usage.
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2002 3:05 pm
The only time I notice a slow down with the system or the graphics is when I am using a lot of PCI intensive things... full sampler, a few reverbs, a bunch of delays. This pushes the PCI bus.
Usually in normal projects, I don't experience this.
Remember unlike other solutions, this stuff happens with ZERO LATENCY and therefore puts a larger strain on your system's bus, which can effect the graphic card's ability to redraw the screen. Try using some outboard gear to take some of the PCI traffic, or pray for a generation 3 board with onboard ram that can be added to your current system.
Usually in normal projects, I don't experience this.
Remember unlike other solutions, this stuff happens with ZERO LATENCY and therefore puts a larger strain on your system's bus, which can effect the graphic card's ability to redraw the screen. Try using some outboard gear to take some of the PCI traffic, or pray for a generation 3 board with onboard ram that can be added to your current system.
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 6:59 am
I have the same Ati card, and have no problems at all. The graphics are really fast, no matter what synths I have running.On 2002-04-02 03:38, King of Snake wrote:
I'm using an old ATI Rage 128, and Pulsar graphics are very slow when I'm running all my DSP's (7) and Cubase/Battery. (on a P3 1Ghz, 256 MB RAM)
It makes switching between mixer views and synths a pain. It's probably the most annoying thing about Pulsar!
So yes if people don't ahve this problem, please tell me which videocard should I get?
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 7:02 am
What colour depth/resolution are you running Dxl? That could be the cause of the slowness.
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 9:35 am
I've been wondering about this too.On 2002-04-02 15:05, subhuman wrote:
or pray for a generation 3 board with onboard ram that can be added to your current system.
Do you think it would be technically possible for, say, Pulsar II to make use of RAM on a future expansion card connected via sync plate?
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 9:53 am
i have a geforce card.ran the dsp meter to the end last night (12 dsp's) lots o plugs in logic, 27 tracks,no slowdown.
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 11:17 am
The fact that the UI is sluggish has nothing to do with PCI traffic when you have an AGP card. The AGP bus, altough part of the PCI PNP enumeration, is wired directly to the north bridge, and doesn't affect the transfers on the PCI bus (south bridge), so, sorry to be blunt, but that's total BS.
I think the sluggish UI is just BAD programming, and tons of wrappers, plain and simple. I would trade anytime a bunch of 'fla flas' for speed. As for zero latency, nothing to do with it also. I have an OASYS PCI board, the UI is *VERY* fast, the audio meters are extremely responsive too...
I think the sluggish UI is just BAD programming, and tons of wrappers, plain and simple. I would trade anytime a bunch of 'fla flas' for speed. As for zero latency, nothing to do with it also. I have an OASYS PCI board, the UI is *VERY* fast, the audio meters are extremely responsive too...
On 2002-04-02 15:05, subhuman wrote:
The only time I notice a slow down with the system or the graphics is when I am using a lot of PCI intensive things... full sampler, a few reverbs, a bunch of delays. This pushes the PCI bus.
Usually in normal projects, I don't experience this.
Remember unlike other solutions, this stuff happens with ZERO LATENCY and therefore puts a larger strain on your system's bus, which can effect the graphic card's ability to redraw the screen. Try using some outboard gear to take some of the PCI traffic, or pray for a generation 3 board with onboard ram that can be added to your current system.
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 12:02 pm
I also have a Korg Oasys and sure the UI is faster but its also plain, boring and ugly. I much prefer the look of the Pulsar stuff, to each their own.
About AGP cards not being effected because they don't share the PCI bus: well obviously the AGP uses the AGP bus connected to the MCH & the PCI bus is connected to the ICH2 hub. Try it yourself: load 10 masterVerbs and watch the graphics slow down, compared, to say, 2 masterVerbs. There is a correlation and that is all I am trying to say. Remember the Oasys can only use it's onboard memory: makes it better behaved, but also a limitation. Just as CW uses main memory and is therefore ("only") limited by the PCI bus.
About poorly coded graphics library: so you're a coding guru that got a peak at the code, huh? But really: i don't think it's poorly coded, but simply not using hardware acceleration. Have you coded alpha-blending before that was cross-platform and anywhere near as fast as the Creamware GUI without using hardware-specific acceleration?
I have and it's quite tricky.
None of this is to say I wouldn't mind it being faster. I would like it faster. But it's far from too slow (on my machines at least) and definitely usable. I don't sit around all day dragging devices around screen timing them. I load the devices, assign midi controllers, and use them.
About AGP cards not being effected because they don't share the PCI bus: well obviously the AGP uses the AGP bus connected to the MCH & the PCI bus is connected to the ICH2 hub. Try it yourself: load 10 masterVerbs and watch the graphics slow down, compared, to say, 2 masterVerbs. There is a correlation and that is all I am trying to say. Remember the Oasys can only use it's onboard memory: makes it better behaved, but also a limitation. Just as CW uses main memory and is therefore ("only") limited by the PCI bus.
About poorly coded graphics library: so you're a coding guru that got a peak at the code, huh? But really: i don't think it's poorly coded, but simply not using hardware acceleration. Have you coded alpha-blending before that was cross-platform and anywhere near as fast as the Creamware GUI without using hardware-specific acceleration?
I have and it's quite tricky.None of this is to say I wouldn't mind it being faster. I would like it faster. But it's far from too slow (on my machines at least) and definitely usable. I don't sit around all day dragging devices around screen timing them. I load the devices, assign midi controllers, and use them.
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2002 7:20 am
mmm... it seems my drivers were just a bit out of date. I updated them and now it's better. Damn drivers!
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2002 9:55 pm
ok i get the conclusion
they optimized for Matrox from V1~v2
but they add optimizitation for Gforce in V3
but i do experience faster graphic tho
please optimize for more.
i have slow down graphic when useing more DSP
i have KyroII for my video card
which it's performance is almost about the same as Gforce2Pro.
_________________
I'm still seeing new things in life.
<p><a href="http://mp3.com/dxl">www.mp3.com/dxl</a></p>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dxl on 2002-04-04 21:58 ]</font>
they optimized for Matrox from V1~v2
but they add optimizitation for Gforce in V3
but i do experience faster graphic tho
please optimize for more.
i have slow down graphic when useing more DSP
i have KyroII for my video card
which it's performance is almost about the same as Gforce2Pro.
_________________
I'm still seeing new things in life.
<p><a href="http://mp3.com/dxl">www.mp3.com/dxl</a></p>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: dxl on 2002-04-04 21:58 ]</font>
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2002 10:01 pm
geforce 2PRO?On 2002-04-03 09:53, garyb wrote:
i have a geforce card.ran the dsp meter to the end last night (12 dsp's) lots o plugs in logic, 27 tracks,no slowdown.
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2002 12:33 am
geforce2 mx something....i don't really care about the video card.i just got a fast one w/ 32mb o.b.