no offens bro djk...
i dunno whats up to the forum today but today many ppl dont read

i have 3 interfaces(and yes i 'can' use all 3 at once in ableton and not daisy chained at all)...i have x64 i7 rocket...and i have a x86 laptop and the rest you can read multible times in loop mode

 

Last edited: Jul 24, 2019

Olymoon please mark thread as solved
thank you

 

AFAIK, this is only possible if you rate a post 'Best Answer'.

 

oh ...

 

Slut!

 

 

Last edited: Jul 25, 2019

About time you did that.

 

no there isn't,
look closely,
ASIO4ALL at buffer of 512 makes 12ms latency
Magix LL at buffer of 128 makes 3ms latency

512/4 = 128
12/4 = 3
simple math ;)

 

Why bother Oly when you can do it yourself?

 

Your math is correct. And you seem to be the only one who was paying any attention to it.

 

Last edited: Jul 25, 2019

aaannddt -- tzzsmk
has won the price...10 years computer music abo paid by the mirror boy's..tell em i said that..

again ....read thread then you kno why...
i didnt kno the feature... NO AVANGER did told me it worx like this when you rate best answer...
NO AVANGER did mod for no mod

 

Last edited: Jul 25, 2019

ASIO4ALL at buffer of 512 makes 12ms latency
Magix LL at buffer of 128 makes 3ms latency

i repeat that now every 3 third comment

tzzsmk

 

I GOT that fockin magix asio driver now...thanx the pirate for pointing me to the right release for my beloved ancient middle ages x86 laptop from 2009 or 10...Audio.Studio.13.0.0.45

 

imo this driver "battle" is pointless anyway;
very low latency is achieved by very fast processing of very small audio data chunks - that can be achieved by very small buffer and very high sample rate - this will obviously stress CPU a LOT even with dedicated hardware-accelerated ASIO interface - and will stress CPU literally multiple times more when using any kind of software ASIO driver/mode (accelerated only by the computer CPU) which in most cases will result in audio crackling in anyway (also because Microsoft's Windows NT kernel is designed to cycle through all processes active on a computer, not really being able to prioritize or lockdown sensitive tasks like almost-realtime audio stream processing);

to simplify (just an example, don't take my word on that), ASIO4ALL buffer of 512 could provide 3ms latency if samplerate would be 4x higher (so for ex. 192kHz instead 48kHz) but the stress on cpu would be 4x higher as well

 

thats why we using win7 lite strip down no senseless stuff running OS
and un-updated

ok

 

You're comparing 512 samples versus 128 samples. Of course 128 samples will have shorter latency. Set the buffer size to the same value and then compare. Also check your CPU usage.

It's not simple math. You'd have to check both drivers at the same setting. It doesn't scale that easily.

Every system that's designed to run more than one program at once is forced to cycle through all processes active on a computer. I find "lite strip down" versions of systems more trouble than they're worth, also remember you're getting random modified versions of your system instead of the official version which is what every driver and software is tested on. Also "senseless stuff" is debatable. Indexing for example depends on your needs. I'd rather have search working fast when needed. "Un-updated" is just plain ignorant. You'll have to update someday anyway since you'll want that new software running and wake up seeing you can't run it on your shady version of the OS.

 

You dont need to rate anyone/anything just change the title to:
(Solved) RME ASIO driver

 

No, it's not simple math. When I set my interface's buffer to 128smpls, this results in 4,3ms latency.
Theoretically with 1024smpls (8 times 128) this would result in 34,4ms, but in practise it results in 24ms (~ 30% less).
And iirc, my other soundcards behaved quite similar.