Stereo Tool

Now testing ST with Marian Trace Alpha and it works great! Only problem is the buffer is fastly empty when I use Advanced clipper (also without composite clipper switched on). All buffersettings are full opened to check if this is the problem. Stereo Tool works with 30% of processing power, so that's not the problem. I am afraid that the samplerate of the input of the Marian card isn't right. i can't put it to 192 kHz in Windows control panel. it's not supported it said. The output can be switched to 192 kHz fine, but that doesn't matter if that's on 44,1 kHz, ST overrules this anyway.

To make it more clear; without Advanced clipper on, it works fantastic, with no buffer under runs.
Two Xeon 3.0 gHz processors and Windows 7 Ultimate 32 bit, with the newest Trace Alpha drivers downloaded from their website.

Anyone have an idea about this?
Thanks a lot

If it goes wrong when you turn Advanced Clipper on it has nothing to do with sample rates, it has to be the CPU.

Stereo Tool uses 1 or 2 cores for processing, so 30% doesn't mean much without knowing how many cores your system has. On the other hand, if you have a quad core system, somewhere between 30 and 40% is the maximum - however I don't think there are any quad core systems that cannot run Stereo Tool. Unless you are using some power save mode...

What type of CPU do you have, and how many cores does it have?

There are two physically processors of 3,0 gHz Xeon. It's a server (with a lot of noise of fans). Asus AP1600R-E2(AI2) http://www.asus.com/Commericial_Servers ... ifications

When this is a problem, then we will buy an other computer for this purpose. Stability is important.

Can you find the CPU in this list?
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php

I cannot find the '7210' number, I see 2 3.00 GHz XEONs that are both very very slow based on the numbers (comparable with a Pentium 4). Can you post a screenshot of Task Manager where you can see the load of each core?

In the context used on that page from Asus, the E7210 is not a processor, but a chipset.

According to the chipset documentation from Intel, the 7210 includes a Socket 478 CPU socket. Socket 478 was Pentium 4. Xeon processors based on NetBurst (Pentium 4 era), went into Socket 603 or 604.

Confusing the situation is there is indeed a E7210 Xeon processor. It, however, runs at 1066 FSB, went into Socket 604, and is clocked at 2.4 GHz.

Confusing me even further is that from what I'm reading, the original Pentium 4 "Extreme Edition" processors were Gallatin cores, which were also used for Xeon processors, but in a Socket 478 form.

In my opinion, the description on the Asus page is incorrect. It supports up to 800MHz FSB Pentium 4 processors, not Xeon. If that is indeed the case, then, yeah, that platform may choke and choke hard on any 7.xx version of the software.

Best thing to do is run CPU-Z on the system and see what it identifies. If it is a P4 EE, then it should have 2MB L3 cache. That could be an intermediate step between 1MB L2 and 2MB L2, meaning that a P4 EE starting to have problems means that your software is creeping up on a 2MB L2 overflow, at which time everyone with original Core 2 systems will start having problems. This is already somewhat the case, as per Bojcha's struggles with his E series processors.

To run full quality fm with comp clipper..i5 or i7 is necessary i would imagine.

You can get by with lesser cpu/quality on core2quads.

I've heard someone is running a 2.5 core2duo with clipper on but quality has to be sacrificed
set to 30%.

Even my somewhat trained ears barely notice a difference at lower quality settings.

512 asio block size/low latency is very fatiguing, to me. But that has nothing to do with ST.

Will this one work?
Price isn't bad. Ok, it's used, but at our radio station we only use second hand HP business computers.
Is this something what is similar as i5 or is this an upgraded Pentium 4, like the server we have now (see here above)...
Hewlett Packard XW4600 Tower model

*Now I understand I can't find it somewhere else, E9300 doesn't exist, it have to be Q9300!*

Intel QUAD CORE E9300 @ 2.5 Ghz
Intel X31 Express chipset
4096MB Dual-Channel DDR2 geheugen
250 GB SATA-harddisk
DVD-brander
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 290 - 256.0 MB
Realtek High definition audio (will not use that, I have Trace Alpha:))
Broadcom NetXtreme ethernet poort
3 PCI slots
475 Watt voeding
Afmetingen (HxBxD): 44,7 x 17,1 x 46,8cm
Gewicht: +/-12KG
Legitieme Windows Xp professional OPNIEUW geïnstalleerd
Windows licentie en volledig geupdate

Prijs € 289,00 - inclusief 21% BTW

That newer system should make things significantly better.

That's for sure, I will call that guys tomorrow, to make shure it's Q9300 in stead of E9300 as they mentioned.
I am curious if this is to compare with an i5. I want an i5 to be sure that will work with ST. If this system is enough for future usage of ST then I am happy with it

This is funny: sometimes it can beat an i5 (650) http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/75?vs=144

Just a small warning: The Stokkemask clipper is mandatory in the Netherlands, and increases the CPU load. (Although I hear from many people that nobody actually checks if you're complying unless there are complaints).
I'm planning to improve this filter this week. CPU load might get lower but I'm not sure (it could actually also get higher).

I have tested version 7.20 on an E5200 and it ran - but I had to lower the quality to 50%. Best way to know how fast a system will be is to look at this cpubenchmark site and compare numbers; always calculate the speed per core because ST uses 2 at most.

If latency is an issue, you'll have (slightly) less latency with a faster CPU.


Note: Even before I optimized the composite clipper code (at the time I couldn't run it on my i7), it was already running on faster i3's. So an i3 might be good as well. I know Bojcha is running it on some E8??? system, which also runs properly.

I just ran a quick test on my old Q9450 system. With Stokkemask clipper enabled, I need to reduce the quality to 70%. Without Stokkemask that's 80%.