volker böhm

i haven't done a lot of cpu util. comparison between 4 and 5 so far, 

while trying out an old max4 patch (that uses a bunch of waveform~ 

objects) in max5 i noticed that my computer started melting pretty 

running the attached test patch on my computer ( ppc pb g4, 1.5GHz, 

processor load (activity monitor or top): 30 - 35%

processor load: 75 - 85%, with occasional spikes to over 90%

while i know that waveform~ always seemed to draw a lot of power, 

there was the (undocumented) buftime message, which made the decision 

between update rate and cpu util. somewhat manageable.

unfortunately this message doesn't work in max5 (max is not 

complaining about unknown message, but doesn't change the update rate 

i haven't done a lot of cpu util. comparison between 4 and 5 so far,  
but this one really seems ridiculous.
while trying out an old max4 patch (that uses a bunch of waveform~  
objects) in max5 i noticed that my computer started melting pretty  
soon :(

running the attached test patch on my computer ( ppc pb g4, 1.5GHz,  
os 10.4.11) i got the following results:
max4
cpu: 0%
processor load (activity monitor or top): 30 - 35%

max 5:
cpu: 2%
processor load: 75 - 85%, with occasional spikes to over 90%

while i know that waveform~ always seemed to draw a lot of power,  
there was the (undocumented) buftime message, which made the decision  
between update rate and cpu util. somewhat manageable.
unfortunately this message doesn't work in max5 (max is not  
complaining about unknown message, but doesn't change the update rate  
of waveform~ either).

max5-waveform-cpu-hog-what-happened-to-buftime-message

On 27 Apr 2008, at 16:47, Klaas-Jan Govaart wrote:

>> running the attached test patch on my computer ( ppc pb g4, 1.5GHz,

>> os 10.4.11) i got the following results:

>> processor load (activity monitor or top): 30 - 35%

>> processor load: 75 - 85%, with occasional spikes to over 90%

> max 5 cpu 1-2%, activity monitor 83-88%

On 27 Apr 2008, at 16:47, Klaas-Jan Govaart wrote:
>>
>> running the attached test patch on my computer ( ppc pb g4, 1.5GHz,
>> os 10.4.11) i got the following results:
>> max4
>> cpu: 0%
>> processor load (activity monitor or top): 30 - 35%
>>
>> max 5:
>> cpu: 2%
>> processor load: 75 - 85%, with occasional spikes to over 90%
>>
>
> 10.4.11, mbp 2.16GHz:
>
> max 4 cpu 0%, activity monitor 19%
> max 5 cpu 1-2%, activity monitor 83-88%

any other takers?
is someone from cycling looking into it?

Any news on this front? Has waveform~'s cpu usage gone down after any of the updates? Or is it like the multislider cpu issue - Inherent to JUCE engine, and not improving anytime soon?

Any news on this front? Has waveform~'s cpu usage gone down after any of the updates? Or is it like the multislider cpu issue - Inherent to JUCE engine, and not  improving anytime soon?

On 15 Oct 2008, at 15:33, Klaas-Jan Govaart wrote:

> Any news on this front? Has waveform~'s cpu usage gone down after 

> any of the updates? Or is it like the multislider cpu issue - 

> Inherent to JUCE engine, and not improving anytime soon?

the buftime message is back since 5.0.5 (maybe earlier), which makes 

the update rate of [waveform~] manageable again.

i haven't made any direct comparisons between 4.6 and 5.0.5, yet, but 

the default setting of 500 ms seems to give reasonable cpu measures 

On 15 Oct 2008, at 15:33, Klaas-Jan Govaart wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Any news on this front? Has waveform~'s cpu usage gone down after  
> any of the updates? Or is it like the multislider cpu issue -  
> Inherent to JUCE engine, and not  improving anytime soon?
>
> Any thoughts appreciated.
> kjg

the buftime message is back since 5.0.5 (maybe earlier), which makes  
the update rate of [waveform~] manageable again.
i haven't made any direct comparisons between 4.6 and 5.0.5, yet, but  
the default setting of 500 ms seems to give reasonable cpu measures  
on my system using max 5.
volker.


max5: waveform~ = cpu hog? what happened to buftime message?