Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

196,759 users have contributed to 43,031 threads and 258,436 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 13 new post(s) and 90 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. General & Hardware
  3. SSD or Slave Computer ?
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC

    Hi DG

    Sorry for my english I was not thinking it was insulting !

    Are you saying that Windows does not know how to deal with a Raid 0 ! that using a Raid of SSD does not allow dividing the loading time by 10 and does not allow to reduce pre-load buffer size !

    Best

    Cyril
  • N
    N

    Ondine, an i3 definitely will not be sufficient for full orchestra.  The specs for full VSL use - with MIR Pro - would be at least an i7.  Real world performance will vary from individual to individual based on workflow, but for most, an i7 4930k or the older 3930k i7 will be more than sufficient.  Dietz has remarked that in the case of his own specific workflow (and this is a specific example - not a general one), on his i7 3930k he is able to get around 100 VSL instrument tracks in MIR Pro.  

    Using SSDs, with their reduced required loading buffer for VSL samples, 32 gigs of RAM will likely be enough.  If you use a lot of sample libraries by other developers, there may still be a potential need for 64 gigs, but I cannot directly speak to that, as for what I write and do, I more or less live in VSL land.  What I can say is that in my existing system (an i7 930 with 24 gigs of RAM), is that more than 24 gigs would be helpful.  Note also that I currently have only one small SSD drive so not that many of the loading buffers can be reduced.

    Also, the VSL developers have stated several times their libraries perform better on the Windows platform than on Mac.  The DAW builder I am most familiar with also confirms better overall DAW performance on Windows over Mac, and for quite awhile that company (ADK) tested and sold both PCs and Macs.  Windows certainly can handle RAID, but unless you intend to be very high-end, streaming from SSD's without RAID is enough.
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @Another User said:

    Are you saying that Windows does not know how to deal with a Raid 0 ! that using a Raid of SSD does not allow dividing the loading time by 10 and does not allow to reduce pre-load buffer size !

    No, I'm saying that you don't need RAID, becuase it works very well using SSD without RAID, and you also don't have to worry about swap (page file), becuase it is not an issue in Windows.

    DG
  • N
    N

    And Cyril, I agree with DG, your English is much better than my French (had two years of French decades ago in high school, but was horrible at it.[:)]
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC
    last edited
    last edited

    @DG said:

    No, I'm saying that you don't need RAID, becuase it works very well using SSD without RAID, and you also don't have to worry about swap (page file), becuase it is not an issue in Windows.

    DG

    If you use a Raid 0, you will load even faster and you will reduce more the preload buffer size

    With 4 x 256 GB you should be able to tripple the I/O (if your PC is able to handle such fast I/O)

    With a raid 0 , you multiply by 1.5 the I/O per disk

    Windows does not swap ? when it need more memory  ?
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @Cyril said:

    Windows does not swap ? when it need more memory  ?

    1. With Windows you can use more of the installed RAM before you get into problems. OSX is less forgiving.
    2. You would never allow the page file to be used for something such as sample streaming, as that would degrade perfornnace.

    DG
  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC
    last edited
    last edited

    @Cyril said:

    Windows does not swap ? when it need more memory  ?

    1. With Windows you can use more of the installed RAM before you get into problems. OSX is less forgiving.
    Hi DG,
    Your informations are a bit out of date, there is no more the RAM limit in OS X, since a few years !
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @Cyril said:

    Windows does not swap ? when it need more memory  ?

    1. With Windows you can use more of the installed RAM before you get into problems. OSX is less forgiving.
    Hi DG,
    Your informations are a bit out of date, there is no more the RAM limit in OS X, since a few years !

    Interesting. I've alway been told that when you get close to the installed RAM limit (and this happens in OSX before it would in Windows)) the sawp file is used and you can't stop that from happening. Is that not the case any more?

    DG
  • W
    W

     Cyril, DG,

    Related to this question - thanks for that info on the other thread.  I am going to get at least 500 GB of SSD space.  I am wondering if that should be a single larger SSd or deliberately use several smaller ones.   If using the smaller ones perhaps with samples the Raid is not needed as the samples each come from a discrete source on the separate drives and are not spread across drives?   I'm not saying that, just asking - is there are specific reason for any one of these configurations?  Thanks for your help!  I greatly appreciate hearing from expert users. 

  • Cyril BlancC
    Cyril BlancC

    Hi William,

    From what I know, (I may be wrong) VSL is loading the samples in serial.

    So putting you lib on different small ssd will no improve the loading time.

    With a raid 0, a sample is cut into segments and is spread accross the disks of the raid

    So when the cpu ask for a sample the controler is reading your sample in parrallel gaining 1.5 per sdd/disk ; this is limited by the I/O speed of the channel.

    If you want to know more about raid : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID