Upgraded to Mac 12-core, have same ASIO/CPU in Cubase

[Laserkraft]

I talked to a DAW hardware specialist from scan.co.uk.
In short:

1. All DAWs he knows, treat multi core realtime processing basically in the same way.
2. A single channel and all it’s subsequent routing is always handled in a single thread by a single core (so single core performance and speed are the bottleneck if you have channels with demanding VSTis or VST FX).
3. If your project’s load is less concentrated on (few) channels with very demanding plug-ins but rather has a big channel count, then you will benefit from having more cores, since all the different tracks can be handled in separate threads and thereby be assigned to different cores.

This generally applies to realtime processing in Audio. Non-realtime applications such as 3D rendering are different and the single core performance is less important.

There are also articles on processor choise in the Steinberg Knowledge base and in the Ableton online help to support this.

[In_Stereo]

@Laserkraft

I talked to a DAW hardware specialist from scan.co.uk.
In short:

1. All DAWs he knows, treat multi core realtime processing basically in the same way.
2. A single channel and all it’s subsequent routing is always handled in a single thread by a single core (so single core performance and speed are the bottleneck if you have channels with demanding VSTis or VST FX).
3. If your project’s load is less concentrated on (few) channels with very demanding plug-ins but rather has a big channel count, then you will benefit from having more cores, since all the different tracks can be handled in separate threads and thereby be assigned to different cores.

This generally applies to realtime processing in Audio. Non-realtime applications such as 3D rendering are different and the single core performance is less important.

There are also articles on processor choise in the Steinberg Knowledge base and in the Ableton online help to support this.

Huh. Well I recently came from Pro Tools (and sometimes Reaper) to Cubase 8.5 and immediately I noticed that it got knocked out far earlier than PT would. I’m sticking with Cubase in hopes that this issue is improved (hopefully in C9), but it’s a very real thing for me. Same computer, too. Last week I tried what someone suggested on another thread and I recreated a Reaper session to mimic a very large Cubase session exactly, since those programs both use the same VST’s folder. For me the difference was night and day, where Cubase was overloading and stuttering on playback with dropouts and Reaper was hovering at around 65% with no dropouts.

As I said I (would like to) stick with Cubase, so I hope whatever is causing this for myself and the other users here (seems to be both on Mac and PC??) gets fixed. I have a 6-core 2014 Mac Pro.

[Laserkraft]

There might be differences in efficiency in general or more specific use cases. I actually think it would be surprising if each DAW handled every use case equally efficient (i heard that Reaper is supposed to be good at this).
I was just referring to the principles of single vs multi core usage in DAWs in general.

[simsung]

same issue here: Big Sessions become very slow and laggy on 12 Core 3,33 ghz mac pro 10.12 Sierra on C9.
Also the CPU is the problem in my case - reaching 1500% usage. same session on windows 6 Core CPU is at 10% CPU usage.
Next test on macpro cubase vs logic : logic can load soooo much more instrument tracks. Cubase gets stucked at 95 tracks. Suddenly freezes and CPU raises from 200% to 1500% again.

After all ive read my conclusion is: cubase cannot handle those 12 Core CPU´s.
I wonder how that is on the new Macpro with newer CPU´s.

[TornadoTed]

I just finished a Mac swap, upgraded my Mac in the commercial studio I run and replaced my 2012 4 core 2.66 Mac Mini i7 with 16Gb of RAM in my home studio with the 2010 12 core 2.66 Mac Pro with 32Gb of RAM and the performance with Cubase is pretty much the same which is very disappointing. With Pro Tools a session that was on the edge on the Mac Mini is at 50% on Mac Pro so definitely worth the swap for Pro Tools but a waste of time and money for Cubase.

[askipper]

@simsung

same issue here: Big Sessions become very slow and laggy on 12 Core 3,33 ghz mac pro 10.12 Sierra on C9.
Also the CPU is the problem in my case - reaching 1500% usage. same session on windows 6 Core CPU is at 10% CPU usage.
Next test on macpro cubase vs logic : logic can load soooo much more instrument tracks. Cubase gets stucked at 95 tracks. Suddenly freezes and CPU raises from 200% to 1500% again.

After all ive read my conclusion is: cubase cannot handle those 12 Core CPU´s.
I wonder how that is on the new Macpro with newer CPU´s.

I’ve just moved from Ableton on a MBP 2015 i7 model with 16GB RAM to a Mac Pro 2010, 12 core, 64GB RAM machine and come ‘back’ to Cubase. I’m having awful CPU problems trying to load in 100+ Kontakt instances with say 10 groups - each group has 2 sends to same 2 FX channels - that’s it. All Kontakt instances set to purged samples for now as I didn’t want to fill all the RAM up until the template was created. I got to about 50 instances of Kontakt before I started seeing problems.

I have multicore support on/off, latency set from 128->256->512->768 to try and help - sessions freezing etc etc

I really don’t want to go back to Ableton as I’ve loved using Cubase on smaller projects - love the look, workflow, midi functionality etc etc but I need a 150 Kontakt instance template for my new work and thought this upgraded machine with 12 cores would be the solution. Seems not. Maybe I should use Ableton in rewire mode - don’t know.

I’m now trying a fresh install of Cubase 9 as it came across through Migration Assistant so there maybe issues there.

I also own Logic Pro X and it seems from this thread that Logic may handle it all better - maybe I need to learn that DAW - not used it in years but bought the upgrade just in case. Going to try once more with Cubase - if that doesn’t work then I’ll switch to Logic I think - I’ve only just come back to Cubase so I guess it’s not too much a jump to go with Logic instead. They are only tools and a means to an end after all and I’m sick of technical crap getting in the way of creative stuff. Just bought a CC121 from Steinberg too - DAMN I love that controller.

Bit fed up with it all to be honest.

[TornadoTed]

I am getting fed up with hopeless performance on my 12 core Mac. My latest project has 7 instances of GrooveAgent LE (my go to sampler), a couple of massive and a couple of Omnisphere and 8 audio tracks so pretty damn small really. I have used some processing, a few instances of EchoBoy, Decimort, Decapitator, a couple of aux send reverbs, Hammer DSP and The Glue on the mix bus. I keep getting overloads, stutters and crackles.

I took a screenshot of my activity monitor and Cubase and while Cubase is maxing out my Mac shows 85% idle. I have tried different buffer sizes, multi processor and AISO Guard on and off etc. and very little significant difference.

Just what is going wrong with my system?

[simsung]

i switched to mac pro 6.1 6Core - much better performance!! But yet the GUI feels better on windows.
The Comment of Steinberg from a call was: Most people use windows , so we mostly test only windows machines.

So yes: 6 Core is better than 12 core

[ErikWMP]

This might be interesting: I just bought a refurbished Mac Pro 6x3,33ghz mid 2010, 32gb ram, AND a Mac Pro 12x3,33ghz, mid 2010, 32gb ram, ati radeon 5770 on both machines, to use in parallel at two different studios I’m running. I was hoping and expecting the 12-core would slay the 6-core, so I created a test project in Cubase 9,5 to measure the power of each machine.

The test project consists of a set of folders. Each folder contains 8 individual stereo audio tracks, each audio track has the insert slot filled with 8x Fab filter Pro MB and 8x Oeksound Soothe (in 9,5 you have 16 slots. Soothe is btw one of the most CPU hungry plugins I own). Each group of 8 tracks is routed to a separate group channel.

I bought the refurbished 6-core from MacBank Pro in UK, and I don’t know what they feed their machines but the performance was mental to say the least. I managed to run 31(!) folders before the memory maxed out (the cpu still had some headroom left). That means 1984 instaces of Pro-MB + 1984 instaces of Soothe spread out over 248 audio tracks with the project running smooth, passing audio through all plugins.

Now the 12-core. Same system and audio SSD’s were switched over. Same test project. Result = 3 folders (192xPro-MB+192xSoothe over 24 channels). Then it was over.

There’s obviously a lot of different ways to test and compare, but at least with my setup the 6-core performed 10x better than the 12 core, in terms of running big sessions in Cubase.

[peder]

i have some issues with this and the new IMAC PRO (high sierra) CUBASE 8-9.5 and apollo thunderbolt

ANY NEWS??

[TNM]

@peder

i have some issues with this and the new IMAC PRO (high sierra) CUBASE 8-9.5 and apollo thunderbolt

ANY NEWS??

Just curious what your issues are and if they were sorted, as I have an imac Pro on the way but also use multiple Apollo thunderbolts.

[Tinsken]

I have a 12 core Mac Pro 5.1 with 32 gigs of ram, a pair of x5680 xeon processors, stock ATI Radeon HD 5770 1024 MB, SSD disks, Raid of 3x 3T, that makes 9 terabytes of 540Mb/sec. read/write huge sound library. My previous computer was an ordinary PC with K2700 I7 processor, 16 gigs of ram, running on Hackintosh Yosemite.
Cubase 10 Pro performed excellent on the old pc, but on the above mentioned Mac Pro with 12 cores and 24 threads, seems to use just one core! Whatever I do, I only get 115 % CPU usage on the latest Cubase 10.0.20 Pro.
On the latest logic Pro x, I get over 2300 %.
It runs at the full CPU usage and I can get about 300 tracks of virtual instruments.
The Cubase is simply impossible to use, because it is going at full processor use, on just few audio tracks,
Not to mention when I try to load VST instruments. A total disaster.
I tried with multiple audio interfaces, including the Mac’s sound card and never had a different results.
With each one of them, the Mac Pro performed almost the same, so the importance of audio interface considering this problem is not the case.
I tried other DAWs and the performance was always great.
Except cubase 10 Pro.
I am running a professional recording studio.
I use cubase from 1990 and it was my main DAW since 1997, when I switched from Digital tape recording (ADAT) to computer DAW, MacPro 9600, Mac G3 and all other Mac or hackintosh computers later.
What a disapointment.

Here are the benchmark results, so you can see that this Mac has excellent performance:

[Chriss]

Hi Tinksen,
that’s worrying. I have submitted a bug report in this issue (PFP-3289).
Could you possibly submit

1. a process sample of the Cubase process from the Activity Monitor, while experiencing the CPU overload? Here’s the how-to: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7959486
2. a screenshot (or several) of the Core load distribution, memory use, project setup
   We’ll then have a look into that.