Exactly. If you are serious about music production Win 7 is still the way to go. Its just a lot more stable.
Well I wish Id found this thread before buying an 18 core i9 computer which will only run Windows 10 and crackles like a panful of bacon. Terrific. 40% CPU and pops every few seconds. Tried everything and nothing fixes it. Is there any hope that either Steinberg or Microsoft will resolve this?
Thanks for the advise.
Just a crappy focusrite 2i2
That really sucks - I feel your pain. At the end of the day, it’s Steinberg who need to sort this, not Microsoft.
Just for the record for anyone else looking for big fast multicore solution that really works, the other rig I have runs a Xeon 14 core 2673v3 and windows 7 and it is flawless. 25% cpu on a huge template 1700 tracks with VSL EP and CB9 running on the same machine. What an idiot I am! Should have stuck with that.
I think Steinberg should really think about putting this warning in the tech requirements as more and more W10 i9 multicore computers wont run CB. Currently their tech requirements are simply not true.
Is it microsoft or Steinberg that have to do something about this multicore system thing?
I Think this is redicilous that we have such problem. Invest in an expensive computer cus we want a better daw, and then it shows that there is limits in the software/OS that make the daw worse instead. If it is MS problem then i cant understand how it was better in win 7 since it is not new. This new win 10 should be far better, at least better for us who upgraded everything and had the hope of it been better than the older OS. IF its Steinbergs problem i also dont understand why it was better in win 7. Im not a technical guy but when people say it has something with mmcss to do then i gyess its MS to blame…or am i wrong?
Its steinbergs issue. MS will always be moving the goal posts, with updates, etc. Cubase means nothing to them, its merely a drop in the ocean. Steinberg need to keep on top of MS architecture and updates and keep tweaking with their own updates. At the moment it’s a joke.
Are these dropouts in Cubase 9 too, or only in 9.5?
Why can I use all 20 logical cores on my i7-6950X without having issues with dropouts? The latency setting usually is 128 samples.
Drop outs on 9 and 9.5. re the 6950 - good question. It may only become obvious at higher processor loads or there’s more to this
This system can also handle relativley high workload on all 20 logical cores and I haven’t even disabled the power-saving features in the BIOS. I only use a “High performance” Power Plan setting in Windows wich is automatically switched by Process Lasso when i start Cubase.
The only way you can / could get lower latency then 128 is by setting hypertrading to OFF in the bios…
There are a couple of tweeks in the BIOS that might help. I got these from support:
Make sure those three are disabled. I think the C-States on did the most for me.
Also, limiting the number of cores used by Cubase can help. See this article, but support showed me a registry edit which is the better way of doing it. Ask them as I am not sure how they worked out the number.
Finally, there is a problem with Dropbox, of all things. One of the dropbox DLLs can cause issues. Just turn off dropbox sync while working, if you have it.
None of this is a perfect solution, but it may get you out of the mud!
It is a real mix, to be honest. MS have introduced some issues with Windows 10 and the way it is handling audio. PLEASE don’t ask me for details - someone pointed me to a MS dev discussion that was SO over my head!!!
However, it is something that is messing things up, not just Cubase, and they are looking at how it is fixed. Maybe in Redstone 4 (April update)? I haven’t updated yet, so I have no idea.
In my case with a 14-core i9, turning of hyperthreading made no difference. Disabling C-States did, however
I could also work on my system with a latency of 32 samples, but not with the same amount of real-time workload (VSTi’s/PlugIns).
The overall performance in Cubase becomes significantly worse if i deactivate HT.
Besides, using Soundblaster or a professional Audio-Interface can make a big difference in terms of Audio-Performance.
I am getting very mixed results at the moment. I am using a Clarett 8pre Thunderbolt. So, for instance, I can load a Hollywood Orchestra with 20+ instances of PLay and that works well.
But heavy latency devices like Ozone 8 cause me headaches. And I am getting lagging if I have too many windows open.
I can’t get down to 32 - as soon as I open an audio channel to input, it goes nuts.
So, a very confused picture at the moment.
Actually 64 samples should be more than low enough for most usecases anyway. In my case only the UAD-PlugIns can’t work below 64 samples.
The Soundblaster Xfi is a good card and goes to 1ms and runs like a charm. Most cases the CPU load and use of many VSTi/VST plugins will run the processorload over multicore’s. The Soundblaster Driver is as steasy as can be, a good test is Wavelab and a very very low latency setting, it works. But like all are struggling because they want and Processorload/VSTi/VST and Low Latency. The middle is about 8ms of latency, where on a modern machine i have plenty speed left and no probs. There was a post that a users found 8ms not enough… and because of his classical music education and use of protools was debunking Cubase for not having a lower latency. So i quess it is more up to the user. I say 8ms latency and a speedy system is what is a good middle road. Also expensive soundcards can have BAD drivers. And USB is not as fast as you think. Dropping an internal card might save you headroom for latency en speed… For instance many users have a Focusrite USB Audio, well the drivers where so bad i dropped it straight back to the SB and sticked with that. The Drivers are sometimes more important then the audio divice…
I have had similar problems for different reasons. Aside from music, I also do voiceovers. Hearing even the tiniest delay is really offputting.
However, this is not a major problem with interfaces like the Focusrite because they have internal DSP and a good mix/monitoring system.
I did try the Presonus Quantum with Cubase. That has no internal mix, and despite their boasts of zero latency, it was just impossible. Used with Studio One, it was better, and just about passable, but not comfortable like direct monitoring.
I dream of the day when this is all as easy as it was with a good old analogue multi-track! haha