Found a way to stabilize Nvidia systems

i9 7900x all cores 4.3 ghz
m.2 boot drive, all SSD
windows 10 pro
64 gb 2666 ddr4 fury ram
nvidia gtx 1080 ti
cubase 10 pro

I’ve been having stability issues since I got this program. As it is, I can overclock my system to 4.5 ghz on all ten cores, but I have to bring it back down to 4.3 because Cubase is the only program that crashes my computer at those speeds. I’m monitoring CPU temperature and load, and it rarely goes over 35% and 70 degrees. There was NOTHING but ASIO “real time spikes” despite this low usage.

Anyway, I figured out something that might be of interest. Turns out the issue might be GPU related rather than CPU.

I went into Nvidia control panel, and made sure that Cubase 10 was set to “max performance” rather than “optimal power.” I also made sure “openGL” was set to on rather than auto.

When I opened cubase again, I’ll still get the wayward spike when switching presets on waves plugins and stuff, but it’s gone from a spike every couple of seconds to a spike every 10 minutes or so.

I’m going to try to ramp the CPU back up to 4.5 ghz and see if it’s stable now.

I hope this is helpful to anyone.

Apparently the GPU was using an active cooling and power consumption system which was screwing with Cubase.


Thanks, definitely going to try this.

Old news I`m afraid but well done.


it isnt quite the same thing as that thread. for one thing, at a buffet of 42 samples or higher, I dont get dropouts really(I run at 64). the real time peak goes nuts but I do not hear a difference…my computer just randomly shuts itself down after a while… seems like the CPU is not happy but like I said when monitoring it is not too hot nor is it loaded up too much.

fixing this GPU thing took care of the real time spikes so I wonder if that’s what was causing the self shutdown. I have yet to see.

Self shutdown, without an OS crash, will almost certainly be a CPU overheat protection given the overclocking. A little surprised your motherboard isn’t beeping prior to shutdown to let you know.

Yeah it never beeps, and the weird thing is, coretemp and task manager are running. No individual core takes a load more than 40%, the temperatures don’t exceed 70c, and NO OTHER APP crashes the pc! It’s ONLY cubase, and it seems to happen randomly if I’m OCed above 4.3 ghz.

I agree it seems like a CPU overheat protection thing, but the CPU isn’t overheating, unless task manager and coretemp are not able to accurately monitor or something.

The active power management of NVidia is a known potential problem for cubace

There may be other problems on this rig but eliminating a known possible problem is always a wise step

It still had to be explained why it is actually working in this case


Hi, OCer here too but on an old system, Q9550 @3.6ghz and modded X5470 to s775 @4ghz.
Recently with a build I had some stability issues and it turned out to be core temp or real temp that caused the crashes, or maybe HWmonitor. I should have documented it, cause can’t remember which one for sure.

When Windows suddenly shuts down without any warning it’s usually not because of CPU overheating. Because if that where the case it will have time to report it’s approaching this threshold. And you say yourself it’s never really overheated when you check. This case rather sounds like it’s caused by instability.

CPU overheating is not the only issue you can run into when overclocking your system. CPU and memory usually need a little more voltage and the memory timings and speed might also have to be adjusted. CPU has a massive amount of settings that can and sometimes must be fine tuned to squeeze the extra bit out of your system. However, some embedded and/or added hardware like USB bus, PCIe bus, add-on cards like soundcards, etc. might not be able to function correctly when stressed to this limit even though your processor is still nowhere near overheating. Even your power supply can cause issues if it can’t deliver enough ‘stable’ power at a given moment. Also bear in mind that the overclocking limit is determined by the weakest link in the chain of hardware and applications you use. Being able to play games and do other tasks at 4.5 GHZ doesn’t necessarily mean that everything will work at that speed?

Interesting. I do have a 1000W G3 EVGA power supply, and it’s on ECO mode, in an attempt to keep the thing quiet. Maybe the active cooling on the power supply is causing a problem in cubase? At this point I have no idea. I also have a network PCI card. I could try turning that off while using Cubase. This is just so annoying. I bought this system to be silent and do crazy audio work. Because of the PSU being loud and Cubase shutting down my PC, it’s been nothing but trouble.

Also try setting NVidia Threaded optimisation to off

Have you mentioned what your audio interface is?


Be aware that some temp monitoring software can create huge interrupts that manifest in real time peaks.

the problems happened before I started monitoring, so if they’re contributing, they’re certainly not causing anything.

I have a Roland Studio-Capture USB 2.0 audio interface.

I have both power supply (Corsair 850W) and Video card (GT1060 MSI) with semi active fans. In practice I’ve never hear the fans rotate. And that’s because I choose not to squeeze every last bit out of my system. Mine is running everything effortlessly I want on 4.3 MHZ with 3200 MHz memory and Cubase 10 has been a big improvement on CPU resources.

It seems to me you need to ask yourself this very important question first: “Do I want to engage in making music with Cubase? Or is it more important to me to make Cubase work with a predefined overclocked CPU speed?” Because to me you seem to be somewhat obsessed with achieving a certain ‘CPU clock speed’ that Cubase doesn’t agree with. I’d say, forget about all this nonsense and focus on music and not on the 0.x GHZ extra speed you might achieve? But that’s really up to you and with that being said…

I know all to well that one can loose himself in ‘system optimization’’ because I’ve been there over and over again. The bottom line is, that its not really worth the effort with today’s systems like X299 and i9 as it was in the past. Out of the box these systems already perform more than efficient for most people. If you want or feel you need more? Just run the embedded overclock tuner from the bios and chances are you’ll gain an extra 25-30% performance? But as usual this always comes with a price. More power consumption, more heath to deal with and worst of all…the chance of instability? But in general it will work on most systems and considerably boost the performance of your system.

All equipment and drivers tested today are tested on ‘standard’ systems. Most manufacturers will confirm that all their product work fine on the X299 chipset with I-7900 that normally operates on 3.3 MHZ. However, not one manufacturer will guarantee that his product will work fine on the same system running at overclocked speeds! So if you go down that route you’re basically on your own. And if you still choose to do so you need to have a good plan.

There’s basically 2 ways of approaching overclocking; Synthetic and Functional. Synthetic: means going for absolute numbers. It means you want to achieve the highest ‘number’ in your overclock regardless of any applications. If Windows starts and you can click any item it means you have a successful Synthetic overclock. Functional; means that you’re aiming to make an application work at the highest clock speed possible. So in your case this would mean Cubase 10 Pro.

So by now you might have figured out that you’re actually a ‘disturbed’ overclocker? :slight_smile: You’re aiming for absolute numbers and at the same time desperately want this number to work with an application that obviously doesn’t. So you’re actually flogging a dead horse. but bear with me…

I’m going to share an important secret with you. A golden rule to overclocking (functionally! And actually the only right way to go in real life!)? It’s actually all over the Internet but often overlooked by people that desperately want their clock speed to work with applications instead of adjusting their clock speed to work with the applications they want to use.

The golden rule to overclocking lookes like this:

  1. Always make notes of all the results in the following tests you are going to do! Clock speeds, tweaks, other adjustments…
  2. Start with overclocking your system to a realistic clock speed like using the embedded bios tuning wizard for your given system.
  3. Determine what application(s) are the most demanding and you would use the most in real live. Stress/test all the ‘demanding’ applications you plan to use on this system. (Not for one minute! But actually for days and how you would normally use these applications).
  4. If all goes well, proceed and increase the clock speed by small increments and keep testing over days…
  5. …Until you’ve reached the point where things start to fail.
  6. Congratulations! You have reached the limit at which your system fails to successfully work with your particular application(s)! (You could try to update the program or it’s associated drivers but that means you have to start testing all over again)!
  7. Turn your clock speed down to the last test where it did work flawlessly and this is the speed you can safely work with!

In the end you’ll probably ask yourself if it was really worth all the testing to add maybe 0.1 or 0.2 GHZ of clock speed on top of the initial factory overclock? I can tell you from experience it’s absolutely not! You really won’t see or feel the difference in real life. But hey, this is the only way to savely ‘overclock’ and this is the actual real world anticlimax result! And you really seem to be determined to get this to work with Cubase? If you still have that ambition after reading all of the above, I wish you all the best of luck!

The moral of this story is; never ever just go cranking up the processor speed and assume that a set overclock speed should always work just because it works with ‘some other’ applications or your neighbor seems to have it working in his system. Test, test and test it again and confirm it on your own system for yourself! Especially when working with data. No one wants corrupt CPR files, do they?

The real moral of the story is, and that’s coming from me personally: “What’s the point dude? Do you want to make music or waste your life on getting Cubase to work on 0.x GHZ higher processor speed?” You won’t notice any difference anyway. So just let it go! Also Let the whole concept go that your system ‘could potentionally’ perform better by doing this or that tweak? It takes to much energy away from you that is better spent on more productive/creative things than tweaking a system that actually wont really improve after the tweaking? Hell, even working on the stock 3.3 MHZ with a I-7900 is always better than trying to tweak something that doesn’t really improve after tweaking!

Furthermore, you have no support! Only you can determine if applications A, B and/or C work with a given clock speed with your particular hardware? And remember, you’re on your own trying this on your own system and applications and you can’t blame me, nor the vendors of your hard & software for any malfunction resulting from this!

I’m not only posting this for you, but hope others and future user will benefit from this? To realize how pointless overclocking to the absolute limit can be.

the only reason I want the clock speed higher is to make cubase perform smoothly at low latency with little to no real time spikes.

even at 4.3 ghz, there is an occasional dropout at 64 samples, and there are still a fair amount of real time spikes.

I got my system so it would have enough headroom to cleanly run cubase so that heavy projects were free of workflow related problems.

1 Like

64 samples is not so bad IMO in a usb audio based rig for a system with that many cores to synchronise.
Have you actually measured the in/out latency ?

Works fine in windows 10

64 samples gives me less that 9ms round trip or about the same as a 2.5 meters from another band member or the same distance via a lead into an amp and back to ears and miles less than any real life key board.

If really low latency is your goal you need fast processing which tends to mean small number of cores running fast.
For DAW power you need lots of core which tends to run slower both due to heat and core/thread synchronisation issues

Your getting the balance right IMO when your getting the Cubase performance meter showing very high on the non real time part of the meter and head room on the real time part and CPU is 90% or more at the same time on all threads/ cores with clean output and a still swiftly responsive graphics, mouse and other controllers at the minimum latency you can work with.

If you use direct monitoring that will be completely different from a real time recorded percussion track on a vsti recorded in head phones

I have no trouble personally using a 128 buffer all round ( measured at 14.8ms) and have never had any latency complaint from a tracking client even not using direct monitoring with the client in headphones with a bit of reverb on it.


OT latency on an analogue live rig from mic to singer via a wedge monitor is around 10ms with in the ear and digital systems higher than that.
People seem to manage