The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3511
Gear Maniac
 
Dewdman42's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomjab View Post
I read that TB3 vs TB2 doesn’t really have an impact on latency. It would be nice though to not have to deal with the TB3 to TB2 dongle.
I don't know about that. TB3 is essentially the same thing as PCI. But there are not many TB3 devices anyway.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3512
Lives for gear
 
Gomjab's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponzi View Post
Hmm, I wonder what the rtl is actually exercising--the I/O stack but not the electrical connection?

Since the 828es is tbolt 1, the results attainable from tbolt 3 are not available to it.
I have a 1’ high quality TRS jumper connecting the input to output at my patchbay which interfaces to my 838es and 8ai in the rack by a short snake.

You do need to configure the 828es routing matrix properly using the web interface to make sure you are looping back externally as you could create an internal loop back in the 828es switch matrix.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3513
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomjab View Post
I was surprised at the USB results. They were pretty good. I would still recommend Thunderbolt as it would not need to deal with other traffic contending for your USB bus.
Thanks for the test results. Things like this do not impact me right now, but I keep them in mind as they might come in handy in the future.

I am on windows, so tb for motu involves a $70 add in card and a $50 tb2 to 3 plug adapter. Since my setup works well enough for me now, I will not pursue it. If I find a tb3 device I like, I can re-visit, but the idea of buying a $50 adapter cable just twists my tail and I won't do it as a matter of principle. Maybe the next generation of motu devices will do things differently.

In another thread we had a long discussion about usb3 and I was persuaded, with technical discussion, that 3 is no better than 2 for audio interface purposes, though it is way faster for things like a disk drive. I have a nice usb 3.2 socket on my computer--just waiting for a device that can take advantage of it.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3514
Lives for gear
 
Gomjab's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdman42 View Post
I don't know about that. TB3 is essentially the same thing as PCI. But there are not many TB3 devices anyway.

PreSonus doesn’t think so.

https://www.presonus.com/learn/techn...erbolt-2-and-3

Of course that will probably change when they have a TB3 interface on the market!



Old 3 weeks ago
  #3515
Gear Maniac
 
Dewdman42's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponzi View Post
I am on windows, so tb for motu involves a $70 add in card and a $50 tb2 to 3 plug adapter. Since my setup works well enough for me now, I will not pursue it. If I find a tb3 device I like, I can re-visit, but the idea of buying a $50 adapter just twists my tail and I won't do it as a matter of principle.
Or consider a PCI audio device if you want the lowest latency

Quote:
In another thread we had a long discussion about usb3 in another thread and I was persuaded, with technical discussion, that 3 is no better than 2 for audio interface purposes, though it is way faster for things like a disk drive. I have a nice usb 3.2 socket on my computer--just waiting for a device that can take advantage of it.
USB3 has greater bandwidth, but not necessarily significantly greater speed. That is part of why USB3 devices never really materialized. For most people in home studios USB3 is no better than USB2. Where it would make a difference would be if someone was trying to use, say 48 audio inputs, all at the same time, through a USB2 interface. It might start to choke at some point, where USB3 would have more bandwidth to handle that.

That above does not necessarily apply to Thunderbolt protocols. Even TB2 can do quite a lot more than USB2.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3516
Gear Maniac
 
Dewdman42's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomjab View Post
PreSonus doesn’t think so.

https://www.presonus.com/learn/techn...erbolt-2-and-3

Of course that will probably change when they have a TB3 interface on the market!



its an interesting article. Let's see test results...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3517
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
I think its getting to be a dog's breakfast with these interfaces once they started to remove the tight coupling between the protocol and the plug shape. So, you have thunderbolts that have different plug shapes that require electronics in the adapter cables to work together. You have usb protocols that can use different plugs for the same protocol or plugs that can support different protocols.

When I have to sit down and study and memorise the situation for a simple plug, its a sign that things are confused and need to settle out.

As always, this will sort itself out eventually. There is a darwinian process that winnows down plugs and protocols to a consensus--Ethernet won the networking battle, and maybe tbolt will beat usb after all these years. A lot of it has to do with whether an interface requires licensing fee. Even at a few cents a mobo, companies dont like to pay, so the licensed protocols tend to die out. I think that's what happened to firewall--steve jobs did not like to pay for it.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3518
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Guys,

I'll repeat this again ( and again ) , RTL is only 1/2 the equation , the other 1/2 which is equally if not more important is the efficiency of the driver / protocol at the respective latencies.

Posting just RTL numbers gives you an indication of the delivered latency, but the comparative test results give the practicality of using the interface at those respective latencies.

TB3 will bring nothing to the table regards performance, its the same driver/controller for the most part in respect to what can be achieved for audio performance . For the current crop of interfaces using TB3 connectors , apart from simplifying the interconnect to later TB enabled systems, there isn't much else to it.

I have tested a TB3 interface on a TB2 powered system with the adapter reversed ( so to speak ), no performance disadvantage. And no, that was not officially supported, but mind you, either was said manufacturers TB2 interfaces officially supported running on native a TB2 controller on Windows, go figure. Both scenarios worked despite the non official operation.

Manufacturer I am referring to is UAD btw .

Much the same with USB3 interconnect on some recent interfaces , where it is simply just a connector as I have mentioned previously, its still a standard USB2 interface at controller/driver level.

Old 3 weeks ago
  #3519
Lives for gear
 
daskeladden's Avatar
 

yepp I see no point in waiting for the "next generation" Quantum. Are you guys so against adapters that you wanna wait years for a thunderbolt 3 device? Next generation Quantum probably gonna be USB4 anyways
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3520
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by daskeladden View Post
yepp I see no point in waiting for the "next generation" Quantum. Are you guys so against adapters that you wanna wait years for a thunderbolt 3 device? Next generation Quantum probably gonna be USB4 anyways
Best if you don't wait, then.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3521
Lives for gear
 
daskeladden's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ponzi View Post
Best if you don't wait, then.
I'm not sure what you mean, I bought the Quantum long time ago
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3522
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by daskeladden View Post
I'm not sure what you mean, I bought the Quantum long time ago
Excellent!
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3523
Gear Guru
 
monkeyxx's Avatar
I'm sticking with mine too.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3524
Lives for gear
 
Jim Rosebrook's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by daskeladden View Post
yepp I see no point in waiting for the "next generation" Quantum. Are you guys so against adapters that you wanna wait years for a thunderbolt 3 device? Next generation Quantum probably gonna be USB4 anyways
As I said in my post about a theoretical "Next Generation" Quantum.. PreSonus adding AVB in addition to TB would be the bigger reason for excitement.

The possibility of AVB is worth waiting for. Lots of options with their current AVB devices.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3525
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
USB4... Is that a thing?

The last time I checked, which was only a few months ago, even the specs for USB3 weren't finalised. Basically, manufacturers do whatever they want. It is one of the reasons why Macs aren't compatible with all USB3 hubs, for example.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3526
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
Hey All,

For those that have followed the DAWbench Project over the years, and are interested in having a listen to a podcast, you can catch myself, Leon Herbers from XI Machines and Pete Kain from Scan Pro Audio chatting on the first DAWbench Radio Show Here
Here
Just listened to (and very much enjoyed) the first podcast episode. Can you get it up on Castbox or other platforms?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3527
Gear Head
 

I own a first-generation Scarlett 18i8 which I've not used in over a year and a half. Recently Focusrite sent out an email about a new driver release (version 4.63.23), claiming latency and stability improvements across the Scarlett range. I haven't tried it yet but I would love to see it included in the next round of DAWBench tests. I'm curious about how it stacks up against the previous version.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3528
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piyono View Post
Just listened to (and very much enjoyed) the first podcast episode. Can you get it up on Castbox or other platforms?
Thanks for the feedback

Its on Spotify as well now, and I will be pushing it to iTunes.

I'll look further into the other platforms, but Castbox isn't listed as an option with my host ( Libsyn ).

Quote:
I own a first-generation Scarlett 18i8 which I've not used in over a year and a half. Recently Focusrite sent out an email about a new driver release (version 4.63.23), claiming latency and stability improvements across the Scarlett range. I haven't tried it yet but I would love to see it included in the next round of DAWBench tests. I'm curious about how it stacks up against the previous version.
I have noted previously that Focusrite broke the ASIO implementation in Cubase on the later driver versions on my default reference system which is still running Windows 7.

I did some recent testing for DAWbench using a Scarlett 6i6 Gen 2 as a reference interface on Win10 , but this was in relation to performance issues in C10 / AG and not related to the LLP work, but the reported I/O and RTL's looked similar to the past drivers.

I'll get to some additional testing when I get some clear air, but I doubt there will be anything significant.


Last edited by TAFKAT; 2 weeks ago at 02:02 AM..
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3529
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdman42 View Post
...

USB3 has greater bandwidth, For most people in home studios USB3 is no better than USB2. Where it would make a difference would be if someone was trying to use, say 48 audio inputs, all at the same time, through a USB2 interface. It might start to choke at some point, where USB3 would have more bandwidth to handle that...
MOTU makes the MADI M64 with 64 channel USB 2.0 function at 48k. Santa might get one for me.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3530
Gear Maniac
 
Dewdman42's Avatar
 

ok. I will be interested to hear how US2 does with 64 channels. In any case, that is where USB3 would have an advantage...adding more channels, not necessarily reducing latency. I do not know the channel limit of USB2.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewdman42 View Post
ok. I will be interested to hear how US2 does with 64 channels. In any case, that is where USB3 would have an advantage...adding more channels, not necessarily reducing latency. I do not know the channel limit of USB2.
The channel limit with USB2 is 72 I/O. It eitehr works with 64 channels or it doesn't. Both the MOTU and RME USB2 MADI units handle 64 I/O @ 48k without issues. USB3 is only required when more than 64 channels (there are no 72 channel interfaces AFAIK) to and from the host computer are required.
USB3 is more expensive, less compatible and more problematic regarding chipset compatibility than USB2, hence USB2 is actually preferred if less than 70 channels I/O are offered.
Performance and latency wise there is no difference between USB2/USB3 and USB3.1.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3532
Gear Addict
 

MOTU went back from USB3 to USB2 on their newer AVB models. The Windows drivers also improved a ton.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3533
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS View Post
USB3 is more expensive, less compatible and more problematic regarding chipset compatibility than USB2, hence USB2 is actually preferred if less than 70 channels I/O are offered.
Performance and latency wise there is no difference between USB2/USB3 and USB3.1.
Leon, is that differential between USB 2/USB 3 across the board for all performance factors, like DPC susceptibility, performance bottlenecks when background processes are hogging CPU cycles, tradeoff between buffer size and latency etc ?

Or, put another way, is there any aspect in which USB 3 interface performance excels over USB 2 ?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3534
Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
Leon, is that differential between USB 2/USB 3 across the board for all performance factors, like DPC susceptibility, performance bottlenecks when background processes are hogging CPU cycles, tradeoff between buffer size and latency etc ?

Or, put another way, is there any aspect in which USB 3 interface performance excels over USB 2 ?
No. It ONLY offers more channels, such as the RME USB3 Dante interface and the MADIface XT (3 x 64 channels MADI).
So if you are looking at an 8 channel interface, have 2 models to choose from, one USB2 and one USB3, the USB connector should NOT be a factor to consider. And if you do, it should not be regarding performance or speed, but rather compatibility, which would even favour USB2.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3535
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
We had a big discussion about usb3 in another thread. I think the conclusion was that in terms of how small you can set the sample buffers (sample buffer latency), usb2 and 3 are the same. They share a limitation on how often data transfers are scheduled. USB3 can send more data per transfer, so a plausible interpretation of that is it can send more channels but at the same latency. Since the motu avb series have usb2 as an option, usb2 can handle quite a few channels already. If I am interpreting their specs correctly, at 44.1 it can do 28 channels in and 32 channels out.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3536
No, MOTU's USB2 also handles 64 I/O @ 44.1/48kHz. It depends on the interface model whether it actually HAS that many I/O.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3537
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
I said 'can do' based on the specs of my 828es as an example, I did not say that was the upper limit which would read 'can do no more than'.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3538
Lives for gear
 
dickiefunk's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomjab View Post
I have a 1’ high quality TRS jumper connecting the input to output at my patchbay which interfaces to my 838es and 8ai in the rack by a short snake.

You do need to configure the 828es routing matrix properly using the web interface to make sure you are looping back externally as you could create an internal loop back in the 828es switch matrix.
Hi Gomjab,

How did you having the routing done on your 828ES for your RTL measurements? Also which output/input did you patch?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3539
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponzi View Post
I said 'can do' based on the specs of my 828es as an example, I did not say that was the upper limit which would read 'can do no more than'.
With all respect, vague figures and guesses don't contribute to clearness about this already confusing topic, nor does factual I/O numbers of mid sized interfaces explain anything.
A Steinberg UR22 "can do" 2 in 2 out but that does not tell us anything about USB2 nor about USB3 capabilities. It just sounds limiting, which is confusing.
Old 1 week ago
  #3540
Lives for gear
So let me get this straight ....according to this excellent data base my 15 year old RME PCIe host card (to which I connect my Crane Song converters via AES) is still the best option going in terms of low latency and stability!

It looks like anything I buy other than using what I already have is a backward step!! .... thank goodness RME continue to support old hardware!
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump