Does Cubase 6.5 utilize GPU acceleration in any way?

I am planning on a new workstation and think about whether cubase is able to render it’s elements via GPU or has any GPU enabled features which would amortize the cost of a new graphics card but I cannot find any info about that.


I think graphics are pretty low priority on a cubase system, just need to cover how many monitors you need to use.
No real advantage in fancy cards.

I am not talking about graphics but about CUDA or massive parallelization on GPU where CPU intensive but parallel tasks can be uploaded to GPU.

I bet it should be possible to parallelize each track layer or similar

I know what you were getting at, as I said, no real advantage in fancy cards. The GPU will not be utilised for decreased CPU with Cubase

Too bad :confused:

Thanks for the help :slight_smile:

Assuming you are using Windows 7, there is (a very) limited support for hardware acceleration when using the “traditional” graphics library (GDI) in Windows 7.
Windows 7

Moving on to Windows 8 (for future planning), there is a blog post from Microsoft about the hardware acceleration in Windows 8.
Building Windows 8

Actually, this is one of those features that would take a lot of code to implement…and unfortunately, no one buys those kinds of features, you know?

Nothing flashy about “watch this buy you 10% of your CPU back by offloading the graphics to OpenGL”…people like stupid new buzzy synths and editing features that hold the promise of amateur musicians being able to make their slop sound passable. That’s what sells.

But, it’s a real, professional need. I have a 9800GT with 1gb (not anything modernly cutting edge) sitting, utterly unused, while my metter ballistics slow as my CPU maxes out. No reason for that to happen. Any GPU made in the last 15 years could draw Cubase’s GUI in real time completely by itself.

Part of the challenge is that plug in GUis are not made by Steiny…which is actually why the Steinberg ballistics CRAWL…and Waves and Slate keep up no matter what the CPU load–THEY are actually using the card. Big mix sessions, I can’t even USE Steinberg plugs for this reason. I’ve learned that I can’t keep the project window zoomed while in the mixer window…because I don’t even need to get near max, and it takes it’s toll on channel ballistics. Even though it’s not technically even on screen!

So, yes, I would buy a paid upgrade that actually used some solid GPU acceleration. Most wouldn’t. So, they don’t implement.

It’s a moot point now anyways.

When Steinberg’s software is on Windows 8, everything will use hardware acceleration.

I don’t think so.

Did you read the Microsoft articles above?

I don’t think so :smiley:

Correct me if I’m wrong, english is not my native language:

The article says, that applications will benefit from hardware acceleration

  • if they are Metro apps (Cubase is not and will not be for the time being) or
  • if they use Direct2d, Direct3d or DirectWrite to generate their graphical output (I don’t know if Cubase does at all ATM, and probably this won’t improve as long as it’s dual platform Mac/PC).

It stays completely unclear if GDI/GDI+ get accelerated at all, and I assume Cubase still uses GDI to draw its graphics, because at least SX3 did still work under Win2k (which didn’t support GDI+)

Cubase 5.5.3 runs with the same performance in Win7 / Win8 on the same computer. No difference at all. I can’t write anything about Cubase 6, because I didn’t upgrade yet. As Direct2d / DirectWrite are not available in XP and Cubase 6 still seems to run fine in XP for some users, IMO it’s very unlikely that Cubase uses any of them.

Conclusion: Windows 8 will probably improve nothing at all regarding graphics performance of Cubase.

that article has nothing to do with Cubase engine using GPU.
basically just more of the same idea as aero…

regardless of windows Cubase has to be able to address it…

there are some 3rd party plug like Nebula that use GPU but they far and few…

Absolutely, the article has nothing to do with Cubase per se. I was merely pointing out that improvements to Windows 8 has been made in the graphics department.

However, Windows Runtime (aka WinRT or formerly known as Metro) certainly is nothing like Aero. That was just an alternate interface, a glorified desktop if you will, whereas WR is an entire system. It is more comparable to iOS and Android.

WinRT is a runtime that allows to run Metro apps. Cubase is not a Metro app and has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with WinRT.

Do you know anything about Windows 8 or is it just funny to post wrong things all the time in a forum?


As far as your first sentence, you can read what I wrote in response to your identical post elsewhere.

Also, had you read my post above, you would have seen that I actually wrote “the article has nothing to do with Cubase per se”.

Sorry for your misunderstanding!

Here’s the real world fact…I have to rescale the zoom on the project window BEHIND my mixer window in order to bring meter ballistics back once a project is starting to push the CPU.

…so, I use third party metering like Wanes Dorrough not for any actual improvements, but because they obviously are using the otherwise idle GPU…I can have a project pushing 90% ASIO(CPU) usage and the Waves or Slate meter ballistics are fine. All built in Cubase metering is utterly POOCHED at that point. I end up using third party plug ins not for strictly sonic reasons, but because they respond even at high CPU loads whee Steinberg’s become useless.

Of course, I could build a faster system…but, I won’t. Not for built in meter ballistics–I’ll just use third party. But, that’s a silly omission of Steinberg code, IMO.