I’ve been running Cubase 8 on a 2011 imac with an i7 3,4ghz processor. Recently I have upgraded to a system with an i7-4790k 4ghz processor. In cpu benchmarks I get about 40-50 percent improvement over the old system so I had high expectations for Cubase.
Sadly after testing several projects I’ve come to the conclusion of an average improvement of only 7-10 percent. I’m checking the average performance in the performance meter in Cubase to make these conclusions. Very sad and poor result indeed. Should performance really scale this poorly over faster cpus on Cubase? I’m running osx like I said and I haven’t ever tried windows Cubase as osx is my environment.
This was a very disappointing update tried finding good benchmarks to run for compassion but they all need access to a variety of sample libraries and paid plugin I don’t have.
So I read up on the whole topic of ASIO meter and overall performance with threads and what not. Measuring cpu use instead to compare the two computers I get a puzzling result.
First off, 3 song projects:
Cpu usage playing the song at the same latency gets the new system an embarrassing 0-2% edge over the older system. EVEN WORSE than I first calculated when solely looking at the ASIO meter.
These projects do not use more cpu power than 10-15% on either machines, so I decided to make something heavier. I load up a channel with a kontakt 5 player, a lead-sample and add a multiband compressor to the channel. Then I duplicate this channel so there is 20 in total. Here the machines are starting to give different results:
20ch: new system claims 14% lower cpu use compared to the older system.
40ch: new system claims 20% lower cpu use.
60ch: new system claims 38% lower cpu use. Here the older system is just barely making it and when the mail.app puts a notification on the screen it gives up and won’t recover until tracks are deleted.
80ch: can’t run at all on old system, but works on new system with 86% cpu, further suggesting the new system is capable of somewhere around 35-40% more.
WHY HOWEVER does this only appear when under heavy load by an artificial project? I’m not even sure this would translate well to a real project with a much bigger variety in the tracks. Any suggestions here on how to interpret this?
Now tried finding this scaling in a normal project by duplicating tracks with a mixture of midi+audio tracks and I see absolutely NOTHING of it. The new system sticks to being about 2% better than the old. I hope I’m missing something or this is a total upgrade fiasko!