@Mike B Studios said:
440 instruments... I imagined something large but this makes my head hurt.How about 64gbs of ram on your host Mac. Then 2 more 12 core Macs with 64gbs of ram each.
Now run 150 instruments on each Mac.
Experiment or not, I don't think this can be done on one machine... But that's just me.
hehe....if Steve Jobs has a daughter, I could always try to engage her in order to inherit Apple, then I will slave 30 x 12core to my machine...but I've become very lazy also in engaging women..
Mike, my "in-real-life" idea was not to run all 440 instrument together, but just to have them all ready and loaded, depending on the project / song...so this test was just meant to "benchmark" the system...in fact I'll never play in a song 400 series of furious fast notes at the same time just to trigger all the samples of all the libs, but I thought this was a funny method to stress the power of a system...then, seeing in the end IT SEEMS I might run 10/11 of all those instruments in that crazy way, but noticing that infamous usage of the cpu, I wondered what would happen maxing out/ buying 96 gigs of ram ( which seems to me still the best bang for the buck, compared to all the other very expensive solutions)...in the end, if you think of it, what would be the sense of life if a mac pro which can be equipped with all that ram is not able to fully handle it?
I mean, all other apps can benefit of much less ram, but audio and samples are made for ram, no??
Some days I wake up thinking maxing out ram can free the cpu from the stress, but other days I fear increasing ram will only lead to bottlenecks and issues...so I'm asking to the experts here if anybody ever experimented this, or if anybody here knows if "de facto" whatever boost of ram can help in this very case, without shade of a doubt.