well, it’s just factive cpu measuring of the same patches. especially when there’s much dsp/asio to do live handles the in/output much more effective. i had a patch with a lot of record~ and buffers objects, in standalone the cpu last was about 40-70% in optimized driver settings. in live the same patch was about 5-8%.

and the gui felt quicker, but maybe due to the better overall-speed of live.

on the possibility side max is an entirely different and greater world, no one would ever argue that.

live on empty projects makes 3% at maximum even with an old toshiba 800mhz notebook.

whatever, 8% on simple loaded buffers is high. when you load 2 impulse devices you have 16 slots, lots of editing and realtime manipulation ablities and it all takes 1% which ensures the sequencers timing. if you program a sampler with similar complexity in max/msp, and sequence it then well… bet you’ll have lots more.

i think it does not make too mch sense to substitute a daw with max if you need classic daw features and dimensions. i really did it for over an enntire year, optimizing the code again and again. but with the size of the patch speed problems grew too much. therefore m4l is the best of both worlds.

on windows you have the task manager for cpu monitoring.

being honest if max had a little better audio engine (regarding cpu load when using much msp and timing/clicking when sequencing audio really quick) and maybe some more own/internal straight scripting options no one would need a generalized standard daw anymore. everyone could easily build its own in a few weeks.