TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Just bought a powerful computer but its slower than my old crappy laptop?! Fl Studio
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Just bought a powerful computer but its slower than my old crappy laptop?! Fl Studio

This is almost making me sick.
I bought an emachine from tigerdirect.com. This computer was built to be roughly 8 times quicker than my laptop. If someone can figure this out PLEASE help me. Its not an easy question but it should be.
Specs (new pc): Pent D dual core processor 3.0 ghz.
2.0 gb ram.
500 gb hardrive.
Mach Speed P4MST-890 mother board

It was suppose to be an improvement on my laptop:
Mobile AMD Sempron 3000+ 1800mhz
A little over 1/2gb ram
80gb hardrive

Now on the new (top) computer I'm having 90% cpu loads with 2 vsts when my laptop can easily handle around 8-10 (similiar loaded patches). Its NOT buffer latency and they both have the same soundcards. When I run a free benchmark test (PC wizard 2008) its giving my new computer a much higher rating (1300 compared to 800) BUT it is not working even close to how it should.

I called the manufacturer of the parts and they said it can't be a hardware problem. I've asked people and noone has a clue. The short question is how is it possible I have a powerhouse computer that is running tons slower than a slower computer?
I'm losing my mind trying to figure this out and I'm just lost. If anyone has any idea I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks - Rox

Check your Bios out, make sure all is configured properly.

Kopi =o.

Linked from the FAQ:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...&postid=5282717

If that doesn't answer your question, nothing will.

Since I heard you say the words "buffer latency", I have to wonder if maybe you're using some crappy built-in audio controller and DirectSound.

Also, I know this isn't what you want to hear, but eMachines and the Pentium D both suck. You really should have picked up at least a Core Duo if you want to do music production. And eMachines... ick. Did you at least remove all the pre-installed crapware?

Edit: One other thing, I'm looking at the specs and... how exactly do you figure it's going to be 8 times quicker?

Re: Just bought a powerful computer but its slower than my old crappy laptop?! Fl Stu

Enable multithreaded generator processing. It should help a bit.
Also, what sound card do you have? If its onboard or made by Creative, it is a piece of shit and therein lies your problem.

I just want to know why you bought a Pentium D? Core 2 Duo's are dirt cheap these days. Dirt cheap.

Could possibly be the soundcard. Also, how many background processes are there?

Sorry to hi-jack this thread, but anyone have any fucking idea why audio would stutter during DVD and CD playback, when for 1 1/2 years there has been no issues, and everyhting else handles fine?

Video is unaffected during playback, just audio stutters.

It's mad gay, yo.

i did the same thing...if its a laptop make sure that on the batter its on high performance...i had mine on low for about a month until i found out i was using a 1/10 of its power

quote:

Originally posted by Oreoh142 i did the same thing...if its a laptop make sure that on the batter its on high performance...i had mine on low for about a month until i found out i was using a 1/10 of its power

could you explain this comment to the technically challenged.... thanks

quote:

Originally posted by knight54 could you explain this comment to the technically challenged.... thanks

um..yeah....i guess

ok so if you have a laptop there are features for the labtop to use X% of its rram and cpu which burns up the battery X times faster. When you first by a laptop, its set to average, so you use an average amount of your CPU and RRAM and your battery last an average amount. If you click on the battery symbol (different for all computers this is just mine) you can change it to high performance where you use more of rram and CPU but your battery goes to hell (which doesn;t matter if it is always plugged in)

Let me guess... It came with Vista, you're using the junk onboard audio and you thought "mach speed" was something more than a marketing tactic?

How is it the laptop and your new desktop have the same audio? they may have a similar sound chip, but implementations vary.

quote:

if its a laptop

The P4MST-890 is a $60 Via P4M890-based microatx desktop board.

Ok the computer was built from a kit and the only software that was installed was windows xp and virus protection (same basics on my laptop).
When I said it had the same card as my laptop I meant that I'm using Realteck HD audio output on both. My brother is a computer freak and use to build computers but now he manages websites for hi end companies like kodak and what not. I would definetly say he's some what of a genious when it comes to computers.
The one thing he mentioned was the bios (like somebody said) but than he mentioned why it wouldnt be the bios and had some long explanation why (that I can't remember).
I know most of the basic ways to conserve cpu like latency, converting to wav, sharing fx for channels that was mentioned in the link. And all though they all have an effect on cpu its extremely minor in comparison to how this computer is performing. The 8'xs faster estimation was roughly how much quicker my brother said it would be than my laptop *before I bought everything.
We even got into the discussion that people can make weak processor chips that lie to the computer and say they're something like a pentium 4 when its really a Mobile Sempron AMD. But the fact is EVEN with a weak chip like that my computer should STILL be a ton quicker.

I have more ram, a huge harddrive, and a dual core processor. And its running at like 1/10th the speed as my laptop which has a crappy Mobile Sempron processor.
I've ran bench marks that rate it a 1300 though and my laptop an 800. So I cannot figure out how its still running so much slower than my laptop. And when I say slow I mean opening one vst eats most of the cpu, EVEN with multithreading. Just from a logical standpoint with the hardware I have I can't see how thats possible.
I'll probaly wind up giving the computer back to my brother so he can look at it but he keeps saying it has to be a software issue with FL Studio that I'm overlooking. The only thing thats unfamiliar to him is FL Studio's software. I've been using FL for years and thought I knew everything but something still is just not right. I could have spent wayyy less $$ at bestbuy and still got a faster crappy dell with a lot slower hardware specs. Makes no sense. =[

Dude, you're using the shitty Realtek onboard audio. That's clearly your problem. Read the thread I linked above before posting another reply, please.

Dual core will only help you if your sequencer makes proper use of both cores. FL is terrible at this (yes, I know, VST instruments are sort-of multithreaded, wonderful).

RAM won't really affect performance unless you're running out of it. If your old computer wasn't starved for RAM - and it probably wasn't, unless you make heavy use of samplers - then adding more wouldn't have much of an effect. It certainly wouldn't improve performance by a factor of 2 as you seem to believe.

Hard disk size will have no effect whatsoever on performance. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Do you even know what these "PC Wizard" benchmarks are telling you, or do you just think that because one number is higher than the other, everything is going to be several times faster?

You *could* have saved yourself a whole lot of coin - not by buying a Dell, which would have just landed you in the same spot, but by buying a proper audio interface from M-Audio, MOTU, RME, or even some low-end POS from PreSonus or Creative. Don't blame the computer, or your brother; next time do your research before shelling out the cash.

I'm sure you can still salvage this one and end up with a decent-performing machine by shelling out another $150-$200 for a proper sound card. And DON'T ask us which one - there are enough threads about that already.

The problems not the sound card. And as shitty as you say Realteck is I never had a problem on my laptop with it in anyway, which is why I don't care for buying a better one.
If I have a pentium d running a crapload slower than a sempron amd with the same sound card thats a problem that your link has no purpose for as its not a basic or simple problem.
This barebones kit should be smoking the crap out of my laptop and its barely 10% as powerful. I would have never motioned to buy a new computer if I didn't break the motherboard on my laptop. So because I had to get a new one I figured I up the hardware and get something faster.. now it turns out I can't even get 2 virtual instruments running w/out a freeze out.
I'm going to bring it back to my brother to see if he can fix it and if not I'm selling it on ebay.

I suggest you listen to Diginut, he knows his shit

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox The problems not the sound card. And as shitty as you say Realteck is I never had a problem on my laptop with it in anyway, which is why I don't care for buying a better one.

Ok. For a start, Realtek produce many different sound cards. Infact, Realtek don't even produce soundcards at all, they just produce the chipsets. Hence, whatever is in this computer is probably shitter than the shit that was in your laptop.

Now... Since you've never used a pro sound card, you obviously have no idea what the benefits are. I am going to tell you now, so you can save yourself the trouble: they're better and they're worth it. As it stands, the sound card inside your current PC is the bottleneck. Not the CPU, not the RAM, not the hard drive. It was also the bottleneck in your laptop, you just didn't realise it - because you're really well informed and not ignorant at all!

Don't bother comming back to this forum unless you want to listen. Diginut is 100% right on everything he said... unless you have messed up your computer somehow and it actually is screwed.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Robby Rox the only software that was installed was windows xp and virus protection (same basics on my laptop).

Ok... Lets start with the operating system.

First off, you bought a barebones kit, which usually (err.. almost always) does not come with a CD that has Windows XP with the hardware drivers already integrated into the installation media.

This means you've yet to install the proper drivers for your motherboard, which means you are using Microsoft-supplied drivers for your hardware, which was built after Windows XP shipped. So, you are likely running out-of-date, possibly invalid drivers.

Go here:
http://www.machspeed.com/specs/matr...890.htm#drivers

Install each driver package. Reboot after each installation to be safe.

quote:

When I said it had the same card as my laptop I meant that I'm using Realteck HD audio output on both.

"Realtek HD" is the CONSUMER BRAND NAME for a number of audio chips marketed by Realtek. These are some of the most horrible devices out there, they require alot of attention from the main CPU. They also lack ASIO drivers. You should seriously consider getting a decent soundboard if you intend to do much production work... especially if you value hearing the note you pressed sometime before you press the next one.

go here: http://www.realtek.com.tw/downloads/downloadsView.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=14&PFid=24&Level=4&Conn=3&DownTypeID=2&GetDown=true

"Realtek HD" is, in all reality, just a piece of software that works with a bunch of software-based audio chips.

And not just realtek chips. Both Intel and Via chipsets have integrated AC97 audio CODECs that use Realtek's HD software under licesnse.

As in the VT8237A southbridge on your mobo:
http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/chipsets/southbridge/vt8237a/audio.jsp

Go grab the audio drivers as linked above at mach speed's site. you will see they are Via "Vinyl" audio drivers, which will properly support the VT8237A southbridge-integrated audio CODEC.

What model laptop did you have, anyways?

quote:

The one thing he mentioned was the bios (like somebody said) but than he mentioned why it wouldnt be the bios and had some long explanation why (that I can't remember).

There are a number of settings in the BIOS configuration utility, accessable on bootup, that may possibly realize a minor performance increase if you tweak them, but the likelihood of these settings causing a major performance problem is pretty low with modern motherboards.

speak of motherboards, what possessed you to go with a "mach speed" motherboard? Just FYI, these dolts are from some backwoods oklahoma town best known for hosting the headquarters of an indian tribe, who knows what shady asian OEM actually built the motherboard for them. Personally, I'd throw that board in the trash and get something from a more reputable vendor, Intel, Asus or Gigabyte come to mind.

The other problem with this board is it has integrated video. This is a no-no for digital audio workstations, as it wastes cpu->memory bus bandwidth by sharing the system memory for both data and video storage. This is called UMA (Unified Memory Architecture) which means the main system memory is also used for video, unlike with a dedicated video card which has it's own memory. UMA video subsystems also offload a good chunk of the video processing to the main CPU. Just another good reason to throw away that board.

quote:

I've ran bench marks that rate it a 1300 though and my laptop an 800. So I cannot figure out how its still running so much slower than my laptop.

Benchmark numbers are largely irrelevant unless the benchmark test is tailored to the sort of load the computer will actually be running.

quote:

wayyy less $$ at bestbuy and still got a faster crappy dell with a lot slower hardware specs.

How much did you pay for this barebones deal anyways?

faster crappy dell with slower hardware specs.. uhmm.. are we living in a parallel universe today, or did that just seem like a paradoxical statement?

quote:

I'm going to bring it back to my brother to see if he can fix it and if not I'm selling it on ebay.

I smell a future apple customer.

Haha

Your new PC is a piece of shit as far as music prod goes.I just cant believe u didnt do some research before u spent your cash.Flog it on Ebay and go buy a core 2 duo u fool.

Ok the computer is not an emachine its a clone or a noname. My brothers going to look at it today.
Meridian THANK YOU for actually trying to break things down to me I appreciate it. I'm going to have my brother read what you wrote just to see what he says.

Please be sure to let us know what your brother finds. Since you've flat-out rejected our repeated assertion that your sound card is the problem, I'm sure we'd all be very interested in hearing what the problem really was.

(Probably just some silly old BIOS setting, I'm sure! )

I just wanted to post an update for those who participated in this thread.
I've wasted a lot of time researching what could have possibly been wrong and today I finally decided I was going to sell the computer on ebay.
Well my brother asked to see the computer before I decided to sell it. He's the one who I said knows everything about computers. He read all the responses in this thread and just shook his head no. He explained how benchmarks ARE relevant but that the average person doesn't know how to run them outside the operating system so thats why I had no purpose doing them.
He also explained how a soundcard would be beneficial but also why he knew that wasn't the problem and that anyone trying to diagnose my problem in a forum would essentially be wasting thier time because they couldn't have any idea unless they could actually look at my computer.
Well long story short he ran the official benchmark software on my computer and saw it was operating wayyy below its capabilities which I already knew by using it but the benchmark software I had used said it was running at full speed which wasn't the case.
It took him about 2 seconds to go into the bios and reset the computer to its default settings. Than we reran the bench mark and it was running at its full speed.
So I went into Fruity to compare it to my laptop and it was absurdly quick like I knew it should be. Than I realized I had to reset it to multithread and the cpu instantly dropped like another 10 units. So now the computer is running extraordinarily quick and I'll be keeping it for a long time. I'm happy I bought it, I would def recommend the specific clone I bought to anyone. Its wayyy faster than my laptop and I spent a lot less for it too.
Thanks everyone who tried to help I appreciate it.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Please be sure to let us know what your brother finds. Since you've flat-out rejected our repeated assertion that your sound card is the problem, I'm sure we'd all be very interested in hearing what the problem really was. (Probably just some silly old BIOS setting, I'm sure! )

Thats funny, you were being sarcastic & thats exactly what it was. But hey, you tried.

thank god for official benchmark software

quote:

Originally posted by palm i have the same problem about audiostutering on my new comp, it makes me even mader caus i bought stuff that supposed to work awesome: asus p5k, intel Q6600, corsair ram, SATA HD. first problem i had when installing this shit: SATA-disk couldnt be found so i had to install windows on my old HD. next problem: drivers for internal soundcard doesnt work. fuck it im not going to use it anyway so I installed my drivers for my echo audiocard. that works perfectly superfast respons etc, but sometimes stutter (if i open up some programs while playing music) never happened before on my old comp. BUT good side is I can finaly run reason 4 (somehow I couldnt before). antoerh great thing reaper with 12audio inputs at 48kHz and 6 midichannels out works at 5,4ms latenvy!! awesome. but the stutering still happends every 5th second or so, maybe 10th. Im gonna read the sticky real thight tonite and if I dont figure it out after that i dont know what to do. could the MB be broken? how the hell do I reset it?

i don't want to bash reaper (otherwise echosystm will jump on me ) but i had similiar problems with ultra low latency. with something like 12ms it usually works great. but cubase runs with 6ms fine on the same system.

quote:

Originally posted by thecYrus i don't want to bash reaper (otherwise echosystm will jump on me ) but i had similiar problems with ultra low latency. with something like 12ms it usually works great. but cubase runs with 6ms fine on the same system.

lols

I had big problems with Reaper at low latency under Vista. In XP it seems quite good though (with an AudioFire4), but I definately don't get it as low as Cubase. It's probably about 2ms difference. I can live with that.

The biggest problem with Reaper is stability. There are still alot of VSTs that don't work and it tends to be a bit temperamental for some people.

You don't want to go over 60C as it could shorten the life of your components. Get some case fans. Try maybe putting one in the front to suck air in and one in the back to blow air out.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.