Tue Apr 19, 2022 3:00 pm
The CPU won't let me
Explain better
I can't even work anymore
Share and discuss your LMMS music projects here, and see what people think!
Tue Apr 19, 2022 3:45 pm
Tue Apr 19, 2022 3:55 pm
methinks their CPU usage maxed out.
Tue Apr 19, 2022 4:28 pm
I have 5 instances of voltage modular running in LMMS. The CPU is spiked but I am finally making some good music. I am going back to porn
Tue Apr 19, 2022 11:31 pm
turned off background apps. increased buffer. no avail. may have to sample patches. F*@#!
Wed Apr 20, 2022 4:00 am
Is this LMMS' fault? LMMS by itself is actually pretty light on CPU. But the more the modules/samples/oscillators, the heavier ANYTHING is.
Change priority of LMMS from Task Manager in Details tab > Right Click LMMS > Change Priority.
There isn't much that can be done here. LMMS isn't infinite, your CPU isn't infinite, LMMS is light and you have 5 instances of what seems to be, according to all information available, a very powerful and probably at least somewhat CPU-intensive program.
Change priority of LMMS from Task Manager in Details tab > Right Click LMMS > Change Priority.
There isn't much that can be done here. LMMS isn't infinite, your CPU isn't infinite, LMMS is light and you have 5 instances of what seems to be, according to all information available, a very powerful and probably at least somewhat CPU-intensive program.
Wed Apr 20, 2022 12:34 pm
I have been using LMMS for years now, LMMS it self is lightweight.
There are certain vst though, that get you into trouble quite fast.
Some have what I think is called a memory leak. If it runs a while my pc runs out of memory, and I have 16 gig.
Thats an vst issue though, not an LMMS issue.
There are certain vst though, that get you into trouble quite fast.
Some have what I think is called a memory leak. If it runs a while my pc runs out of memory, and I have 16 gig.
Thats an vst issue though, not an LMMS issue.
Wed Apr 20, 2022 1:56 pm
I have a pretty powerful PC, meaning that I really have to populate those channels with stuff just to make any noticeable change in CPU usage,
The only thing I've noticed tho, is that if you use audio samples, the more you had into a project, the less responsive LMMS gets. So if you have a lower CPU and you use a lot of samples in your tracks, it is possible that those can be using all of your CPU.
The reason behind this is the poor clip management for audio files under LMMS.
I guess it always has the full audio file in memory, when it should probably be streaming the playing parts, for better memory performance.
Other thing that can make LMMS run slower, is like Gps said,can be caused by VST.
If you stack too many effects over each other, those have a cost for CPU time, and if your CPU can't keep with the pace of that information, you won't be able to listen to your track in real-time.
The equivalent of this on easy terms is like running a game with full details on a lower-end GPU, You will simply not be able to have enough frames to play it.
The counter-measure for this is to render some of your effects chains into a wave track, reducing CPU processing required for those, and work directly with the audio-only, or reduce the effects and tracks in your project.
if you use heavy VSTs, you can also reduce the processing by turning those tracks, into Wav, Ogg or Mp3.
Notice that after you turn something into a wave file, you will no longer have the ability to change its contents unless you saved the track that created it into a different project.
Also notice that disabled tracks use CPU on LMMS.
The only thing I've noticed tho, is that if you use audio samples, the more you had into a project, the less responsive LMMS gets. So if you have a lower CPU and you use a lot of samples in your tracks, it is possible that those can be using all of your CPU.
The reason behind this is the poor clip management for audio files under LMMS.
I guess it always has the full audio file in memory, when it should probably be streaming the playing parts, for better memory performance.
Other thing that can make LMMS run slower, is like Gps said,can be caused by VST.
If you stack too many effects over each other, those have a cost for CPU time, and if your CPU can't keep with the pace of that information, you won't be able to listen to your track in real-time.
The equivalent of this on easy terms is like running a game with full details on a lower-end GPU, You will simply not be able to have enough frames to play it.
The counter-measure for this is to render some of your effects chains into a wave track, reducing CPU processing required for those, and work directly with the audio-only, or reduce the effects and tracks in your project.
if you use heavy VSTs, you can also reduce the processing by turning those tracks, into Wav, Ogg or Mp3.
Notice that after you turn something into a wave file, you will no longer have the ability to change its contents unless you saved the track that created it into a different project.
Also notice that disabled tracks use CPU on LMMS.
Wed Apr 20, 2022 3:18 pm
Yes, muted tracks do still actually end up getting rendered. Just output is not shown. I think this is in case mute is turned back on, so it continues to play properly. Slightly more hard on CPU, but...
Hmm, if you have a powerful CPU but can only run 5 instances of this plugin I wonder how heavy it must be on CPU. Try using 5 instances of it in a different program (like Hermann Seib's VST Host), and see how it goes?
Hmm, if you have a powerful CPU but can only run 5 instances of this plugin I wonder how heavy it must be on CPU. Try using 5 instances of it in a different program (like Hermann Seib's VST Host), and see how it goes?
Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:34 pm
I have what is tantamount to a 5 moog modular or roland system 100 synths running with sequencers running within sequencers.... but I trimmed it down enough to finish i think