The Best Computer For Music Production: ruclips.net/video/HFL3wOfPx9s/видео.html How To Get Better CPU Performance In FL Studio: ruclips.net/video/OWYmqwb7b4k/видео.html Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/firewalkmusic Want professional feedback on your track? Mixing or Mastering? www.fiverr.com/firewalk
That's the best explanation that can be found on RUclips. I often try to explain people this problem with exactly the same example you did here in the video.😁
nah... About that part what new CPUs favor... Generally we're going for a smaller fabrication process, which allows for less power consumption and higher clockspeeds. In the consumer segment, Intel focus still remains at raising clockspeeds while AMD also secondarily focuses on more cores. The main focus still lies at raising clockspeeds. Also, the indications are the same. The difference is that the FL Studio measurement combines different specs. If you show the threads in task manager, and go to the thread handling the audio processing, the figures will look much closer.
It's true that fabrication process is improving and transistors are getting smaller and smaller. However, the reason why clock speeds seems stagnant these days have to do with power and heat. We've begun to encounter the limits of Dennard scaling, which states that the power needed to run transistors in a particular unit volume stays consistant even as the number of transistors increases. In short, as the volume of transistors increases, the power required to run them increases. Back in the days, clock speeds increased tremendously, and if you had a 1 year old computer back then it would be completely outdated. Event hough clock speeds seem to be a bit sagnant these days, CPU's are still getting faster. Keep in mind IPC (Instructions per cycle). Essentially, more work is done at the same time, and at the same clock speeds. Here's a good article explaining the evolution of clock speeds etc: www.maketecheasier.com/why-cpu-clock-speed-isnt-increasing/
@@FireWalkMusic I think the clock speed umprovements only look slow on Intel's side because they are stuck at trying to lower their power consumption on desktop chips. AMD is truly making progress, even though the actual improvements are being exaggerated on media. The actual increasing of core count isn't visible anymore in the mid-range section of the market, it's stuck at 6 cores since 2017 with the release of Summit Ridge. Of course, it's a different story in the server and enthusiast segments where core counts are currently doubled, but there are still IPC improvements.
@@delta61 AMD has made some great chips lately, especially their 3000 series is very good. Intel has been struggling with manufacturing problems for a long time now, and this has allowed AMD to catch up, and even surpass Intel to some degree. This is all great for consumers, since more competition will result in lower prices overall. :)
Thanks for your video. But I have a question, Something is not clear for me. For example when I use too many layers with spire VSTi I need more Cache. And my question is which one is better : one Core I9 CPU with 20 MB cache on a single CPU motherboard or two Core I7 CPU with overall 36 MB Cache on a dual CPU motherboard ?
i have a 5950x my cpu usage in fl studio is 70% while task manager shows 10% ;-; multithreading is enabled, my audi interface is focusrite solo 2nd. Pls help
Yo guys, there was this video that actually fixed this for FL Studio, I’ll comment the vid to this comment once I found it. It made it so that fl and windows cpu matched, so idk what this guy is talking about.. it’s honestly not a processor or fl studio problem - just settings!
What are you talking about? They are measuring two completely different things, that's why they don't match, and they're not supposed to either. Windows displays the average CPU usage over all cores, while FL Studio reports the CPU's ability to fill the audio buffer.
Perhaps you're thinking about the PDC (Plugin delay compensation) being fixed in FL Studio? They did that a few versions ago. The difference shown has to do with the way they measure the load. As Kevin said, the meter in FL Studio isn't really a "CPU" meter at all, it just reports the CPU's ability to fill the audio buffer within the allowed time, which is determined by the buffer size etc.
Does this apply for memory as well? I'm having the same problem, but with with RAM. My memory in the DAW says 15 GB usage, while task manager shows 7 GB usage?
I was thinking about switching my i7 6700 CPU with the 6700k so I can overclock it. Based on this video and how DAWs utilize CPU will I see much of a difference with the overclocked 6700k?
This will depend a bit on how you work and and what kind of projects you have, but generally overclocking will make a big difference. I remember with my old rig I had a project that I wasn't able to run without sound crackling, even with the buffer set to max. It just maxed out.. I was able to get another 100 Mhz overclock out of the CPU, and that made all the difference. I was then able to run the project properly.
Hey, I actually have a video about the best computer for music production. You can find the video here: ruclips.net/video/HFL3wOfPx9s/видео.html There's also a parts list of every component used to built the pc, as well as monitors, audio interface etc. Note that most people won't need the "best" computer for music production. Check out some of the cheaper alternatives listed below as well.
i have ryzen 7 3700x and 32 gb ram 3600mhz , wd blue 500 gb nvme ssd and still getting hella crackles and glitches. im going crazy. i don't know what to do. pls help. i tweak buffer size but i either have much latency, or my shit just crackles and glitches, and i've heard people with setups half as powerful as mine have absolutely no problems. IM GOING INSANE
It's not really an "issue". It's just the way it works. It's not really a "CPU-meter" at all, it just focuses on the audio buffer itself, which is the only thing you need to worry about with regard to the CPU's ability to process information in real time without any lag.
Cubase is definitely more efficient in many ways. Keep in mind that Cubase also has a more linear workflow, which is better for the CPU overall. In FL You can route anything anywhere and to all kinds of crazy things which will be very demanding on the CPU.
The Best Computer For Music Production: ruclips.net/video/HFL3wOfPx9s/видео.html
How To Get Better CPU Performance In FL Studio: ruclips.net/video/OWYmqwb7b4k/видео.html
Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/firewalkmusic
Want professional feedback on your track? Mixing or Mastering? www.fiverr.com/firewalk
@DONNOD I actually have a video about this and you can find it here: ruclips.net/video/HFL3wOfPx9s/видео.html
Wahay! Another priceless video from Lord FireWalk
Thanks! Glad you liked it :)
That's the best explanation that can be found on RUclips. I often try to explain people this problem with exactly the same example you did here in the video.😁
Thanks! Glad you liked the video 😀
This is why I chose a humble i5-9600k for my pc.
6 cores/ 6 Threads total but may go to ~5Ghz if overclocked 🤗
I've always been puzzled by this but now I know! Thanks
You're welcome :)
The water-cups analogy is very helpful. Thank you.
Glad you found it helpful 😀
Exactly Valhalla, Lord FireWalk is the best name One can think of :-) Great video Eirik!
Thanks Jan! :)
Wow! Your trick to explain this was amazing. 💧
Thanks. A lot of juice had to die in the name of science to make this video possible. 😜
Fantastic! Thanks! 🎸😃
You're welcome :)
Thanks a lot for the information! :)
You're welcome :)
nah... About that part what new CPUs favor... Generally we're going for a smaller fabrication process, which allows for less power consumption and higher clockspeeds. In the consumer segment, Intel focus still remains at raising clockspeeds while AMD also secondarily focuses on more cores. The main focus still lies at raising clockspeeds. Also, the indications are the same. The difference is that the FL Studio measurement combines different specs. If you show the threads in task manager, and go to the thread handling the audio processing, the figures will look much closer.
It's true that fabrication process is improving and transistors are getting smaller and smaller. However, the reason why clock speeds seems stagnant these days have to do with power and heat. We've begun to encounter the limits of Dennard scaling, which states that the power needed to run transistors in a particular unit volume stays consistant even as the number of transistors increases. In short, as the volume of transistors increases, the power required to run them increases.
Back in the days, clock speeds increased tremendously, and if you had a 1 year old computer back then it would be completely outdated. Event hough clock speeds seem to be a bit sagnant these days, CPU's are still getting faster. Keep in mind IPC (Instructions per cycle). Essentially, more work is done at the same time, and at the same clock speeds.
Here's a good article explaining the evolution of clock speeds etc: www.maketecheasier.com/why-cpu-clock-speed-isnt-increasing/
@@FireWalkMusic I think the clock speed umprovements only look slow on Intel's side because they are stuck at trying to lower their power consumption on desktop chips. AMD is truly making progress, even though the actual improvements are being exaggerated on media. The actual increasing of core count isn't visible anymore in the mid-range section of the market, it's stuck at 6 cores since 2017 with the release of Summit Ridge. Of course, it's a different story in the server and enthusiast segments where core counts are currently doubled, but there are still IPC improvements.
@@delta61 AMD has made some great chips lately, especially their 3000 series is very good. Intel has been struggling with manufacturing problems for a long time now, and this has allowed AMD to catch up, and even surpass Intel to some degree. This is all great for consumers, since more competition will result in lower prices overall. :)
some tutorials about music theories/tricks & tips of making Melodies and chords easily.
Great videos by the way ♥️
Thanks for the suggestion :)
Good video, thanks :)
You're welcome :)
Полезная тема.
Thanks for your video. But I have a question, Something is not clear for me. For example when I use too many layers with spire VSTi I need more Cache. And my question is which one is better : one Core I9 CPU with 20 MB cache on a single CPU motherboard or two Core I7 CPU with overall 36 MB Cache on a dual CPU motherboard ?
i have a 5950x my cpu usage in fl studio is 70% while task manager shows 10% ;-; multithreading is enabled, my audi interface is focusrite solo 2nd. Pls help
Yo guys, there was this video that actually fixed this for FL Studio, I’ll comment the vid to this comment once I found it. It made it so that fl and windows cpu matched, so idk what this guy is talking about.. it’s honestly not a processor or fl studio problem - just settings!
What are you talking about? They are measuring two completely different things, that's why they don't match, and they're not supposed to either. Windows displays the average CPU usage over all cores, while FL Studio reports the CPU's ability to fill the audio buffer.
Perhaps you're thinking about the PDC (Plugin delay compensation) being fixed in FL Studio? They did that a few versions ago. The difference shown has to do with the way they measure the load. As Kevin said, the meter in FL Studio isn't really a "CPU" meter at all, it just reports the CPU's ability to fill the audio buffer within the allowed time, which is determined by the buffer size etc.
Good to know!
Indeed! :)
Does this apply for memory as well? I'm having the same problem, but with with RAM. My memory in the DAW says 15 GB usage, while task manager shows 7 GB usage?
I was thinking about switching my i7 6700 CPU with the 6700k so I can overclock it. Based on this video and how DAWs utilize CPU will I see much of a difference with the overclocked 6700k?
This will depend a bit on how you work and and what kind of projects you have, but generally overclocking will make a big difference. I remember with my old rig I had a project that I wasn't able to run without sound crackling, even with the buffer set to max. It just maxed out.. I was able to get another 100 Mhz overclock out of the CPU, and that made all the difference. I was then able to run the project properly.
@@FireWalkMusic Thanks for the info!
Great Video!
Thanks! :)
U should make a guide of specs to look up for music production
Hey, I actually have a video about the best computer for music production. You can find the video here: ruclips.net/video/HFL3wOfPx9s/видео.html
There's also a parts list of every component used to built the pc, as well as monitors, audio interface etc.
Note that most people won't need the "best" computer for music production. Check out some of the cheaper alternatives listed below as well.
i have ryzen 7 3700x and 32 gb ram 3600mhz , wd blue 500 gb nvme ssd and still getting hella crackles and glitches. im going crazy. i don't know what to do. pls help. i tweak buffer size but i either have much latency, or my shit just crackles and glitches, and i've heard people with setups half as powerful as mine have absolutely no problems.
IM GOING INSANE
Try following the steps shown in this video: ruclips.net/video/OWYmqwb7b4k/видео.html
How to get better CPU performance in FL Studio:
Buy a new CPU
Switch to cubase
That would be the ultimate solution :)
So short story my CPU heat is high ?
If you're having performance issues then check out this video on how to fix it: ruclips.net/video/OWYmqwb7b4k/видео.html
Nice
Thanks :)
What's the solution to this issue please
It's not really an "issue". It's just the way it works. It's not really a "CPU-meter" at all, it just focuses on the audio buffer itself, which is the only thing you need to worry about with regard to the CPU's ability to process information in real time without any lag.
@@FireWalkMusic wow thanks 🙏💯💯
Thank you very much.
oh shit you have 16 cores and still hitting 100% in FL damm...that sucks
I'm Love Sir ♥️🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳🇮🇳 💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯
Glad you liked the video! :)
thank you !!
You're welcome :)
YYYYYEEESSSS
😄
I feel like cubase handles cpu usage much better than fl studio
U need custom settings, than fl also works
Cubase is definitely more efficient in many ways. Keep in mind that Cubase also has a more linear workflow, which is better for the CPU overall. In FL You can route anything anywhere and to all kinds of crazy things which will be very demanding on the CPU.
Ahhh that explains some things thanks for the info
😃
thx
You're welcome :)
Nice explanation, any tutorial about how to use chorus like a pro
Thanks. Yes, I will probably make that part of my how to mix series. :)
Yeah it's called latency 😅
Indeed :)
of cores
I see what you did there 😂
Firewalk it is time to Show your Face in the videos.why do you choose a secret hero? Everyone wants to see your face man .
thank you !!
You're welcome :)