Tone Deft wrote:because it's beta software, it's not finished, it's broken, it sucks. doing performance ratings on it is kinda pointless, of course Live 8 beta is going to be worse than Live 7
I take it you're not a software developer. I am. By trade. I wrote my first line of code 1981.
Doing performance ratings on beta software is most definitely not pointless, where on earth did you get that idea???
In fact, I'm currently involved in a very large and expensive development project where doing performance ratings is our prime goal!
In that particular project, I wouldn't say that our debug code's CPU overhead is even measurable
Why do you make the conclusion that a 30% overhead in L8bxx is down to it being beta? It sure may
be, even twice the overhead could well be. Fuck, ten times could be as well. But without indepth knowledge of the source code, you cannot possibly tell.
which is not only out of beta, it was worked on for MONTHS afterwards to make it better. Live 7.14 is better than Live 7.0.
Yeah. But not when it when comes to CPU consumption. I've used all versions of L7 on several systems, both Mac and PC. I haven't seen even a 0.5% difference when it comes to CPU consumption between various versions on either platform.
it is interesting to see a number like 30% and props to the thought that went into some
Pure and dead simple math son. Like eight grade math. STFU. Please.