[Amp block] Improving CPU usage

Clive

Clive

Experienced
Hi,

If an amp block had no parameter, nothing to tweak but set to the position I chose and like, would it use less CPU resources ?
 
Not at all.
It's something weird I know because how can I set parameters positions to my taste if there is nothing to tweak ? Just imagine this : when FAS builds a block amp, they build it with a lot of parameters for users. If they chose to make no parameter available for users and set this amp block to their taste, would this amp block use less CPU resources ?
 
Amp blocks have a dedicated CPU, there is some overhead on the other processor but very little. When you look at CPU use, you are not looking at what the amp blocks is really using.However, the output compressor in the amp block will increase CPU load. the amp block (other than the output compressor) is not really the place to look for CPU savings.
 
Clive said:
Just imagine this : when FAS builds a block amp, they build it with a lot of parameters for users. If they chose to make no parameter available for users and set this amp block to their taste, would this amp block use less CPU resources ?
Click to expand...
This is not how computers work. All parameters are just variables in a giant equation and simulated digital circuit. Even if all parameters would be constants and un-accessable to the user, the CPU load would still be the same.


Think about it like this: If you build a house and the architect doesn't ask you if you want your roof red or black, you'd still have a roof.
 
Zwiebelchen said:
This is not how computers work. All parameters are just variables in a giant equation and simulated digital circuit. Even if all parameters would be constants and un-accessable to the user, the CPU load would still be the same.


Think about it like this: If you build a house and the architect doesn't ask you if you want your roof red or black, you'd still have a roof.
Click to expand...

No idea if this is accurate or not, but philosophically speaking - I'm sure some parameters could be eliminated entirely as equations. Think some of the settings that get nullified when "Ideal/Smooth" is selected, etc - I assume those equations could be removed entirely, for whatever little processing power that would save.

Brb picking nits
 
Wolfenstein98k said:
No idea if this is accurate or not, but philosophically speaking - I'm sure some parameters could be eliminated entirely as equations. Think some of the settings that get nullified when "Ideal/Smooth" is selected, etc - I assume those equations could be removed entirely, for whatever little processing power that would save.

Brb picking nits
Click to expand...

It is very accurate. Parameters are data, CPU usage come from code getting executed. In "Ideal/Smooth" mode for example, the same code executes, with some other data set
 
Clive said:
Just imagine this : when FAS builds a block amp, they build it with a lot of parameters for users. If they chose to make no parameter available for users and set this amp block to their taste, would this amp block use less CPU resources ?
Click to expand...
The CPU usage would be the same. All those parameters are still there, whether you can see and adjust them or not.

For example, suppose you like the Mid control set at 7, and you leave it there. The Axe still has to process your sound for the Mid knob set to 7...even if you never change the setting. It doesn't matter if you take away the ability to adjust the knob. The Axe still has to perform all the calculations for the Mid knob.

What eats up your CPU is the actual processing of the sound. It takes almost zero CPU to change a parameter.
 
Last edited:
yek said:
You just described 'profiling'.
Click to expand...

shock.gif



lynchmob.gif



biggrin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom