Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER Bug Reports

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-22-2022, 06:31 PM   #1
matnoir
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: France
Posts: 41
Default [6.72] Bad performance with multichannel plugins

After installing 6.72, the project I'm currently working on started to put a very heavy load on the CPU (fans went full throttle) and audio was just a bunch of glitches.

Same session reopened with 6.71 worked like a charm.

After much investigation, I found that the plugins that drew so much were the numerous instances of Fabfilter Pro-L2 I have on atmos (10 channels) tracks.

I also have quite a few instances of Penteo 16 pro, Cinematics Room, ReaSurround and various SoundParticles plugins (all 10 channels), but the FabFilter seem to be the only one concerned with 6.72 but not at all with 6.71.

It's hard for me to tell if it's a Reaper or FabFilter issue, but the fact it works great with 6.71 suggests me that I should start by posting here.

All the best,
p@T

Mac Trashcan (Intel) / OS 12.6.2 (Monterey)
Both Universal and x86_64 builds have the same behaviour
matnoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2022, 06:31 AM   #2
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,815
Default

How does 6.72 compare against 6.70?

If you look in the performance meter, what does that track FX CPU readout show for each version for that track?

The reason I ask is 6.71 had some stuff in it to report very granular silence information to VST3s, however a lot of plug-ins fail miserably when they get this information, so 6.72 removed it (but 6.70 and 6.72 should behave similarly, hopefully! if they don't, then I need to look elsewhere...).

Last edited by Justin; 12-23-2022 at 06:50 AM.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2022, 09:04 AM   #3
matnoir
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: France
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
How does 6.72 compare against 6.70?
Spot on, 6.70 & 6.72 severely lag with around 40% RT CPU and tons of RT xruns when 6.71 quietly sits at 2.5% RT CPU and no RT xruns...
matnoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2022, 03:17 PM   #4
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,815
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matnoir View Post
Spot on, 6.70 & 6.72 severely lag with around 40% RT CPU and tons of RT xruns when 6.71 quietly sits at 2.5% RT CPU and no RT xruns...
If you tweak the block size or anticipative FX so that 6.72 doesn't RT xrun, do they sound the same?

Do many of those 10 channels on that one highest-cpu track have silence most of the time?
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2022, 05:37 AM   #5
matnoir
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: France
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
If you tweak the block size or anticipative FX so that 6.72 doesn't RT xrun, do they sound the same?
My block size already was at 3072 (I usually am around 512/1024, but I did increase for this relatively complicated mix), so I did not try to change it as I do believe, possibly wrongly, but I recall reading that somewhere once, that above 2048 does not make a real difference).

The anticipative FX, even at 1200 does not completely suppresses xruns. (however, I don't know if that may help, 6.73 was kinda ok at 800ms.) But, in both cases, the "peak cpu track" now goes up to almost 4%.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
Do many of those 10 channels on that one highest-cpu track have silence most of the time?
Yes, they do :-)

Merry Christmas to you and your dear ones,
p@T
matnoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2022, 07:16 AM   #6
Justin
Administrator
 
Justin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 15,815
Default

For high channel counts you might find better performance with lower block sizes, eg 256, due to cache effects. Anticipative FX at 1000ms with that should be plenty.
Justin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-23-2022, 01:07 PM   #7
matnoir
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: France
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin View Post
How does 6.72 compare against 6.70?

If you look in the performance meter, what does that track FX CPU readout show for each version for that track?
Sorry, I misread your message and gave the overall CPU charge.

For individual tracks, especially those with FabFilter, 6.70/72 are at around 1% when they are at 0.04% with 6.71.

My "peak cpu" track has 3 10 channels plugins (Flux Epure, Flux Solera and Penteo16 pro) is at 2.45% with 6.70/72 and 1.06% with 6.71

Hope this helps :-)
matnoir is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.