PDA

View Full Version : (PLAY) and PPC G5 Mac Performance ?


Muziksculp
07-24-2008, 12:55 PM
Hi,

I'm aware that PLAY is optimized for Intel based Macs and PCs, but does PLAY still run decent enough on a PPC based Mac G5.

I have a Mac G5 2.5 ghz. Quad, w/8 GB RAM, would I be able to run a decent amount of PLAY based instruments on the G5, as a stand-alone computer ? and would expanding it to 16 GB of RAM help a lot ?

My main system is a Mac Pro 3.0 Ghz. (1st Gen). w/ 8 GB RAM, running LP8. (Will be expanding it to 16 GB soon).

Basically, I would like to use the G5 as a temporary solution, to help run more instruments along my main Mac Pro, until APPLE introduces the next Gen. of Mac Pros, which I plan to purchase as soon as they are available.

Any feedback on (PLAY)'s performance with PPC G5 Quad would be very helpful.

Thanks.

Jonathan Kranz
07-24-2008, 01:02 PM
http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=14626

-Jonathan

Muziksculp
07-24-2008, 01:16 PM
Thanks for the feedback link.

So it seems that the latest (PLAY) version 1.0.79 has been improved quite a bit on the PPC side, that is wonderful news.

Would adding more RAM make a difference if I'm using (PLAY) as a stand-alone on the G5 ? or is my current 8 GB RAM good enough, since I'm not sure if PLAY would be able to access the additional RAM on the PPC ?

rimskykorsakov
07-24-2008, 01:34 PM
Any feedback on (PLAY)'s performance with PPC G5 Quad would be very helpful.



Hi ,

it depends on which PLAY-library you are actually using:
Fab Four is no problem.
MOR is a little bit more demanding .
SD2 can be a real challenge.

In general:
whenever you switch on the built-in Convolution Reverb on a PPC
the CPU usage rises significantly.

All my PLAY-Autoload-Instruments have Filter/Delay/Reverb disabled.
Usually I'm using Altiverb and Spacedesigner as Reverbs , but
if I really need a certain PLAY Reverb on a particular PLAY Instrument
I'm freezing this Instrument.

Nevertheless , even SD2 works quite well on my PPC Dual 2,3 (16GB/OS X 10.4.11),
but I have also a dedicated external eSATA II HD especially just for this single library .
But be aware of the "MIDI Performance" Patches. They are too heavy for the PPC.
You have to split these PERFORMANCE Patches into single PLAY Instruments.
Then they run without problem, without any glitches.

I have the feeling that the latest update 1.0.79 improved the performance on PPC's.


But of course the performance always depends on the combination of PlugIns ,
Instrument Patches , and the particular sequence you are working on .



Cheers

- Gerd

P.S.: Yes , PLAY can address the additional RAM on your PPC.

Muziksculp
07-24-2008, 02:32 PM
Thanks for the additional feedback.

I plan to use PLAY as a stand-alone, rather than a Plug-In from within a host on the G5, I guess this would translate into some performance improvement on a Quad PPC.

I'm still not sure if adding additional RAM to the G5 would be useful ? I noticed you have 16 GB installed on your PPC Dual, is PLAY able to use the additional RAM in your system, when running PLAY as a stand-alone application ?

Muziksculp
07-24-2008, 03:40 PM
OH... I did not notice your answer to my RAM question, since it was in your P.S. (I should have read more carefully :) )


Thank You.

rimskykorsakov
07-24-2008, 03:46 PM
OH... I did not notice your answer to my RAM question, since it was in your P.S.

Ah , okay.

But I have to add that I was referring to the use of PLAY within Logic.

In standalone ( under OS X 10.4.11 ) I can't access the extra RAM.
PLAY is freezing when I've loaded some 2,5 GB .

Maybe that's different under Leopard.


- Gerd

Muziksculp
07-24-2008, 04:09 PM
I see, so you can access the additional RAM only when using PLAY as a plug-in within Logic, using OSX Tiger, on a PPC. (Any advantages for staying in Tiger instead of upgrading your G5 to Leopard ?)

It would be interesting to know if running PLAY as a stand-alone in Leopard would allow for accessing more than 2.5 GB of RAM ? Are there any advantages of running PLAY version 1.0.79 in OSX "Leopard" on a PPC Mac, either as a plug-in, or as a stand-alone application ?

Thanks.

rimskykorsakov
07-24-2008, 04:20 PM
(Any advantages for staying in Tiger instead of upgrading your G5 to Leopard ?)

My system is rocksolid and I don't think my system would be faster
or more stable with Leopard than it is now.
The next generation of MacPro's can't be that far away , and
I will definitely get one, but until then I can live without a Leopard in my house .


It would be interesting to know if running PLAY as a stand-alone in Leopard would allow for accessing more than 2.5 GB of RAM ? Are there any advantages of running PLAY in OSX Leopard on a PPC Mac ?



I'd like to know that too !!!

Anyone ? Maybe Jonathan can clarify this ???? (please)

- Gerd