What's the difference between i/o buffer size and sample size?

W

whattaguy

New member
I have an Echo Layla3G usind Sonar 2.2XL. I've got it configured to where I get no pops or crackles anymore.

The i/o buffer size is 128 (the tab where you choose WDM, ASIO or other drivers), and the sample size is 1024 in the ASIO panel the Echo panel. I though that a good card paired with a good system should have low sample/buffer rates. Is something wrong? Thanks.

System specs:

DFI LanParty UT NF3 250gb mobo
AMD64 3000+ @ 2.0GHz
1gig low latency ram (PDP Patriot turbo)
7200rpm HDD's
Echo Layla3G soundcard
ATI 9800pro vid card
 
Well ... I could be wrong but, they are the same thing.
The only difference is how you change the sample buffers, depending on which drivers you use.
I don't use Sonar or a Layla, so I should probably shut my mouth right about now. But ...
Normally when you use ASIO drivers, you will change the sample buffers via the ASIO control panel supplied with the audio interface.
When using WDM or MME drivers, you will make your sample buffer setting via the controls provided by your recording software.
 
I just read my original post again, and it should've read "and the sample size is 1024 in the ASIO panel *and* the Echo panel." I hope that makes more sense.

Thanks, crankz, for your reply.

Shouldn't all by buffer/sample sizes be the same across the boards? At least that's what I can gather from reading here. If that is the case, don't those numbers seem kind of high for my system?
I was thinking to get it down to 128 buffers in all my settings.
 
My understanding is that the sample size contains the number of 16 or 24-bit samples that are captured at one time. This affects latency in that the bigger the sample, the longer you have to wait before any changes you've made in real time take effect.

The I/O buffer size is just the size of the buffer used to transfer the audio data to & from the disk. I don't think this has any effect on latency

1024 samples would be around 15ms (or thereabouts) latency at 96Khz
 
Doh!

I solved the problem...I am down to .7ms latency. I was shuffling around and my HDD wasn't set to Ultra DMA! I never thought that was the problem, because my HDD's are usually set at Ultra DMA by default. I guess I was wrong!

...talk about a silly mistake!

Thanks to all who replied.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top