[LAD] FLTK vs GTKmm

Jens M Andreasen jens.andreasen at comhem.se
Fri Nov 6 20:09:39 UTC 2009


Adrian

I e-mailed you several times ... Am I blacklisted somehow?

Anyways, the new fancy €70 card (Gigabyte GT220 OC) is in place here
now. It is specced at approx 220 (bogo)flops. So far I have only been
able to milk it for something like 50 Gflops using previous work naively
scaled up to fill out the void.

This at 3x16 samples @ 96kHz (no, not a typo), 128 channels in/out
oldstyle slow PCIe 1.a, runlevel 2 and no monitor (this is important!).
256 channels works if you can do away with 3x64 (and the cost of the
roundtrip to the GPU being 0.3ms rather than 0.16ms)

/jma


On Tue, 2009-08-11 at 14:43 +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 01:54:39PM +0200, Jens M Andreasen wrote:
> 
> > > It's not ideal, but assembling all the jack buffers into one big one  
> > > is not going to be that much load on the CPU.
> > OK .. Adrian Knoth showed some interest and says he knows his way around
> > in jackd as well as a colleague involved with CUDA. If the idea after
> > evaluation does not appear to be worth the effort, then we'll just drop
> > it by then.
> 
> Speaking from the user's point of view, LV2 would be the way to go. It's
> just convenient to have all the settings saved in an ardour session,
> nice GUIs and so on.
> 
> This could boil down to have a collecting thread somewhere and just
> small control plugins for getting the actual data.
> 
> 
> But I'm sure we'll find out. ;)
> 
> > That would have to be a collection of generally useful plugins, at least
> > 32 channels wide to be worth it. A mega plugin so to say. This ain't no
> > lawn-mover you can turn around on a platter. Doing little things here
> > and there /only/ would be very difficult in general.
> 
> I could imagine a generic all-in-wonder channel strip. (to the channel,
> it looks like a channel strip, but it's actually 32 or more channels in
> parallel).
> 
> Which would mean: dynamics section (compressor, gate, gain), EQ, perhaps
> some fancy stuff like your rubberband or pitch correction in general,
> perhaps FFT analysis or at least FFT transformation, so subsequent
> plugins can operate in the frequency domain.
> 
> Or whatever. ;)
> 
> 
> > processor it is running on. Or else you'll end up with 640 identical
> > channel-strips rather than something like a synth-collection, 64 fully
> 
> Doesn't sound too bad to me. ;) Though I could perfectly live with 128
> identical channel strips plus your synth running, if switching kernels
> is feasible.
> 
> 
> > To put things in some economical perspective, I am talking about
> > upgrading this tiny desktop-machine to having bandwidth and processing
> > power twice that of a current top-of-the-line Intel Nehalem for less
> > than $200, maybe around Christmas.
> 
> Christmas? That's ambitious, but hey, I guess we could "borrow" lots of
> code from existing plugins and chain them together.
> 
> Anyway, it's a cool project.
> 
> 
> 




More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list