Le 27/06/2016 11:58, Dario Sanfilippo a écrit :
Hi, Christof. It is a rather large project and relatively new, so I'd prefer not to share it at this point as it still kind of a work in progress. I will try putting together some test patches isolating some of the most used objects and see if there's any significant change in the different PD versions when instantiating many of them. Cyrille: I'm just using PD's Load Meter patch. The test I performed had had just the patch on, without me doing anything. In 0.46-7, the average CPU load when turning DSP on is around 40-50%, with peaks at about 60-70% when acting on the patch. No dropouts experienced. In 0.47, the initial CPU load is around 60% or more and it gets to the point of producing audio dropouts when acting on the patch. So, empirically, 0.47 does seem to have a different CPU load.
different cpu load: yes, but since you don't know the cpu frequency, you can't know if it's a higher load, a lower load, and if it's a significative change.
I can see the same behaviour by looking at Activity Monitor on OSX. I wouldn't know how else to measure the CPU load, though.
i'm afraid it's the same problem with activity monitor. cheers c
Thanks for your help, guys. Dario On 27 June 2016 at 10:00, cyrille henry <c...@chnry.net <mailto:c...@chnry.net>> wrote: hello, how are you doing cpu load measurement? I find it very hard to do reliable measurement of cpu load nowadays, since computer have a variable cpu speed depending on load. For exemple, pd CPU load can be at 75%, with CPU frequency at 800MHz. When increasing the patch complexities, the CPU frequency increase, and the apparent load reported by pd decrease. On linux, you can bloc the processor to a fixed frequency, and then make reliable load measurement. But i don't know how to do than on OSX. Did you find a way? otherwise, your measurement are useless. cheers c Le 27/06/2016 10:44, christof.re...@gmx.at <mailto:christof.re...@gmx.at> a écrit : Do you want to share your patch? I could test it on my machine with 0.46 and 0.47 -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Gesendet: Sonntag, 26 Juni 2016 um 13:27:23 Uhr Von: "Dario Sanfilippo" <sanfilippo.da...@gmail.com <mailto:sanfilippo.da...@gmail.com>> An: pd-list <pd-l...@iem.at <mailto:pd-l...@iem.at>> Betreff: [PD] Experiencing a higher CPU load with 0.47-0 and 0.47-1. Hi, list. I'm loading the same patch with 0.46-7, 0.47-0 and 0.47-1 - all 64bit. The last two have a significantly higher CPU load. I'm on OSX 10.11.5. Has any of you experienced anything similar? I haven't changed my [vd~] objects into [delread4~], are they calling the same piece of code? The patch is almost exclusively using signal objects, have some of these been modified in 0.47-0 and 0.47-1? Thanks for your help. Dario _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at> mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list@lists.iem.at> mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
