New build with 13000K

Actually, it is possible to process serial plugins in parallel. Cakewalk does this with their plugin load balancing, there is a nice explanation in their manual (also describing the limitations and trade-offs).


It’s “possible” but is there a benefit? Even if you put plugin A on one thread, and Plugin B on another thread, the information from plugin A still needs to be processed and then sent to Plugin B even if it’s on another thread.

So it’s not realllllly parallel is it? I think the benefit perhaps depends on the intensity and amount plugins on one channel and in the project to prevent singular threads from getting bogged down. It’s not really parallel though, it’s not possible, otherwise for an example, Plugin B (compressor), wouldn’t respond to changes in the EQ curve of Plugin A.

That’s my understanding, and also, because CPUs are so powerful now and thread counts are so high, that sort of distribution isn’t really necessary. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Read the linked document, it is pretty well explained there, also the limitations and scenarios where it wouldn’t work or bring no benefit.

There is a clear benefit, depending on what the plugins are doing and if they are dependent on each other. To make it simple, there are two possible cases.

One is, there are plugins where the output of one plugin is required as input to the other plugin. These plugins can be started on separate CPUs and as soon as the first plugin starts output of processed data, the second plugin can take them and do its work. This is something called pipeline processing, which is kind of the simplest way of using parallel processing.

Then there is real parallel processing in case you have a plugin that is loaded in two or more flows. In this case this plugin can be started multiple times, on multiple CPUs and run fully parallel, processing independent data from independent flows. If the output data of theses plugins need to be processed by another plugin in the chain, the data need to be combined (gather) and then sent into that plugin.

There are many ways of combining data back to a single stream, for example something that is called Interprocess Communication.
In reality this is much more complicated, but it is the basics of parallel processing and standard technology these days.

The linked document above is explaining exactly this kind of processing and why you get a benefit.

The question is, what do you mean by CPU. Is it just the chip you put into a mainboard, or is it the number of cores this chip has? If you have a high load of threads, what do you think who is going to run these threads?

The reason Intel, AMD and Arm(Apple) are adding more cores to the CPUs is to allow more parallel processing, pure CPU power is limited by physical boundaries.

1 Like

Not trying to be a smartass, but actually trying to understand here. But if that’s true what you’re saying… how did they do it in ‘the old days’ with just single core processors? They had multiple tracks too.

1 Like

The process on a single core machine is pretty much the same, except plugins were way less cpu intensive back then and you could use fewer of them
Very simplified explanation:
Say you have four tracks each with a few plugins on. Now cubase will create four compute threads, one for each track, and each is responsible for computing the plugins on the track (sequentially).
Now if you have a CPU with four cores, the operating system can distribute those four threads evenly on those four cores. If one of those cores saturates though, because of too many demanding plugins in a row (or other tasks), you have a problem.
If you only have one CPU, the operating system will schedule the four Cubase threads on just that one CPU, but of course not in parallel as it could do with four cores, just alternating… Given the same set of plugins, you will run into dropouts way earlier than with four CPUs, of course.

And what about this official post from Steinberg

If I am not mistaken this should be an issue also in the 13th Gen.
Did you need to deactivate any of the efficiency cores?

The title has it all, it says “or newer”, which means 12000 or higher. All new Intel processors use this architecture.

Hi… No… Everything is running stock… Except for the cpu which I am OC’ing… P-Cores running at 5.6, E-cores running at 4.3. Aside from that the entire stack from mobo on up is stock.

1 Like

Im using 12700K in Cubase 11 Pro since March this year and I dont find any performance issues at all - in heavy projects with hundreds of plugins, synths and over 150 tracks all works smooth and fine. I use Windows Maximum Performance power plan.