Issues with CPU load post FW7.0

[nneilboss]

Hi folks

Recently updated to FW7.0. Cannot say my battered old ears really detected any tonal differences this time but one thing I did notice after the upgrade was that some of my presets now are in the red zone for CPU (85%) whereas before they were under 80%. I don't let things get into that zone cause the last thing I want is for the FM9 to zone out in the middle of a gig (which happened once and I do not want to repeat that).

I don't think I am imagining it: it is quite a complex preset with a TC Electronic Mimiq doubler in the external loop which feeds two independent stereo drive/amp/cab channels. It also uses a synth block and pitch block for a synth drone in the prechorus of the song. I have this because we are just one guitar and bass plus vox and drums and I need to fill a lot of space on this Black Keys song (Gold on the Ceiling), which has lots of keys and stuff going on.

Yeah, I know I could optimise CPU by taking out the drive blocks and maybe bringing the stereo channels together before the cab. But this worked fine before and it gives the flexibility to have different amp and cab setups.

Any thoughts on what is going on here?

 

[chris]

get rid of all those Shunts at the bottom and you'll probably be under 80% again.

 

[nolesj]

I agree with chris- lose all the shunts and you should be fine. I also noticed a slight bump in CPU with FW7, but the improvement is worth it IMO.

 

[Joshua_L]

Too many shunts, it looks nice on the editor but it’s useless.
And maybe drop a little de quality of the reverb and you’ll be good

 

[nneilboss]

Thanks - nearly 10 years of using this Fractal kit and I did not know that shunts took CPU. Removing shunts took it down by 3%, which is enough to stop the warnings. The reverb quality did not do anything; I think maybe because I read somewhere that reverb has a dedicated processor. I tried the preset with just one cab in stereo - not as fat and wide as two cabs somehow. Thanks fellas

 

[unix-guy]

Too many shunts, it looks nice on the editor but it’s useless.
And maybe drop a little de quality of the reverb and you’ll be good

Reverb runs on a dedicated core on the FM9. Run it on Ultra High... It won't use more CPU

 

[SRegal]

Yeah, I had the same exact problem. I had to tighten up my patch, as suggested above

 

[Joshua_L]

Yeah, I had the same exact problem. I had to tighten up my patch, as suggested above

Still one empty shunt to delete.
You can do it!!! lol.

 

[Chromatizm]

Still one empty shunt to delete.

Actually, two
And it seems like this preset can be done in one line which will save latency from Send-Return and some more CPU

 

[Joshua_L]

Ф

Actually, two
And it seems like this preset can be done in one line which will save latency from Send-Return and some more CPU

You’re right but I can also understand that the send return is better if you are planning to add more blocks.

 

[Chromatizm]

You’re right but I can also understand that the send return is better if you are planning to add more blocks.

Say no more, Send for the rescue (pun intended)

I just meant to demonstrate that you can insert a send-return literally anywhere and expand two rows into 10 rows if needed just by that trick

 

[unix-guy]

Say no more, Send for the rescue (pun intended)
View attachment 140259
I just meant to demonstrate that you can insert a send-return literally anywhere and expand two rows into 10 rows if needed just by that trick

Since you have only 4 rows in the grid and 2 Send/Return blocks, that would be a really cool trick

 

[Chromatizm]

Since you have only 4 rows in the grid and 2 Send/Return blocks, that would be a really cool trick

English hates me sometimes!
I meant columns!
Sorry!
I wanted to demonstrate that you can turn this

In something like this very easily, no need to re-arrange the whole grid