PDP
There once was a note
Does recording at a higher rate i.e. 32bitfloat 96khz use more CPU and RAM than say 24-44? Or does it only affect HDD space?
austinm08
the pigeon knows the way.
I know that your plug-ins will be using a lot more processing if you record at a higher bit-depth and sample rate. And yes it also takes up a lot more space on your hard drive.
Personally I don't think you'll benefit at all recording at 96kHz vs. 48 kHz. 24-bit and 48kHz should be plenty.
Personally I don't think you'll benefit at all recording at 96kHz vs. 48 kHz. 24-bit and 48kHz should be plenty.
O
oretez
Hwy 50
Primary limiting factor is ability to manage the 'bandwidth' necessary for streaming data to the disk. But any constriction of that data flow can be potentially damaging to recording process. So while rotational speed of a drive is used as a rough indicator of its suitability for recording the important numbers are read/write times and relationship between them. All of the variables of the system CPU 'speed'; amount of RAM, how it addressed; Type of Drive, drives data path; OS, etc. will effect efficiency of recording as a system.
RAM usage will be least effected by bit-rate/sample-frequency, (right up the point where rates are influenced by available RAM, a point that depends not merely on hardware as a whole but also on software application) The Actual A/D is (typically) handled by specialized chips/firmware in the converter so essentially the CPU manages the data stream and misc. overhead. If recording app is direct to disc very low CPU % is typical even with high track count. Drive topology remains the most significant bottleneck, partially because of dependence on mechanical processes. After a systems minimum specifications necessary for A/D recording the recording medium, i.e. HDD, is probably the most significant bottleneck. Followed by OS & recording applications. Once minimum specs are met the HDD is typically the one user amenable variable
RAM usage will be least effected by bit-rate/sample-frequency, (right up the point where rates are influenced by available RAM, a point that depends not merely on hardware as a whole but also on software application) The Actual A/D is (typically) handled by specialized chips/firmware in the converter so essentially the CPU manages the data stream and misc. overhead. If recording app is direct to disc very low CPU % is typical even with high track count. Drive topology remains the most significant bottleneck, partially because of dependence on mechanical processes. After a systems minimum specifications necessary for A/D recording the recording medium, i.e. HDD, is probably the most significant bottleneck. Followed by OS & recording applications. Once minimum specs are met the HDD is typically the one user amenable variable
Steenamaroo
...
that's what i was going to say!
like.....word for word..
like.....word for word..
M
moresound
Loud Sun Studios
Me Too Steenamroo! 
Well I'm off to the cave than where things are a little less predictable.
Well I'm off to the cave than where things are a little less predictable.
PDP
There once was a note
Thank You Ortez and others for the info. Very helpful.
Steenamaroo
...
Me Too Steenamroo!
Well I'm off to the cave than where things are a little less predictable.
amazin!