Tír Na HiFi

Aleg wrote:Gordon

I like your 5.47
Great job

glad to hear that.

only a couple more things to try

just as well we have golden ears, imagine trying to measure all these changes

read today that a driver developer thought wasapi was the best method because it uses the device interrupt to tell when the buffer needs filling rather than a polling method which is what asio and wdm/ks use. They poll the device and get the number of bytes they are through the buffer and then calculate how much to fill, so you get irregular buffer filling and you can't optimise it for the cpu.

5.31 sounds agricultural compared to 5.47, a bit tiring after a while, not going back there.

5.47 > 5.44
didnt try anything else

jrling , goon-heaven, John Dot, and others who are stuck in the land of Sub Standard Ever-hopeful (SSE) , which CPU , Mboard , and OS are you running ?

I have tried a day and a half's worth of hardware / software solutions to get avx2 to run on my system. Ultimately, I discovered that my dictionary of expletives is satisfyingly comprehensive. It doesn't make a lot of sense when I say them one after the other but somehow it makes me feel better.

Some of the things I've tried : permissions ad nauseam, different directories, CPU-Z to make sure I haven't got a fake, memory stick changes , bios update and tweaks , different combos control/play, and trawling through a variety of OS settings . Some of these things should have no bearing whether the AVX2 part of the code executes or not , but hey , desperate times etc..........

The one thing I haven't tried is a different CPU/Motherboard combo hence the crowd sourcing question. I was considering setting up an excel type table on google for participants to enter and edit their software/hardware combos to see where there are similarities and differences between avx2 capable systems and SSE type outfits.

m5lig wrote:jrling , goon-heaven, John Dot, and others who are stuck in the land of Sub Standard Ever-hopeful (SSE) , which CPU , Mboard , and OS are you running ?

I have tried a day and a half's worth of hardware / software solutions to get avx2 to run on my system. Ultimately, I discovered that my dictionary of expletives is satisfyingly comprehensive. It doesn't make a lot of sense when I say them one after the other but somehow it makes me feel better.

Some of the things I've tried : permissions ad nauseam, different directories, CPU-Z to make sure I haven't got a fake, memory stick changes , bios update and tweaks , different combos control/play, and trawling through a variety of OS settings . Some of these things should have no bearing whether the AVX2 part of the code executes or not , but hey , desperate times etc..........

The one thing I haven't tried is a different CPU/Motherboard combo hence the crowd sourcing question. I was considering setting up an excel type table on google for participants to enter and edit their software/hardware combos to see where there are similarities and differences between avx2 capable systems and SSE type outfits.

Don't understand why this isn't working for you your CPU has avx2 instruction
Search in your bios for a possible instruction settings
It's a bit of a long shot though

sbgk,

I know zero about programming but does this apply for us AVX2 less folk ?

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/ ... piler.aspx

Thanks .

Nige , had a look at the bios and tried a few settings. Having said that , I prefer the ASUS bios screens to the ASRock ones I'm working with now. At the time I bought the MBoard it was better value than the ASUS Z87 s but prices have come down since then, so maybe time for a change.

m5lig wrote:Nige , had a look at the bios and tried a few settings. Having said that , I prefer the ASUS bios screens to the ASRock ones I'm working with now. At the time I bought the MBoard it was better value than the ASUS Z87 s but prices have come down since then, so maybe time for a change.

It's hard to believe that your motherboard is what's stopping you from using avx 2
I have seen instruction settings on a motherboard I had
That prevented mqn from working before that's why I mentioned it

Have you tried a new installation of server r2

For a dedicated audio pc I don't see any advantage in going for the maximum amount of features on a motherboard, just means extra components and ports making extra noise, granted the difference isnt huge
b85 and h81 is ok
Not having avx 2 wouldn't be an option for me

sbgk wrote:5.31 sounds agricultural compared to 5.47, a bit tiring after a while, not going back there.

If this was a response to my previous post, I may not have been clear enough. I still had a slight preference of 2496 5.31 over 5.47, but only because there were no other 2496 5.4x versions and I also have a sense that preferences for 1644 may not apply for their respective 2496 versions.

On our main test platform 1644 avx2 my order of preference was:

5.44 > 5.47 > 5.40 >> 5.31

with the differences between the latest versions being ever so subtle. Today I'll try to listen to all versions between 5.40 and 5.47 to pinpoint my favourite.

m5lig wrote:jrling , goon-heaven, John Dot, and others who are stuck in the land of Sub Standard Ever-hopeful (SSE) , which CPU , Mboard , and OS are you running ?

I have tried a day and a half's worth of hardware / software solutions to get avx2 to run on my system. Ultimately, I discovered that my dictionary of expletives is satisfyingly comprehensive. It doesn't make a lot of sense when I say them one after the other but somehow it makes me feel better.

Some of the things I've tried : permissions ad nauseam, different directories, CPU-Z to make sure I haven't got a fake, memory stick changes , bios update and tweaks , different combos control/play, and trawling through a variety of OS settings . Some of these things should have no bearing whether the AVX2 part of the code executes or not , but hey , desperate times etc..........

The one thing I haven't tried is a different CPU/Motherboard combo hence the crowd sourcing question. I was considering setting up an excel type table on google for participants to enter and edit their software/hardware combos to see where there are similarities and differences between avx2 capable systems and SSE type outfits.

Please see my signature for details of CPU/mobo/OS

Actually the three of us are the least capable of advising you on avx2, as we have never had the priviledge of hearing it in action! Sorry.

satshanti wrote:

sbgk wrote:5.31 sounds agricultural compared to 5.47, a bit tiring after a while, not going back there.

If this was a response to my previous post, I may not have been clear enough. I still had a slight preference of 2496 5.31 over 5.47, but only because there were no other 2496 5.4x versions and I also have a sense that preferences for 1644 may not apply for their respective 2496 versions.

On our main test platform 1644 avx2 my order of preference was:

5.44 > 5.47 > 5.40 >> 5.31

with the differences between the latest versions being ever so subtle. Today I'll try to listen to all versions between 5.40 and 5.47 to pinpoint my favourite.

Which control file are you using?

Which dac are you using these days?

Difficult to keep up with version releases and test em properly ill try to catch up tonight