I use Padshop 2.1 (latest version) in Cubase Pro 11.0.41 and C 12.0.20 on Mac Pro, Mojave 10.14.6 (I know, I know, officially unsupported for Cubase 12). The computer is a “trashcan cylinder”, has the Six-Core 3.5 GHz CPU, 64 GB RAM and SSD’s.
My observation is that in C 12, when I play e.g. a sequence of eighth notes (at ca. 75bpm) with the patch “Brass of Doom” (from the free Cinergy library by Dom Sigalas), the CPU meter gets close to 100%.
In C 11, however, under the same conditions, the CPU load meter shows only about 25%, which is only a quarter of what is shown in C 12.
Is the plugin device performance in C12 worse than in C11 (at least on macOS)?
Or could this be due to changed CPU metering in C 12?
Or, indeed, might it be the new authorization software that is too invasive here?
What are your findings?
Who could please reproduce the issue as accurately as possible?
I have analyzed the matter further.
The picture below shows the 4 scenarios tested by me. (Ignore the Reaktor VSTi track, it is disabled in that project. Also, ASIO Guard is activated.)
Top left: Cubase 11, Padshop track record disabled.
Top right: Cubase 11, Padshop track record enabled.
Bottom left: Cubase 12, Padshop track record disabled.
Bottom right: Cubase 12, Padshop track record enabled.
I didn’t at first understand the bearing of the Track Record Enable status on the issue, in view of the ASIO Guard behavior. (I most often use ASIO Guard in “Normal” mode.)
So the different metering between C 11 and C 12 has to be taken into account.
It may well be that the issue is actually not C 12 using way more CPU power, but the Audio Performance Meter in C 12 has to be interpreted different from the one in C 11.
Quoting @Chriss
Cubase 12 uses a new designed performance meter, and shows more accurately the state of the real time communication of your audio card and Cubase. Here’s a more detailed explanation regarding the new performance meter: Cubase 12 Upgrade ASIO-Guard Issue - #147 by Chriss
