Live Performance Test 1 and 2:

Discussion of music production, audio, equipment and any related topics, either with or without Ableton Live
FORMAT
Posts: 1776
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 12:13 pm
Contact:

Post by FORMAT » Tue Apr 23, 2002 9:46 am

These are astounding results, particularly the PC-Mac comparison you're bound to make when seeing this... I will post my results soon..


FORMAT

gonzo

performance tests

Post by gonzo » Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:21 pm

Hi

PC: Home built jobbie
Processor: Athlon XP1800 (1.53MHz) + 512Mb RAM
Windows 98SE
Audiophile 2496 sound card
Live 1.5b3

Test 1: 1%
Test 2: 7% (honest)

Athlons get a bad press for music apps so I was wary of getting one but it works really well...

atom_b
Posts: 264
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 11:02 am
Location: North by Northeast

Post by atom_b » Wed Apr 24, 2002 5:06 pm

Tested with 1.5b3

Make of computer: MSI 694D Pro AIR (dual PIII)
Operating system: WinXP Pro
CPU Speed: 2x1GHz
Soundcard: RME multiface (ASIO mode, 2 output-channels assigned)

1Gb RAM (2-2-2)
streaming HD: IBM 60Gb (DMA-mode)
no SCSI

Result for test 1: 2%
Result for test 2: 16%

Live 1.5b3 is still causing trouble with the RME ASIO driver:

After changing buffer size it gave me bufferoverload at 18% CPU-load! Unloading the driver and loading it again worked after the third try.

I wonder if this could be related to the fact that if I select buffersize LIVE always stays 0,5 to 2ms below the latency given in the hardware config of the multiface. So if it is 6ms with the multiface Live estimates 5ms. Adding these values in Overhead Latency again won't help.

If I read my hardware manual well, underrunning buffersize is hazardous (not only to your ears).
Vaio AR11S
XP Pro SP2
2GB RAM
intel T2500 2GHz
200GB RAID-0
RME FF400

Guest

Post by Guest » Wed Apr 24, 2002 6:39 pm

Tested with 1.5b3

Make of computer: Home built asus p4t mainboard
Operating system: WinXP Pro
CPU Speed:Pentiun 4 1.3ghz
Soundcard: Creamware Powersampler card(Luna 3.1 software)
768 mb ram
17 gig seagate SCSI hd

Result for test 1: 2%
Result for test 2: 13%

Regard J.Tom

chris_borgia
Posts: 36
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2002 10:22 pm
Location: South Florida

nail in coffin?

Post by chris_borgia » Sun Apr 28, 2002 9:00 pm

I am a big Mac man, but MY GOD! These pc’s are smoking… I would love to see these same tests on the just released final version of 1.5 with its performance gain. Also if someone has an older PC laptop like a 600mhz or 700mkz - that would be great if you could post your results this way we will see if a G3 600 is matching or beating a PC P3 600/700.

SongCarver
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2001 3:29 pm

g4

Post by SongCarver » Sun Apr 28, 2002 10:20 pm

I'm just wondering if LIVE is G4 altivec enabled, looking at the poor performance, esp. on the dual machines.

Ableton, is it alitvec??

cheers

davemanning
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:02 am

Live Performance Test 1 and 2:

Post by davemanning » Mon Apr 29, 2002 1:35 am

Make of computer: Apple PowerBook G4
Operating system: MacOS X 10.1.4
CPU Speed: 500MHz/1GB RAM
Soundcard: Built-in Audio

Result for test 1: 4%
Result for test 2: 29%
Using Version 1.5 - final release

For a portable solution, I'm pretty happy with the performance of Live under OS X on my Titanium - so happy, I got rid of my behemoth Athlon!

Dave
---
Dave Manning

electropap

clone

Post by electropap » Sat May 04, 2002 6:55 am

Make of computer: pentium3
with asus cusl2-c motherboard
Operating system: windows98
CPU Speed: 800mhz 256mo ram
Soundcard: Maudio delta1010

Result for test 1: 4%
Result for test 2: 23%

live 1.5

working fine for me :D

Angus
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 10:39 am
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Post by Angus » Sun May 05, 2002 3:56 pm

Make of computer: Home built PC Intel Mboard, 768 MB SDRam
Operating system: Windows 2000
CPU Speed: P4 1.8 ghz
Soundcard: MOTU 2408 MKII

OK, could be better

Angus
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2002 10:39 am
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Post by Angus » Sun May 05, 2002 3:59 pm

OOps - forgot to put the stats in!!!

Make of computer: Home built PC Intel Mboard, 768 MB SDRam
Operating system: Windows 2000
CPU Speed: P4 1.8 ghz
Soundcard: MOTU 2408 MKII

Result for test 1: 3%
Result for test 2: 13%

OK, could be better

The Kooky Scientist
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 7:08 am
Location: Salem, MA
Contact:

Post by The Kooky Scientist » Sun May 05, 2002 4:15 pm

oops, now it's in the right place....

Computer: Apple ti Book
OS: 9.2.2
CPU: 550
RAM: 512
Soundcard: E-magic emi 2/6
Ableton Live: 1.5

Test 1: 6%
Test 2: 43%

using Soundmanager:

Test 1: 6%
Test 2: 41 %

OS 10.1.4 results:

Test 1: 5%
Test 2: 42%

MC

Live Performance Test 1 and 2:

Post by MC » Wed May 22, 2002 2:14 pm

Make of computer: RME Reference PC P4 DDR
Operating system: Windows XP
CPU Speed: 2 GHz
Soundcard: RME HDSP Multiface

Result for test 1: 2%
Result for test 2: 10%

8 ASIO playback channels active

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC

Live Performance Test 1 and 2:

Post by MC » Wed May 22, 2002 2:41 pm

Operating system: Windows XP
CPU Speed: 2 GHz
Soundcard: RME HDSP Multiface

Result for test 1: 1%
Result for test 2: 9%

2 ASIO playback channels active

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC

Live Performance Test 1 and 2:

Post by MC » Wed May 22, 2002 3:05 pm

[quote="MC"]
Make of computer: Dell Inspiron 8100 laptop
Operating system: Windows XP
CPU Speed: 866 MHz (PIII)
Soundcard: RME HDSP Multiface

Result for test 1: 2%
Result for test 2: 19%
8 ASIO playback channels active

Result for test 1: 2%
Result for test 2: 18%
2 ASIO playback channels active

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

os
Posts: 278
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by os » Wed May 22, 2002 6:40 pm

Hey Matthias, nice to see RME making an appearance on this list!

Going off topic briefly, is it true that the "Steinberg Nuendo Audiolink" hardware is actually the RME HDSP system in disguise?

Can you post some results for an Apple TiBook running with the RME hardware? (Ideally under OS X, and yes, I realise you've not released OS X drivers yet ;) )

cheers,
os.

Post Reply