UAD Sucks i7 Memory [Archive]

Michael Tibes

01-22-2009, 07:36 AM

Hi Vin,

You'll probably laugh your butt off when you read this, but the dpc spikes were caused by a tool that was installed from the gigabyte driver cd - some overclocking tool, don't remember the name now. The moment I turned it off the dpc spikes were down to below 20 at idle without cards installed. Before that I tried disabling every possible bit of hardware, without success of course.

I'm really overrun with work these days, so for now I'm happy that the box is running and is a huge improvement for my setup, though I'm aware that I might get even more out of it if I had the time and money to do more research. Unfortunately I'm not aware of anyone here in Berlin who provides a highly qualified daw service. If anyone has a recommendation, please let me know. In the normal shops I always end up teaching people what things are about, that is really boring...

Michael

TAFKAT

01-22-2009, 10:29 AM

Hi Vin,

You'll probably laugh your butt off when you read this, but the dpc spikes were caused by a tool that was installed from the gigabyte driver cd - some overclocking tool, don't remember the name now. The moment I turned it off the dpc spikes were down to below 20 at idle without cards installed. Before that I tried disabling every possible bit of hardware, without success of course.

Hey Michael,

Yep , that would have done it.. :rofl2:

As soon as I saw your post a few weeks back, the first thing I said to myself was, I bet he has installed the Easytune overclocking app , but had no way of getting the info to you.

Anyhow, great to hear the system is kicking for you now , all the best Mate, enjoy..:D

tunetown

01-23-2009, 08:38 PM

After some more testing with Vin's test I am confident the systems runs solid natively. I reached 134 plugs at 32 samples before glitches appear.

I've narrowed the problem down to the UAD-2 card. When I open Vins test and replace with UAD plugs I immediately got clicks and pops.

Over at the UAD forum they are saying there appears to be a problem with the Vista64 driver. Those who rolled back to XP did not have the problem anymore. Looks like I should roll back too. I can't wait for a new driver. I need to mix.

How's XP64? I really do want the extra memory.

Cheers

TAFKAT

01-23-2009, 09:05 PM

Hey Peter,

Haven't tried the UAD2 under XPx64 to be honest, but I do like it over Vista64 as an overall DAW O.S.

BTW: I am experiencing the dreaded ASIO munching issues at low latencies with the UAD2's on the X58 / XPSP3 dev system.

I am hearing a few more reports that UAD2 are not playing nice with the latest X58 systems, which has more to do with how the PCIe bridge is now arbitration with the new Intel Quickpath interconnect I suspect. There are also reports on the newer AMD systems as well as last gen Intel of ASIO munching, so I think UAD have some work to do there .. :-(

What latency are you wanting to work at ?

tunetown

01-23-2009, 10:27 PM

I usually track with 64 samples. Playing BFD with Roland TD12 starts to get funky after 128. I raise the buffer when mixing. I never track with UAD so not really a problem there.

Lets hope UAD are on the case and will sort this out with the next driver. I'll be pissed to have all this power and can't run my UAD plugs.

So, in your opinion should I persist with Vista? It seem ok otherwise.

Cheers

tunetown

01-23-2009, 11:30 PM

It seems XP64 is suffering the same problems. UA are aware and are working on it.

Here's some more info

http://www.chrismilne.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=10529

http://www.cubase.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=109055&highlight=uad2

The quest continues

Cheers

TAFKAT

01-24-2009, 12:03 AM

Hey Peter,

Thanks for the heads up..

Re My personal opinion on Vista, if I can leapfrog it entirely I will.

My Vista partitions work fine on my development and test DAW systems , I just think its a lethargic , resource hungry , lipstick on a pig of an O.S, and I can't wait to see the back of it.

Windows 7 Beta is showing some promise, but its still too bloated for my liking, with its base memory footprint still way above what XPSP3.

Hopefully they can trim the fat even further before prime time..

tunetown

01-25-2009, 09:38 PM

:headbang-1:
Rolling back to XPSP3 today. Man, what a waste of time Vista is. I was prepared to tough it out but once Ivory starting funking out I've had it.

Maybe I'll give W7 64 a go when the bugs are sorted. For now, I just need to mix.

Cheers

tunetown

01-26-2009, 01:15 AM

Man... Talk about PITA..

Now I'm getting disk read errors when tring to install xp. Any ideas??

Do I need to make a smaller partition?? Or, do I need to load an f6 driver? Its a 500 gig SATA.

Cheers

tunetown

01-26-2009, 01:53 AM

Sorted.

Did an 80gig partition and is installing fine.

Geez, I thought they sorted the large disk problem.

Cheers

TAFKAT

01-26-2009, 10:25 PM

Sorted.

Did an 80gig partition and is installing fine.

Geez, I thought they sorted the large disk problem.

Cheers

Peter,

You will find in all their wisdom, Gigabyte defaults the SATA Ports 0-3 HD Mode to IDE Legacy in the BIOS on the X58 boards , you need to change it to Native.

tunetown

01-26-2009, 10:31 PM

Thanks Vin.

I'm hoping to have all the software loaded in the next day or so. It will be interesting how your test goes in XP. I wonder If I'll be able to run more instances than Vista.

Cheers

TAFKAT

01-26-2009, 10:37 PM

Hey Peter,

I expect you will squeeze some more out of it.. :D

Let us know how it goes..

tunetown

01-26-2009, 10:41 PM

Sure will.

Did you get a chance to play with Vista64 and UAD-2 over the weekend? As far as I'm concerened it's an absolute rubbish partnership. Whether it's Vista or UAD it just isn't good enough.

I'm hoping windows 7 will be better. I really need to get to 64 bit sooner rather than later. Maybe I'll try XP64 if UAD get their driver sorted.

Cheers

TAFKAT

01-26-2009, 10:45 PM

Didn't do anything on the weekend except kicked back with some beers and and a few barbies.. :D

I'll see if I can get a Vista64 partition happening on the dev system later this week if/when I get some clear air..

Animus

01-27-2009, 12:17 AM

You guys have phones? What don't you call each other?

:phone3:

TAFKAT

01-27-2009, 12:30 AM

.. do I hear an echo in here..:eusa_think:

Softy

01-27-2009, 12:33 AM

.. do I hear an echo in here..:eusa_think:

Yeah, what is this "don't you guys have phones" stuff about? Are we wasting too much virtual space or something?

tunetown

01-28-2009, 05:43 PM

Ok, back on topic,

Finally got XPSP3 running stable. It was a bit of a mission. One of the windows updates, Not sure which one, seems to have killed performance on the first install.

Loaded N4 and ran The dawbench test. Managed to get 135 plugs at 32 samples running smooth without glitches. Surprisingly that was only 1 more than Vista 64 at the same sample rate. Vista seems ok native with the exception of some plugs don't like it.

The huge difference for me was that at 128 samples I was able to load the UAD-2 Quad to 98% achieving 81 88RS's on the Dawbench test. I couldn't even load 1 with the vista64 OS.

So, basically, XP it is until they get a suitable and useable 64 bit platform. UAD have some work to do with 64 bit.

Thanks Vin for your advice and assistance. I picked up the phone and saved your precious virtual space.:icon_rolleyes:

Cheers

Cheers

TAFKAT

01-28-2009, 05:48 PM

Hey Peter,

Great to hear.. :D

See phones do serve a purpose....:rotfl:

03-16-2009, 04:25 PM

So I will add my hat to the arena of people who can't get a stable 64 bit OS working with UAD-1 cards and i7/X58.

I just built my new system, i7 920, 6 GB OCZ DDR3 12800, Gigabyte EX58-UD3R and it works great until I connect the Magma with my 4 UAD-1 cards. No problems right down to 32 samples without them. It wouldn't be such a big deal if I didn't have so much invested in UAD, and not just money: I use them heavily in every single project.

So now I'm rather stuck. I can't work on any projects because my 32 bit XP only recognizes 1.75 GB of my 6 GB...

Other than that, the system is great. I put it all into an Antec Sonata Elite case which gets very high marks for everything. It is quiet, easy to work with, and lovely to look at, not that you'd spend much time doing that.

TAFKAT

03-16-2009, 05:40 PM

Hmmmm,

Whats the actual problem, is it the same as what Peter highlighted ?

BTW only 1.75 GB of the 6GB installed.. , thats odd , Peter has 6GB as well and hasn't reported the memory dropping that far unless its the UAD-1 reserving all of the memory.., ouchhh.., can you pull one stick and drop it back to 4GB / dual channel - just for testing, I'd be interested what that reports back..

03-16-2009, 10:00 PM

well, I pulled one stick and it still reads 1.75 GB on the sysinfo panel. Cripes.

OTOH, I am sure that UAD will come up with a fix. If not, the Magma and these 4 cards are going on eBay and I'll get a UAD2.

tunetown

03-17-2009, 01:03 AM

What does it read without the UAD's attached?

I have turned on the 3 gig switch with the UAD-2 quad and using
USERVA=2900. Running very stable. If you turn on the 3 gig switch with 4 cards in a magma make sure you use the USERVA=2600. UAD cards seem to suck about 100 meg per card.

I never looked but I'll check the memeory usage tonight and see where it sits and report back tomorrow.

Cheers

03-17-2009, 03:04 AM

Vinark

03-17-2009, 04:16 AM

Wow, sure enough it reads 3.25 GB without the Magma and with all three DIMMs inserted. Very odd.

There is no change when setting the userva or adding the 3gb switches. Incidentally, most of the documentation on the userva switch is geared towards Exchange Server. There doesn't appear to be much precedent for using it with other applications. I would imagine it is an unnecessary switch in the case of DAW software.

When running cubendo you get an improved memory usage from 1.6gb to ~2.6gb. The only issues are that all your plugins must work with it (and not all seem to do) and with very high plugin counts you can get empty GUI´s, because of lack of available system ram. But for example on a Kontakt3 workstation it is very worthwhile!

zvenx

03-17-2009, 11:36 AM

When running cubendo you get an improved memory usage from 1.6gb to ~2.6gb. The only issues are that all your plugins must work with it (and not all seem to do) and with very high plugin counts you can get empty GUI´s, because of lack of available system ram. But for example on a Kontakt3 workstation it is very worthwhile!

yep audioease speakerphone doesn't work with /3GB switch neither does RMX 1.7 and up so far from spectrasonics.
rsp

psvennevig

03-17-2009, 12:56 PM

Wow, sure enough it reads 3.25 GB without the Magma and with all three DIMMs inserted. Very odd.

There is no change when setting the userva or adding the 3gb switches. Incidentally, most of the documentation on the userva switch is geared towards Exchange Server. There doesn't appear to be much precedent for using it with other applications. I would imagine it is an unnecessary switch in the case of DAW software. In addition, some MS documentation shows that the lowest value to set userva to is 2800.

Additionally, I am running a 20 odd percent overclock on the i7 ATM with no hassle. I am really loving the new setup except for my UAD issues.

I guess the 4 UAD-1s in the Magma simply steals that much of memory mapped i/o on this new i7 system. Nothing you can do about that.
This is the real culprit today with x86 32 bit OS and many installed i/o cards.

Sadly also one of the reasons I dropped DSP cards over 1 year ago.

The memory mapped issue is of course gone with x64 OS, but then we need stable drivers :-)

Pål

Animus

03-17-2009, 01:52 PM

The memory mapped issue is of course gone with x64 OS, but then we need stable drivers :-)

Pål

And a stable 64bit Cubendo....:eusa_whistle:
:icon_biggrin::icon_biggrin:

psvennevig

03-17-2009, 03:32 PM

Yeah, of course a stable 64 bit Cubendo.
And I believe it is, but the VSTbridge for 32 bit plugins can't be used for proper work, and it isn't many 64 bit plugins, even though the numbers are growing.

BUT! Running 32 bit Cubendo on x64 OS, do give you 4GB of RAM for Cubendo, no problems with memory mapped i/o.
THEN you only need stable 64 bit drivers for say UAD-1/2 or PoCo, or Duendo, or your soundcard, Decklink card etc. etc.

I think we'll see more of 64 bit DAWs with Windows7. It is clearly a better OS compared to Vista.

And of course Snow Leopard from Apple, but that again needs a 64 bit Cubendo for OSX if you want to use more than 4GB of RAM for Cubendo.

Pål

TAFKAT

03-17-2009, 06:08 PM

As Pal noted, Cubendo x86 under x64 is great, as long as the rest play ball.

I have clients systems running out there with RME/Lynx/Decklink combo's , with a wide list of plugs/VSTi's , no problem under XPx64 and Cubendo 32.

This is more a UAD1 memory allocation issue under XP32 , and the sucky x64 drivers than anything else in the case highlighted by D, and Peter from Tunetown , so I would suggest Peter edit the title of the thread to something more appropriate, as "i7 not so stable" is sending the wrong message to those reading in for the first time, and more dangerously , skimmers , who just pick up on the headline and start a new internet rumour... LOL

Don't laugh guys, I have already put out numerous fires with concerned prospective clients giving me chapter and verse how they have read that i7 is incompatible with audio apps and unstable..

Let me tell you, in this slowing economic climate , its the last thing I/we need... :-)

03-17-2009, 07:03 PM

well, the point on the 32 bit XP install is now moot, as that has been sporked somehow and I cannot even boot into it without a blue screen, even in safe mode.

Sadly, unless UA fix this issue pronto, I am going to have to ditch the UAD cards, as all of my projects are using them heavily, and I'm in no mood to halt my entire work process while they fix this problem. I'm thinking I can get at least $1000 for the 4 cards, the Magma chassis and all of the extra plugins I paid for, but now cannot use.

Does anyone know if UAD plugs will work with FX Teleport? It's a possible solution, but not one I look forward to. I already own FX Teleport though, so it would be a relatively painless application.

tunetown

03-17-2009, 07:07 PM

I can confirm D's finding in regards to the UAD memory requirements. I missed this initially because I've been predominantly working audio these last few projects.

Last night I open, or tried to open, some older projects that are VSTi intense. Out of memory errors continued whilst opening. These same projects opened fine with 4 UAD-1 cards in a magma on the old Tyan S2895 Opteron and the 3 gig switch on. Checked memory usage and sure enough only reading 1.93 gigs. Huh, What the...???

I haven't yet removed the UAD quad to see if that's the culprit.

Vin, you have a test board there with a UAD2 Duo. Are you seeing this on yours?

Thanks for picking this up D. I've got some TV work coming in and I need heavy samples. I may need to return to the Vista 64 and dump the UAD2 until they find a fix. This really sux.

Cheers

tunetown

03-17-2009, 07:08 PM

Oh, and Vin, I changed the thread title to something more appropriate as suggested.

Cheers

TAFKAT

03-17-2009, 08:09 PM

I haven't yet removed the UAD quad to see if that's the culprit.

Vin, you have a test board there with a UAD2 Duo. Are you seeing this on yours?

Hey Peter,

I actually don't have the UAD2 in the dev system, as I sold it on.. :-(

I'll see if I can get my hands on another one to do some quick testing in the meantime..

So with a single UAD2 you are seeing total memory under 2GB total as well.. ?

I can see this starting to snowball.. :-(

I still have a UAD1 here, I'll see what it throws up on the X58 system.

These memory allocation issues are not new with UAD's, I have had an issue with my ASUS i975 workstation board refusing to see anything above 2GB with a single UAD1 installed , something that I only pinpointed being the UAD1 recently..

I am disliking any form of DSP more and more as we progress.., and my love hate of anything UAD continues.

So we have incredible Native horsepower at our disposal with the i7/x58 systems, and they are being crippled in x86 due to UAD's inane and archaic resource mapping ..

Time for a change..

Lets start a "War On DSP Powered Plugins" ... just kidding, flow on joke from another thread... :-)

03-17-2009, 08:48 PM

Well, I spent last night into this morning trying all different switches in the BIOS, but nothing gave me joy. In the process I lost my XP 32 install, but it was headed out the door anyway, so that's not a big deal.

At this point I am ready to go native and ditch the UADs and the Magma, and start converting my projects to native plugins. I haven't got time to waste troubleshooting these issues. The last time I spent this much time on a build was in 1998, and then I spent a 60 hour week fine tuning a dual boot system in Win98/NT for use in video editing, 3D and pro audio. I don't enjoy those troubleshooting sessions. I would rather just get back to work.

tunetown

03-17-2009, 08:59 PM

I'm going to give Vista64 one more chance. I need plenty of ram for an upcoming project. Won't really need low latency. If I can't see more than 2 gig then i'll remove it and see what that brings. There are some people running Vista64 with 32bit programs without issues. I wish I was one.

Cheers

03-17-2009, 09:27 PM

Why not try using Xp 64? That's what I installed, although I haven't yet to load it up with any serious soft.

I just don't like bloat, and Vista is full of it.

tunetown

03-17-2009, 09:52 PM

Why not try using Xp 64? That's what I installed, although I haven't yet to load it up with any serious soft.

I just don't like bloat, and Vista is full of it.

I don't have a copy. I'm trying not to buy another OS until Win7. I think you can turn a lot of the bloat off. Besides, with this much native power it shouldn't even feel the bloat. Should it??

Cheers

03-17-2009, 10:57 PM

Bloat is bloat and can affect any system, regardless of horsepower. IMO there aren't enough of the hobbyist/engineer types at MS anymore. Too much corporate combing sends those types packing into environs where their special sensibilities find more favor and less scrutiny. FYI I used to be a developer myself. As a hobbyist/engineer, I taught myself assembler language by diving into a project, before the internet made every answer immediately available to every nitwit on the planet, regardless of whether it was the right answer, or not. Regardless of whether or not the answer also required some greater background knowledge to be used properly.

Also IMO, these type of people are being phased out by the mediocrity which has gripped corporates. OT, but relevant is that society has spent so much time convincing people that it's all good, and the exceptional is now found by myopic competitions, which do not favor the unique, but rather the mundane.

Anyone not convinced of this need look no further than "Idol" or any of the other competitions. Are these competitions picking the best and brightest? Sure, if you want all of that to fit in a nice, tiny little box. Well, great engineering rarely fits into a nice little box, just like great music or anything else. Subjecting greatness to myopic competition only serves to limit creative expression.

Rant over.

Cheers.

tunetown

03-18-2009, 12:37 AM

This issue may be more a MOBO issue than an i7 issue. On the UAD forum I posted the same topic and a 920 user is reading 2.99 gig using the Asus P6T Deluxe MOBO.

Don't tell me I found an incompatible UAD MOBO.

Cheers

03-18-2009, 01:11 AM

Yeah, it looks like it might be a motherboard issue, which is why I spent so much effort trying out different BIOS settings. I am wondering if I can even return the motherboard at this juncture, or if the folks at Gogabyte can come up with a solution.

In my testing, I also tried turning off the cards in the configuration applet. Same problems.

TAFKAT

03-18-2009, 02:09 AM

Its definitely getting interesting , maybe time to contact Gigabyte and see what they can offer.

I am not holding my breath on that one to be honest unless enough people make the same noise.

Its pretty odd that both UAD1 and UAD2 are suffering from the issue tho.

tunetown

03-18-2009, 02:12 AM

Here ya go

http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11370

Cheers

03-18-2009, 03:08 AM

Yeah, I found it and deleted my request, but thank you.

So, I pulled out the Magma, and pulled 2 UAD-1s out of it. Put them inside the case, same problem as far as pops & crackles, so it's not the Magma causing the problem.

Also tried it with only one card, in both slots, same deal.

I also tried moving the video card to the second x16 slot, same result.

At this point, I've given up. Unless UA can fix the problem, I have to say I'm out. I'm not sure at this point what I'm going to do. I have a lot invested in this, as I have perhaps 70% of the extra cost plugs, plus the 4 cards plus the Magma. That a huge investment.

I just added up the price of all the extra plugins I bought, and it comes to $2865. Including the 4 cards, at $399 apiece, and we're well over $4K USD.

Damn.

Jcschild

03-18-2009, 11:37 AM

with Vista 64 and probably win 64 (we dont touch it anymore more issues than Vista.) with a 64bit install of cubendo
you can
1) disable in windows core 0 only. (processor affinity)
2) in cubendo disable multiprocessor. worse!
until UAD gets new drivers.

someone had DDR3 1866 ram WTH? pointless
make sure your timings are set to 1600 and loose on the CL etc.
like 999 24 (generally if you set it to 1600 it should auto set the rest correctly but it depends on the tatoo of the ram and if the bios is reading it correctly.

otherwise try a 64bit OS and 32 bit Cubendo.

Scott
ADK

Michael Tibes

03-18-2009, 12:08 PM

I have the EX-58 UD5 board as well under XP 32 sp3 and have the same bluescreen problems if I install more than 1 UAD1. It doesn't matter what other cards are installed - in addition I have 1 duende pcie, 2 pocos and 1 RME digiface in use and my 1 UAD2 quad and 1 UAD 1 work fine with them, but immediately when I insert a 2nd UAD 1 into my magma I can only boot into bluescreens. Actually the system stability is totally awesome, I didn't yet have a bluescreen during work in over 2 months.

I had sent a question about the issue to UAD and got a response back from them, but I must admit that I didn't really comprehend what the person was trying to tell me. I didn't yet follow up on it because I was too busy, but maybe someone here get's a grip on it.

My original question was:

I have a new computer, an Intel i7 920 on a gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5 board with 3 x 2 GB Ram under win XP pro SP3. I have been successfully using a UAD2 quad along with 4 UAD1s which are in a 7 slot Magma chassis together with 2 powercores plus a duende pcie amd a RME digiface pci in the 2nd pci slot on the mobo in my former dual opteron computer. Unfortunately now I can't install more than 1 UAD1, if I insert a 2nd one I either get a bluescreen during bootup or during the driver installation (the first of both driver installs nearly completes and then the system hangs). I had problems with a too high dpc latency with the new board before to which I also attributed the installation problem, but that's fixed now (the average is about 30 with a maximum of 300 during an 8 hour testdrive) - and the installation issue is unaffected from it.
I tried the 5.2 drivers and the 5.1 as well when I was still having the dpc trouble.

Do you have any hints what I could do to get things to work?

And the response was:

This would appear to be an issue related to windows xp
2gig ram limitations. As a test, try uninstalling ram to equal a
total of only 2gig ram installed. Does this fix the problem?
If yes, you may refer to the following info:

Here is the link for info on how to implement the 3gb ram switch: http://www.chrismilne.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9742&p=78501&hilit=3+gb+switch#p78501

In short, this behavior is normal and is a limitation of the motherboard which has a total of 4GB of available "address space". Physical RAM and all PCI/PCIe hardware devices require a portion of this address space. When the amount of installed RAM nears the total capacity of the system, a certain amount of the installed RAM may be reserved for address space for hardware devices. However, how much RAM that is reserved for this purpose is defined by the motherboard. A UAD-1e card requires only 128MB, but 512MB has been allocated. The unused address space in this case is showing up as available to the video card. Unfortunately, this is just "the way it is" with 32-bit systems, and there is not really a workaround short of upgrading to a 64-bit system (and 64-bit version of Windows) with a different motherboard with a higher RAM capacity. (So as a side-note, this is the primary appeal of 64-bit systems, but in reality, for the current needs of the DAW user and with the advent of advanced disk-streaming technology, over 3GB of RAM is generally rather excessive for even the most demanding projects.)

Note that similar behavior will occur by installing any other PCI/PCIe devices as well (depending on the amount of address space each device requires). Also note that Windows Vista 32-bit faces the same limitations as XP. Only a 64-bit OS running on a 64-bit system has a higher address space limit.

Because physical RAM is currently over-allocated for address space on this system, if additional UAD cards are added, it should not require any additional RAM and 2.5GB will still be available to Windows.
I hope this helps and has answered your questions.

There's lots of further reading online about this topic if you are interested, here's one good article:
http://h20331.www2.hp.com/Hpsub/downloads/RAM_Allocation_w-WinXP_HP_MWP_x64.pdf

If anyone sees a possible solution in it, I'd be happy to try it when I find the time. The UAD2 quad has a lot of power, so that I can run all my projects - but seeing my remaining 3 UAD1s being shelved is such a waste!
I need to stay with xp32 because I'd loose the pocos and perhaps the duende if I go 64 bit. Pulling memory sticks seems like a way to do some testing, but in use I'd rather not cripple the awesome memory performance of the I7 by not making use of all 3 channels.

Michael

Jcschild

03-18-2009, 12:46 PM

the issues is 6gig ram and any UADs with XP.
either do 2 x2gig or 3x 1gig

03-18-2009, 03:31 PM

the issues is 6gig ram and any UADs with XP.
either do 2 x2gig or 3x 1gig

No, it is not the issue. I have already tried it with 2 x 2 GB and the behavior was the same.

On another note, I unhooked the Magma last night, reluctantly, and started to setup XP64. I could not find a version od the Syncrosoft driver that would work on XP 64. In addition, their website is poorly organized and you cannot get previous versions that might work.

Pathetic.

03-18-2009, 05:44 PM

Alright. This definitely seems to be an issue with the motherboard, as I've gone out and bought Vista today, and the audio breaks up even without the UADs installed. I've sent a support email to Gigabyte, but at this point, I'm ready to return the board after wasting 3 mofu days on this build.

TAFKAT

03-18-2009, 05:52 PM

I could not find a version od the Syncrosoft driver that would work on XP 64. In addition, their website is poorly organized and you cannot get previous versions that might work.

Pathetic.

D,

I have had some of the latest builds working fine on XPx64..

Whats the actual problem ?

@ Michael Tibes ,

How much ram do you have installed, and what is the total showing on your system ?

Thanks

Jcschild

03-18-2009, 07:30 PM

No, it is not the issue. I have already tried it with 2 x 2 GB and the behavior was the same.

On another note, I unhooked the Magma last night, reluctantly, and started to setup XP64. I could not find a version od the Syncrosoft driver that would work on XP 64. In addition, their website is poorly organized and you cannot get previous versions that might work.

Pathetic.

having more than 4gig in the system with XP and ANY uads is most definately a problem.

may not be your problem but its adding to it.
dump the POS UAD1s and get a UAD2 Quad.

03-18-2009, 09:37 PM

having more than 4gig in the system with XP and ANY uads is most definately a problem.

I have already tried it with 2 x 2 GB and the behavior was the same.

What part of "the behavior was the same" did you not understand?

Its pretty odd that both UAD1 and UAD2 are suffering from the issue tho

may not be your problem but its adding to it.
dump the POS UAD1s and get a UAD2 Quad.

I think maybe you need to brush up on your reading comprehension.

zvenx

03-18-2009, 10:08 PM

you do know scott builds hundred of DAW and Video computers for a living right?
rsp

zvenx

03-18-2009, 10:09 PM

having more than 4gig in the system with XP and ANY uads is most definately a problem.

may not be your problem but its adding to it.
dump the POS UAD1s and get a UAD2 Quad.

Scott I am curious the UAD-2's do not have this problem only the UAD-1's?
Or is it the less of them you have the better so therefore one UAD-2 quad is best.
rsp

TAFKAT

03-18-2009, 11:54 PM

..settle.. :-)

There is more to this , I can't remember having any issues on my X58 dev system, or clients systems with UAD2's, but all those systems only had 3GB of RAM.

Its been reported here by both of the guys running 6GB, or even 4GB with either UAD1 or 2 is causing an issue.

I can't confirm on UAD1 with my dev system atm, simply because my circa 1999 UAD1, yeh you read that right , will not play nice at all, it simply will not boot.., suggesting either a firmware or voltage issue with the earlier cards..

Bottom line is this guys, none of the DAW builders , myself included really need to lift a finger to help on open forums. However, I don't mind feeding the wheel a little as does Scott, as long as its a 2 way street, so lets all play nice..

03-19-2009, 04:11 AM

you do know scott builds hundred of DAW and Video computers for a living right?
rsp

Wow, and I've been in the computer industry for 30 years, having taught myself assembler language in the late 70's, which I would rate as being a bit more complex than building computers, having done both. Since then I've designed game engines at the kernel level, device drivers, financial software and more. I've worked for IBM and other top companies, and I do know what I'm talking about as well. Don't just assume because you don't know someone that you know who they are or what their capabilities are. That is rude, at best, as was his condescending reply.

The fact the he builds DAWs has nothing to do with not reading or understanding what I wrote. Quite frankly, nothing he said rose to the level of sound technical advice, unless you consider saying, "dump the POS UAD1s and get a UAD2 Quad", a respectfully sound technical comeback.

Respect is a also two way street.

Thank you. :)

03-19-2009, 04:39 AM

Its been reported here by both of the guys running 6GB, or even 4GB with either UAD1 or 2 is causing an issue.

To repeat myself: I am having issues with this setup with no UADs installed on Vista 64. Pops & crackles at 32 samples all the way up to 2048.

So, in this particular scenario,it is NOT a UAD issue, but an issue with the motherboard. I would further suggest that the issue is a bus timing issue, judging from my results in the past three days of testing. This only pertains to this particular motherboard, since I have tested no others.

Jcschild

03-19-2009, 11:14 AM

Scott I am curious the UAD-2's do not have this problem only the UAD-1's?
Or is it the less of them you have the better so therefore one UAD-2 quad is best.
rsp

HI Richard,

there is so much to this its not funny. but what do i know i am not a programmer therefore i am clueless.

alot is explained here. but still alot missing
http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10984&p=88437#p88437

again bios of the motherboard, with Vista being the previlent OS installed today (audio is at best 2% of users, XP and new motherboards maybe 5%)
when programing the bios 32bit is an afterthought for most manufacturers.

UADs ARE video cards.
the vendor ID is seen by the bios as such and therfore reserves memory alocation. (this is the missing memory problem we have all seen since day 1 with UADs or any other DSP card)
the issue today is the memory allocation by the bios is being pushed to higher regions (upper 64bit regions) that do not exsist in a 32bit world
(WHEN MORE THAN 4 GIG IS INSTALLED)
with the X58 its 3gig due to the tri-channel.
the bios gets confused by the added ram even though it detects a 32bit OS.

as far UAD1 vs 2.
PCIe no difference
PCI has become problematic on many boards past 1. magma same thing where a PCIe expansion works great.

Scott

Jcschild

03-19-2009, 11:16 AM

..settle.. :-)

Bottom line is this guys, none of the DAW builders , myself included really need to lift a finger to help on open forums. However, I don't mind feeding the wheel a little as does Scott, as long as its a 2 way street, so lets all play nice..

and this kinda crap is exactly why i had not posted in this thread until you emailed me.

i wonder how much he has saved at this point by self building?

Scott

Jcschild

03-19-2009, 11:23 AM

Wow, and I've been in the computer industry for 30 years, having taught myself assembler language in the late 70's, which I would rate as being a bit more complex than building computers, having done both. Since then I've designed game engines at the kernel level, device drivers, financial software and more. .

Thank you. :)

well then get busy rewriting the UAD drivers for the mutlitcore issue.
should have this fixed in no time eh?

MCSE, engineers, coders yup they know it all.

zvenx

03-19-2009, 11:39 AM

Scott I went to the thread and saw this:

"they would fix part of it but would still have 4gig/nVIdia issue, or they would fix that and more than 1 UAD would blow up... back and forth..
we ended up dumping that board for another (obviously w did this from the get go, but finally completely abandoned hope)"

which describes my system.
Not sure if you know but at least with two software vst and vstis (audioease speakerphone, and spectrasonics rmx 1.7 (not omnisphere or 1.5)) I am having no ends of gui problems with the /3GB switch enabled..
can these be related?
or maybe I should email you offline since I am a customer now :-)
rsp

Jcschild

03-19-2009, 12:16 PM

the 3gig switch causes more issues than it resolves. we have not recommended it for a long time and only for Multiple UAD.
once you get the userva dialed in right and change anything in your system poof... its broke again.

see what happens by removing the switch.

Scott

zvenx

03-19-2009, 12:54 PM

oh, they then load fine, just that I can't get much work done as my work methodology uses lots of memory :-)
rsp

Jcschild

03-19-2009, 01:39 PM

time for vista!

Michael Tibes

03-19-2009, 01:41 PM

@ Michael Tibes ,
How much ram do you have installed, and what is the total showing on your system ?

3 x 2 GB installed, 2,75 GB reported by the task manager. I'll try pulling 1 stick to see whether it helps the issue as soon as I got a moment.

Michael

zvenx

03-19-2009, 01:58 PM

time for vista!

Vin shall I say it or you :-)
time for Leopard :-)
seriously I think I will see what Snow leopard has to offer in terms of low latency and if it does well I am going back to a mac.

Doesn't vista have performance issues as compared to XP? or those days are behind us?
rsp

Jcschild

03-19-2009, 03:10 PM

you would have to ask that....

first i need to mention something about the more than 4gig in XP.

we have had a few boards with 6gig and UAD2 only on XP and they work takes a little tweaking, no dont ask...

i didnt want to toss a "blanket statement" without qualifing.

XP VS Vista...

Vista is a resource PIG BUT..... we have our installs down to a somewhat acceptable level BUT....
by now anyone who is even slightly tech savvy understands vista and the ready boost drive.
Vista on boot ram is the same idea.
it also depends on which vista premium, biz or the very overbloated ultimate.

any way the downsides to me are outweighed by the gains at this time.
an 8gig (or 6-12gig i7) on vista 64 even with Cubendo installed @ 32 bit
gives you more memory ability.
yes you have to up the ram and cpu power to over compensate but you are a classic reason why to do it.

even on my office box i am typing on right now where nearly ALL my programs are 32bit i can do more with 8gig ram than i could in xp.

yes there are still a few gotcha's with vista and we are very far from running everything in 64bit but for samples guys you really have no choice unless you want to keep using mulitple slave systems.
even with 12gig ram chances are you still need 1 slave box.

Scott

OK Vin have at it!

zvenx

03-19-2009, 03:14 PM

thanks for the response Scott. will look it over again in more detail later.
but thanks
rsp

TAFKAT

03-19-2009, 05:08 PM

3 x 2 GB installed, 2,75 GB reported by the task manager. I'll try pulling 1 stick to see whether it helps the issue as soon as I got a moment.

Michael

Hey Michael,

O.K heres where it gets really interesting.., and this is under XP32 , right ?

That is about the right amount that should be reported on a 32 Bit O.S , so we need to narrow down what the difference is between yours and the other 2 guys using the same/similar boards..

@D,

Re the Vista issues being reported, can't say I have seen them on my X58 dev system , it performs as expected , just a resource pig as Scott has noted..

I am not questioning you technical knowledge , but from my experience, I have never had issues like that in Vista specifically tied to a motherboard , especially when it worked well in XP, more so the specific drivers involved.

Whats the DPC latency reading under Vista compared to XP, that may give us a hint.

Michael Tibes

03-19-2009, 09:23 PM

Hey Michael,

O.K heres where it gets really interesting.., and this is under XP32 , right ?

That is about the right amount that should be reported on a 32 Bit O.S , so we need to narrow down what the difference is between yours and the other 2 guys using the same/similar boards.

I hope I'll be able to try it on monday. I am using XP 32 sp3, 1 UAD2 quad, 1 UAD1, 2 powercores, 1 Duende pcie, 1 Duende firewire on a pcie fw card and the RME digiface. I am using a beta bios, but don't remember the number now. It's in AHCI mode. I have disabled the onboard sound, the 2nd disk controller and the speed stepping and energy saving functions in the bios.

Michael

Beat Productions

03-20-2009, 04:56 PM

Thought I'd add that I'm running 2 UAD-1 PCIe cards (I'm waiting for a while on the UAD-2) perfectly on my Gigabyte X58-UD3R with 6 gigs of Patriot 1600 ram, !7 920 and Vista 64 Ultimate. Actually, I'm really digging Vista 64 and I have it installed on two other computers, my Q6600 desktop (used for samples) and my Dell Vostro Core 2 Duo laptop with 4 gig of ram. For me, Vista 64 has been the most stable OS so far.
BTW: I ran Windows 7 for a while on my old Q6600 and it was even better but when I got the I7, Ididn't want to go through the day long install with Windows 7 beta only to do it all over again when the full release comes out.

tunetown

03-24-2009, 06:51 PM

I installed Vista64Biz on the weekend on a seperate drive for dual boot. It doing everything right as far the OS is concerned. Showing and reading as expected. I'll build the audio stuff into it over the coming weeks.

On the XP32 install, I just want to clarify that the system shows the correct amount of RAM but I just cant load it past 1.8 gigs. Even with the 3 gig switch. It seems the 3 gig switch no longer works. The sooner I can dump 32 bit the better.

Cheers

TAFKAT

03-25-2009, 10:44 AM

.. the plot's thickening..

Just tested a more current UAD1 on loan from a friend , and it still hung the system boot.

Tracked it down to the Nvidia vid card/driver. Tried different/earlier vid card/driver and managed to boot but the UAD was not being recognised correctly. Similar shite as being reported in the past across various platforms and Nvidia card combo's. Its not as easy as just listing card models/drivers, and the same card/drivers work well on all other systems tested.

Learned 2 things today, 1 being that UAD1's legacy of simply being a circa mid 90's failed mpeg encoding/vid card is still throwing up minefields, and 2, that the cards have not changed at all since the original 1998/1999 rev cards that I still own, proving that they are truly an archaic POS...

All I can say to those hitting walls with them is bin the crap and move on... :-)

I really need to start that War on DSP Cards thread.... LOL

Sam

03-25-2009, 05:40 PM

hey vin, remember my little foray into UAD1 coupled with a new Nvidia driver....=no boot and a slap on the wrist from you for deviating from the provided materials!!!

As soon as they just go with synchrosoft protection and get native - I am there.....but I truely, truely believe there just aren't any toher plugs that are as 'musical' and good sounding...dammit...

TAFKAT

03-25-2009, 06:15 PM

Hey Sam,

Yeh, I do remember that adventure.. :-)

Mind you that specific proprietary driver/card combo is not even working on the i7 dev system..., there is even more going on under the belly here.

It will boot, but the UAD1 is recognised only as a Media Device.

I really don't have the time or energy to continually navigate this minefield , and despite UA having such a glowing good rep for being the "good guys" , I for one do not in any way have the same sentiment. Scratch the surface and you will see that they are totally absent when it comes to issues like this over at their forum , or their FAQ/support pages , not an official word in sight.

Whether its the UAD1/Nivida issue, or the UAD2 resource munching, issues with x64, etc, etc, not a single word from UA..., but they do send out some vouchers every once and a while to me.., thats nice..:icon_rolleyes:

I have seen it too many times from various companies over the years , and I believe UA have got away with way, way too much. I have also heard of threats / business consequences for dealers who dare speak out , I mean WTF.., well they can kiss mine , the clients best interests are what keep me in business , not covering for companies that couldn't care less to sweep there own steps....

Ahhhh, thats better, needed to get that out ... :-)

Everytime I venture to the UA forum, it usually only lasts a few minutes before some shill with some pretty heavy investment is there trying to polish the turd a little too much for my liking..

Re the plugins, we have had this discussion before.., I love the plugs , they are awesome, no question or argument there, but in this era of native horsepower I believe anything needing DSP to process the numbers is an archaic achilles heel to the potential we have , and loosing vast % of your native processing to be able to load up a UAD2 quad at good working low latencies for many, too me, is insane .

But there you have it, that is exactly what is happening, and UAD just seem to ignore the whole situation..

psvennevig

03-25-2009, 06:46 PM

he he, if UAD-1 is bad, what is PoCo then?
Talk about polishing the turd, the "new" PoCo 6000, talk about rip off.
Its even FireWire, makes it even better :-)

P

TAFKAT

03-25-2009, 07:42 PM

..now there is another prime candidate for an archaic Achilles heel.. , and the mere mention of Firewire units still brings a twitch to the eye :-)

Is anyone even using Powercore any more, apart from maybe a dongle for the Virus , like I do.. ?

Jcschild

03-25-2009, 07:47 PM

oh no not another poco firewire...
that last ones didnt work for crap
i havnt sold a poco in a yr.
give me Duende first please (well UAD first then Duende)

tunetown

03-25-2009, 10:49 PM

This just in from UA

Hi Everyone,
I just wanted to put everyone in the loop with the latest info regarding this problem with the UAD-2.

While we've been able to add several usability improvements to the release of UAD v5.3.0, we have not, unfortunately, been able to fix the "CPU spiking" that many users are seeing on multiprocessor machines when using the UAD-2.
We have several different test cases in-house now and our engineers are chiseling away at the problem, but at this time we're unable to forecast when exactly a fix will be available. Obviously, our hope is to have the issue rectified for our next scheduled release, and we'll do all that we can to get it out to you sooner if that becomes a possibility.

Unfortunately, we also cannot accurately at this time say what specific systems the problem will occur with. We have evidence to support that it does seem more likely to occur on systems running Windows Vista (32 or 64bit) and most users experiencing the problem are using either Cubase or Nuendo, but we believe we have cases of it occurring with other DAWs on Windows and possibly a related case on the Mac side as well. The most consistent variable is that it occurs on systems with more than one CPU and happens during periods of heightened graphics activity. And, while disabling multiprocessing has improved the performance for many folks, we realize this is not an acceptable, nor a fool-proof workaround and ask for your patience while we solve this issue.

Thanks everyone.

_________________
James Cigler
SQA Manager
Universal Audio
http://www.uaudio.com

TAFKAT

03-26-2009, 03:52 AM

:sleeping:

The guy should be a politician.., he just managed to deliver a few well worded paragraphs , without actually saying anything of value, IMO.

So its mostly on Vista 32/64, hmmm, wrong, oh and its also with any system with more than one core, brilliant, meaning the vast majority, and during periods of heightened graphics activity...??

What, like navigating around your DAW application ?

Wake me up when they have actually done something.

BTW: where was this originally posted.. ?

tunetown

03-26-2009, 04:16 AM

Here's the link

http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11409

Michael Tibes

03-26-2009, 05:01 AM

oh no not another poco firewire...
that last ones didnt work for crap
i havnt sold a poco in a yr.
give me Duende first please (well UAD first then Duende)
Please stay away from the fw units... at least SSL seems more responsive to user problems. Unfortunately the Poco reverbs are still the best I know, any tip is welcome to overcome this.

Michael

TAFKAT

03-26-2009, 05:21 AM

Here's the link

http://www.studionu.com/uadforums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=11409

Hey Peter,

Thanks for that.. :-)

Well reading in it seems I am not the only one feeling a little less than impressed.

Lets see if they can deliver anything past nicely polished spin.

Michael Tibes

03-26-2009, 07:53 AM

3 x 2 GB installed, 2,75 GB reported by the task manager. I'll try pulling 1 stick to see whether it helps the issue as soon as I got a moment.

Michael
Ok, finally pulled 1 mem stick, comp boots fine, add 1 more UAD1, comp already crashes during windows boot with a 'machine_check_exception'. I vaguely remember it used to be a 'irq not less or equal' one before - and booting after just inserting the card was no problem, the crash first occured during the driver installation process with the full memory installed.
Nevertheless, that's not what I call an improvement :smash:

Is it worth trying an ATI video card?
Or 3 1 GB sticks instead of the 2 2GB ones I have used now?

Michael

Michael Tibes

03-26-2009, 08:03 AM

Hm, rethinking things I wonder if I should have tried it with just 1 memory stick, which would be 2GB? The whole combination of cards worked fine in my dual opteron comp with 2GB ram.
Anyway, too late for today, gotta get back to a safe system mode...

Michael

TAFKAT

03-26-2009, 09:45 AM

Jcschild

03-26-2009, 11:30 AM

Hey Vin,
at least they are communicating and not isolated in an ivory tower like some companies !

and the forum replies are at least a pleasant effort to let peeps know they are working on it. again unlike some companies...

TAFKAT

03-26-2009, 12:04 PM

Hey Scott,

Sure , but what have they actually communicated ?

Judging from the responses at the forum the radio silence up until now has not been appreciated, and I still stand by my opinion that they have not actually said anything.. , to me it sounded like .. :willy_nilly:

Jcschild

03-26-2009, 12:33 PM

thus the email i sent you yesterday...
so they are working on it or will be :wink:

Michael Tibes

03-26-2009, 10:47 PM

Hey Michael,

Thanks for the continuing time and energy ... :-)

I don't think its the overall amount of RAM that is causing the issue, its more to do with UAD1's archaic low level memory addressing. As I noted earlier in the thread , the tech is well over 10 years old, and is not sitting well with the memory mapping of the latest chipsets/BIOS's.

It would be interesting to see if an ATI card helps your set up at all, at least you are getting one UAD1 installed, I am not even getting that far with the Nvidia cards/drivers I am using.

I seriously doubt AU would care less about the UAD1 issues on the current architecture , they have enough on their plate with their new gem, let alone trying to arm wrestle a decade old , defunct , mpeg encoding chip.. :-(

I still have an old ATI card somewhere, gotta find it and test with it. I haven't reread all the threads to verify it, did anyone get more than 1 UAD1 to work at all with the I7 under XP 32?

And the bloody TC drivers are really not working under Vista 64, are they? I know they don't officially, but from a different company I remember something like their drivers were 64bit capable, but not officially supported. I don't have the time right now to do a 64bit installation just to try that...

I know how old the UAD1 chip is, it was in fact on the graphics card I had in my first PC. I bought the card in Taiwan when hardware DVD players were still barely known in Germany - I was so proud to be able to watch DVDs. What a great picture and great sound - compared to VHS.

Michael