This isn’t very scientific, but my early tests opening the same project in both 12 and 13 show the 13 has the edge and seems to be more CPU efficient, which is a good start
Cubase 12
Cubase 13
Cubase 13
What hardware are you on? Is that while the project is playing?
Seems slicker in use, must admit, and sure it closes projects down much quicker with a handy progress dialog.
yes playing , not hardware at the moment as Im away , so just playing back with the MBPs Built is driver ( which Cubase is that good at)
I expect much better performance when in back in the studio , which I RME
Maybe a bit early to ask, but does C13 need to have E-Cores disabled on later gen Intel chips like it was recommended for C12?
I am running M2 max , not sure about intel
13 feels much more snappy. That’s not very scientific but it’s my impression anyway.
Same project in Cubase 13 uses 10-15% more CPU than C12.in my case.
1 Like
In my case (at least after couple of hours testing) on C13 I have significantly lower real time peaks - which I struggled with on C12 a lot. I’m on Win 11, 13th gen CPU i7.
When I’m back in the studio next week , I will do lots of A , B with older project and overall performance with a template I have been working on , so anyway apple silicon users can see
I have an M1 pro laptop and an M1 Max Studio snd both give the same performance with 12 and 13. So no improvement for me on Macs.
Dam that’s a shame , it’s amazing cubase can run with all the CPU types , but in wonder if it would run much faster if they dropped the Apple intel support ?
Is that PC or mac? I’ve had some C12 projects have problems trying to play in C13, haven’t yet tried new C13 projects.
Steve.
PC, Windows 10, Ryzen 9, no issues so far playing C12 projects but higher CPU load…
On my system (OXS monterey) it Cubase 13 uses more CPU according to OS. (Quite small, but it there). But the low-latency settings works better. At least one-step smaller im trying 2 steps. Then there are bumps now and then. (64 samples at 44.1KHz with USB3)
1 Like