-----Forwarded Message-----
>From: Michael Gogins 
>Sent: Mar 1, 2006 5:33 PM
>To: Art Hunkins 
>Subject: Re: [Csnd] Realtime Csound5
>
>Thank you for doing these tests. In a week or so I will prepare a 32 bit version of the Windows installer.
>
>Regards,
>Mike
>
>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Art Hunkins 
>>Sent: Mar 1, 2006 5:42 PM
>>To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk, Michael Gogins 
>>Subject: Re: [Csnd] Realtime Csound5
>>
>>Here are test results. All are under as comparable conditions as humanly
>>possible. All timings done manually as Csound5 apparently no longer reports
>>render time (??): (all tests repeated and averages taken)
>>
>>csound32.exe 3600" file - render time = 130" average
>>csound.exe 3600" file - render time = 143.5" average
>>  Conclusion: 64-bit is 10%+ slower
>>(Note: the only MIDI activity here was an "always on" instrument reading 8
>>ctrl7's which did not move; thus no "schedkwhen" MIDI events were
>>triggered.)
>>
>>csound32.exe as above adding 60" of MIDI ctrl activity -
>>  render time = 180" average
>>csound.exe as above adding 60" of MIDI ctrl activity -
>>  render time = 211" average
>>  Conclusion: 64-bit is 17%+ slower
>>
>>In the MIDI ctrl activity test, the same sequence of MIDI activity was
>>repeated for nearly the same length of time in each trial. Six intense and
>>sustained MIDI events were triggered. I expected csound.exe to do less well
>>on the second test because this was one where I knew that the multiple
>>(concurrent) MIDI events caused overload and stuttering, and my
>>system/csound.exe could not keep up.
>>
>>My test system is an Athlon XP 1600+ (32-bit) running WinME, with 224MB RAM.
>>
>>Art Hunkins
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Michael Gogins" 
>>To: 
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 9:50 AM
>>Subject: Re: [Csnd] Realtime Csound5
>>
>>
>>> Could you please re-run your test, rendering both times to soundfile, and
>>measure the times taken? This will give a more precise idea of the speedup
>>of csound32.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Victor Lazzarini 
>>> >Sent: Mar 1, 2006 5:38 AM
>>> >To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
>>> >Subject: Re: [Csnd] Realtime Csound5
>>> >
>>> >Thanks for the report (I always use the floats version anyway, never
>>bothered
>>> >with the doubles... even for 'tape' pieces. But it's good to know).
>>> >
>>> >Victor
>>> >
>>> >At 03:54 01/03/2006, you wrote:
>>> >>I've been comparing csound.exe and csound32.exe with respect to realtime
>>> >>performance. (Csound.exe is the 64-bit, "higher precision" version.)
>>> >>
>>> >>I can report that csound32.exe has a small but significant advantage as
>>to
>>> >>what it can handle without breakup compared with csound.exe. I'm
>>currently
>>> >>working on a .csd which runs fine at 44100SR with csound32.exe, but
>>breaks
>>> >>up with csound.exe. (I imagine the difference is comparable to the
>>> >>difference in render times for the two versions.)
>>> >>
>>> >>That being the case, I'd recommend csound32.exe for all realtime use (on
>>> >>Windows anyway). This means you need to install from the .zip
>>distribution
>>> >>(Varga) rather than the Gogins installer .exe, as the Gogins distro only
>>> >>contains csound.exe - not csound32.exe.
>>> >>
>>> >>Art Hunkins
>>> >>
>>> >>--
>>> >>Send bugs reports to this list.
>>> >>To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk
>>> >
>>> >Victor Lazzarini
>>> >Music Technology Laboratory
>>> >Music Department
>>> >National University of Ireland, Maynooth
>>> >
>>> >--
>>> >Send bugs reports to this list.
>>> >To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>>> To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk
>>
>
>