CPU Performance of USB sound cards

[dE|_]

In anybody's practical experience, do these outboard USB 'audio interfaces'
put more strain on the CPU & RAM than PCI cards?

If anybody has used an M-Audio Fast Track, I'd like to hear what you thought
of record/monitor latency.
(It's either that or their Delta 44 PCI card)

Cheers,

--
dE|_

PS I'm not taking that secure recording research any further but thanks a
bundle for all the input.

[Mike Rivers]

dE|_ wrote:
> In anybody's practical experience, do these outboard USB 'audio interfaces'
> put more strain on the CPU & RAM than PCI cards?

How would you measure "strain?" I doubt that anyone has, for example, ever
loaded up a project to the choking point with plug-ins when using a USB
interface,
then switched over to a PCI interface to see if it's better or worse.

In theory, there's more load on the "computer" with a USB interface
transferring
the same amount of audio data as a PCI interface because the USB bus needs
fairly constant attention whereas the PCI bus pretty much takes care of
itself. But
in practice, PCI audio interfaces by themselves don't seem to cause
problems.

[soundhaspriority]

"dE|_" > wrote in message
...
> In anybody's practical experience, do these outboard USB 'audio
> interfaces' put more strain on the CPU & RAM than PCI cards?
>
> If anybody has used an M-Audio Fast Track, I'd like to hear what you
> thought of record/monitor latency.
> (It's either that or their Delta 44 PCI card)
>
> Cheers,
>
First a comparison of USB and Firewire:

USB is a high CPU load, high latency interface.
Firewire is a low CPU load, low latency interface. Actually, it's zero load
with respect to the interface itself; the visible load is the CPU cost of
moving the data elsewhere in the machine.
USB is half duplex, meaning it can transmit only in one direction at a time.
Firewire is full duplex, meaning it has full bandwidth in both directions at
once.

But since you asked about PCI: It has the lowest latency of any of the
established interfaces, lower than Firewire. Only PCI-e is lower.

PCI: best
Firewire: very good
USB: not acceptable for low latency applications.

[dE|_]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> dE|_ wrote:
>> In anybody's practical experience, do these outboard USB 'audio
>> interfaces' put more strain on the CPU & RAM than PCI cards?
>
> How would you measure "strain?" I doubt that anyone has, for example, ever
> loaded up a project to the choking point with plug-ins when using a USB
> interface,
> then switched over to a PCI interface to see if it's better or worse.
>
> In theory, there's more load on the "computer" with a USB interface
> transferring
> the same amount of audio data as a PCI interface because the USB bus needs
> fairly constant attention whereas the PCI bus pretty much takes care of
> itself. But
> in practice, PCI audio interfaces by themselves don't seem to cause
> problems.

Okay should have said "Load" not "Strain". I don't buy PC Monthly mag.
You put your stamp on what myself and a buddy suspected, although doesn't
get spoken of in reviews.

You don't actually need that many plugins to make a PC fall on it's arse,
just bad handling of them. FL Studio 5 only takes about 5 Waves DX p-ins on
my machine before it starts stuttering. Cubase will do 12+ and not seen a
problem yet.

--
dE|_

[Sean Conolly]

"dE|_" > wrote in message
...
> You don't actually need that many plugins to make a PC fall on it's arse,
> just bad handling of them. FL Studio 5 only takes about 5 Waves DX p-ins
> on my machine before it starts stuttering. Cubase will do 12+ and not seen
> a problem yet.

That seems to be true with or without a USB interface. I use both PCI and
USB at diffrent times and the host seems to run out of gas at the same point
on both.

As far as Waves vs. VST, well all I use is VST and I was able to load a fair
number of EQs and effects on 12 tracks, even on an 1G P3 system.

Sean

[Alan[_3_]]

Soundhaspriority wrote:
> "dE|_" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In anybody's practical experience, do these outboard USB 'audio
>> interfaces' put more strain on the CPU & RAM than PCI cards?
>>
>> If anybody has used an M-Audio Fast Track, I'd like to hear what you
>> thought of record/monitor latency.
>> (It's either that or their Delta 44 PCI card)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
> First a comparison of USB and Firewire:
>
> USB is a high CPU load, high latency interface.
> Firewire is a low CPU load, low latency interface. Actually, it's zero load
> with respect to the interface itself; the visible load is the CPU cost of
> moving the data elsewhere in the machine.
> USB is half duplex, meaning it can transmit only in one direction at a time.
> Firewire is full duplex, meaning it has full bandwidth in both directions at
> once.
>
> But since you asked about PCI: It has the lowest latency of any of the
> established interfaces, lower than Firewire. Only PCI-e is lower.
>
> PCI: best
> Firewire: very good
> USB: not acceptable for low latency applications.
>
>
>
Note that PCI slots in motherboards are fast disappearing in favour of PCIe.

[Mike Rivers]

Sean Conolly wrote:

> That seems to be true with or without a USB interface. I use both PCI and
> USB at diffrent times and the host seems to run out of gas at the same point
> on both.

That seems to jive with my experience - that modern computers have
plenty of
gas to run the I/O, even I/O that involves a fair amount of busy work.
It's the
number crunching that takes up the resources. That's why I suggested an
experiment
using plug-ins to load the computer, then see if different I/O hardware
made a difference.

And, yes, PCI slots are getting rare, particularly in store-bought
computers, though there
still seem to be built-it-yourself motherboards with at least one legacy
PCI slot and the
BIOS to accommodate it. We've been saying this may be the last
generation for the last
three or four generations (two years maybe) and they're still hanging in
there. Maybe
PCI cards will be like vacuum tubes - for some applications, there's
just no better
substitute.

[dE|_]

"Sean Conolly" > wrote in message
...
> "dE|_" > wrote in message
> ...
>> You don't actually need that many plugins to make a PC fall on it's arse,
>> just bad handling of them. FL Studio 5 only takes about 5 Waves DX p-ins
>> on my machine before it starts stuttering. Cubase will do 12+ and not
>> seen a problem yet.
>
> That seems to be true with or without a USB interface. I use both PCI and
> USB at diffrent times and the host seems to run out of gas at the same
> point on both.
>
> As far as Waves vs. VST, well all I use is VST and I was able to load a
> fair number of EQs and effects on 12 tracks, even on an 1G P3 system.
>
> Sean

I've got a really old sound card, a Prodif Plus from the 90s but hung on to
it for it's ADAT connection with my 8-Track, not cheap. I've started
recording with Cubase now and it's just falling on it's arse. 2.8GHz P4 w/2G
RAM

There's 3 different ASIO drivers to pick from, one can accomodate loads of
plugins, even run Fruity Loops and the seriously cool Waves plugins but has
a shocking 625ms total latency!! Driver with lowest monitor latency of 20ms
stutters with plugins so it comes down to a driver switch and disable/enable
plugins between record and mix.

Time to upgrade I think.

--
dE|_