FM3 "Base Load" CPU use and "Upper Load" CPU use seem *very* high - is this likely to be addressed (?)

ben ifin

ben ifin

Experienced
Hey all !

Running 3.01 - just did a very simple test

-> 1 x Input Block with 1 x Output Block and no-blocks / shunted in-between => base CPU load of ~ %20.5
-> made a preset that hit the %83 level and it was in a warning state and very sluggish / unusable to use

This all says to me that my FM3 has a useable CPU percentage range of around %60 percentage points to %63 percentage points ?!

Is this something that's being worked on (?) It seems like there could be potential significant gains here in terms of releasing CPU load for more blocks (?)

Thanks,
Ben
 
The input and output blocks use CPU. The shunts use CPU. The display uses CPU. Communicating over USB uses CPU. Just keeping the operating system running takes CPU. All this before you add an Amp or effect block.
 
Rex said:
The input and output blocks use CPU. The shunts use CPU. The display uses CPU. Communicating over USB uses CPU. Just keeping the operating system running takes CPU. All this before you add an Amp or effect block.
Click to expand...
From the manual: On the FM3, CPU usage does not increase when USB is connected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rex
I understand all the above.

Putting aside the "idle" CPU load of ~ %20, it seems to me that the FM3 as it is now is "far from optimized" - I could understand presets hitting the wall in the low-to-mid-%90 CPU range, but at %81 <-> %83 that's a long way from %100.

Just my observation, not looking to start anything.

Ben
 
ben ifin said:
I understand all the above.

Putting aside the "idle" CPU load of ~ %20, it seems to me that the FM3 as it is now is "far from optimized" - I could understand presets hitting the wall in the low-to-mid-%90 CPU range, but at %81 <-> %83 that's a long way from %100.

Just my observation, not looking to start anything.

Ben
Click to expand...

i think its the price of admission to keep the amp modelling on par with the 3 . looking at your recent findings
the basic operation of in/out /amp/cab
cpu has increased , when the FM3 came out last March it was around 14% so that tells me the amp improvements have cost some additional cpu
 
Randalljax said:
i think its the price of admission to keep the amp modelling on par with the 3 . looking at your recent findings
the basic operation of in/out /amp/cab
cpu has increased , when the FM3 came out last March it was around 14% so that tells me the amp improvements have cost some additional cpu
Click to expand...
He listed Input and Output, not Amp/Cab block.

Also I believe the CPU percent doesn't include the Amp block that runs on another CPU...
 
ben ifin said:
I understand all the above.

Putting aside the "idle" CPU load of ~ %20, it seems to me that the FM3 as it is now is "far from optimized" - I could understand presets hitting the wall in the low-to-mid-%90 CPU range, but at %81 <-> %83 that's a long way from %100.

Just my observation, not looking to start anything.

Ben
Click to expand...

It’s just numbers. Regard 20% as 0, and 83% as 95. Fractal Audio develops high-quality algorithms and they require power. A manufacturer will do anything to get the most out of the available power.
 
On my AF3 (15.01) I get:
5% CPU: no blocks​
9% CPU: IN1 -> shunts -> OUT1​

If the FM3 uses one CPU and it must preallocate ~50% to AMP/CAB, then 20% base CPU is not unreasonable. But if it was 14% previously that might warrant investigation.
 
Last edited:
FM3 has 2 CPUs. Amps and Delays share a CPU.

The CPUs must run everything: algorithms, modifiers, audio, GUI, system, background tasks, expression pedals, communications, etc.

There has to be headroom for all this, so a preset can never go to 100%.
 
Would anyone try to run a PC up to 90% or more CPU usage and is still the opinion that there should be no issues at this high level ?
See the modellers as computers that are highly specialized for computing audio signals in realtime. (Most applications on PC do not need realtime calculation !)
And so it makes sense that there is a usage of CPU needed for GUI and other stuff too and if you hit the range over 80% you may get issues, like with a computer.
For example, if I'm managing presets and cabs, I dial in an empty preset and reading and writing data run much faster than doing this with a preset that uses around 70% or more of overall CPU.
May fractal will implement a second "used by preset" CPU usage view in future because of confused users ;)
Or adapt the CPU usage by substracting the 40% for OS and warning limit and display this range from 0% to 100% (This will not be the real CPU values but may prevent confused users)
 
Last edited:
BTW, on my FM3 CPU usage is 12% with an empty grid, and 18% with [IN]-[OUT].
 
Genuinely not wanting or trying to be problematic here - its just that a "ceiling" of %83 is confusing / from a user perspective comes across as somewhat arbitrary - especially if %83 full system load is in reality %95<-> %100 full system load ?!

Peace out :)
 
ben ifin said:
Genuinely not wanting or trying to be problematic here - its just that a "ceiling" of %83 is confusing / from a user perspective comes across as somewhat arbitrary - especially if %83 full system load is in reality %95<-> %100 full system load ?!

Peace out :)
Click to expand...
Sure man, no prob, that's understandable. Translating 20%-80% to 0-100 has been proposed by some, but that could spawn additional problems since CPU % is not something static. I think you can get some answers in the link I gave above. Like with any other device, it's better to understand how everything works. In this case, the 80% ceiling is also clearly stated in the manual and multiple warning messages and signs in the UI.
 
Keep posting this and fractal will change total CPU usage to Cpu availability showing 0-100%.
Users sometimes are happier not knowing to much XD. I'm talking as a dev here .
 
yek said:
FM3 has 2 CPUs. Amps and Delays share a CPU.

The CPUs must run everything: algorithms, modifiers, audio, GUI, system, background tasks, expression pedals, communications, etc.

There has to be headroom for all this, so a preset can never go to 100%.
Click to expand...
Hi Yek!
Where can I read more about this does all the delay blocks run separately? (Plex, multitap, etc) or just the 2 normal delay blocks?
Also I remember back when FM3 was in development Reverb was the block to operate in a separate black with amp, do you know why that changedi always thought it was better for performance, wasn't aware it had changed until recently.
Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom