BIG difference at cpu load on same patch, between windows 7 and OS X
i am currently building a patch on a windows computer, and from times to times when i am not home, i continue no my macbook. When the patch runs on Windows the dsp monitor inside max shows about 10-12 %, and the task manager, show a CPU load of around 12-14%.
For the same patch, on my macbook pro, the max dsp monitor shows about the same, 11-14%… but activity monitor, shows max using 90-140%.
Windows equipment: Windows 7 32bit, i5 3,1 GHz, 4giga ram 1333mhz
Macbook equipment: Mac IS X Mountain Lion, Intel core 2 duo 2,66 GHz, 4giga ram 1066mhz.
I know there should be a small difference in the CPU load between the two machines.. but that much?
Does anyone has a problem like this? Any suggestions where the source of the problem might be?
I am using enough UI objects like [meter~] and [pictctrl] for custom knobs and buttons. Could this be the problem??
Also, i did the OS X upgrade from Snow Leopard to Mountain Lion recently, so the patch worked under both operating systems, and i think that i did not have that problem with Snow Leopard.
Any help would be much appreciated!
no opinions on the subject ?
Did you measure the CPU usage just after launching Max? If that’s the case your likely to be looking at the CPU utilization for the database update which happens in the background in another thread.
I did waited a while before checking the cpu usage in case max had something initialized when launched that used a lot o f "extra" cpu. The measurements I saw were under the same conditions on both machines, opened the patch and dsp, left it running for some ttime then checking. It is not so much the big cpu usage but the difference between the two that is weird and bothering. When o built a patch I expect to run the same under both operating systems. Anyway, thanks for the reply!
Still having an issue with interface smoothness between OS’s.
The same patch, running on a 2012 Macbook Pro with i7, is far more glitchier than on a Windows 2007 laptop with a Celeron cpu…
The DSP cpu is ok (about 20%), But the patch uses more than 110 % on the activity monitor.
I presume, this is because of UI elements of which I do have a lot. But, why the big difference from OS to OS ? On the PC’s task manager it showed less than 30%.
Is there a way to optimize my interface, some guidelines, to avoid a slow behavior (Which, bu the way runs FINE on a Windows PC, despite the lower system characteristics…) on my patches?
I tend to develop my patches on my Windows PC, so it is not a nice thing when a patch that behaves smoothly, suddenly becomes glitchy on a at least same capabilities computer.
What are the graphics cards in both laptops? Are you using only standard Max objects or also 3rd party externals?
is it a retina machine?
if so, i believe the recommendation for optimal graphics performance on retina devices at the cost of resolution, is to disable retina support on the Max application. Get Info on the application in the finder and check the box for "Open in Low Resolution".
I think the MacBook had a 650M, and the Windows laptop I don’t remember, probably worse than a 650M… I do not think it is the retina resolution the problem, as the same behavior is consistent on two other macbooks, a 2009 and 2011 MacBook pros. I’ll get back to you about the Low Resolution option…
I’ve noticed some weird discrepancies in cpu usage between mac and pc as well. Unfortunately I have no idea what to do about it. do you notice significant clunkyness running the patch?
nearly every patch runs faster on windows. you can test it even with simple max-patches not using ANY dsp/msp stuff. i have made a carefully programmed workstation patch (high time/transport resolution and calculations, 8 midi devices, live-recording, gui, etc.) which takes 2-5% on a dual core 3,2 ghz (4gb ram) and 10-15% on a 1,6 ghz single cpu notebook (1,2 gb ram) when running at 150 bpm. both machines use 32-bit windows xp/sp 3.
on my macbook (2,2ghz, 4gb ram, 64 bit, lion, but also on snow leopard which i had installed before) the absolutely same patch takes 40-50%.
mac osx is much more fun to use, but it really can’t stay in the background and concentrate on the maths. it seems to reflect everything on it’s own again and therefore slows down other processes. the disk system (just compare windir-stat and disk inventory) and even the network are slower as well. it takes care a lot, but needs resources for all of this.