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 9th October 2017
  #1591
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I have tested and posted results for the Mackie Onyx Blackbird using the same 4.1 revision driver, performance is very good and consistent with all interfaces running that unified TC Applied driver.

The Blackbird rated better than the FocusriteSaffire units I tested due to lower I/O and RTL. Respective I/O and RTL results for the Onyx-i will depend on the AD/DA being used.

Hey, I sure appreciate the reply man! I've enjoyed the Onyx 1220i, but my older system is crapping out on me & Mackie has no official drivers apparently for Windows 10, so the Focusrite units are probably what I'll end up with, if I do run into W10 Mackie problems.

Have a great week everyone & thanks to all the contributions made for this thread.
Old 10th October 2017
  #1592
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I will test anything that I can get access to and/or comes across my desk, unfortunately the new Lynx cards are not available to me locally nor has anyone asked me to configure a system with one that they have previously purchased.

Lynx are more than welcome to send me a card directly , at their expense this time.



With StudioOne's direct implementation it makes Quantum a hard choice to go past if you have TB connectivity sorted. Also you need to remember that it isn't simply a TB3 card, its also a TB3 to TB2 adapter , so depending on which one works , could be anything from an additional $150-250 for TB3 card + adapter on top of the Quantum purchase, and then add a TB cable.

Performance wise its great, and if it ticks all the I/O requirement boxes , then you have your answer, but for those using Cubase for example , use ASIO Direct Monitoring and dont need the additional I/O , the the smaller RME PCIe still deliver , horses for courses.

One last note , the posted numbers are not achievable in StudioOne, which adds additional I/O and RTL buffers, even in the best case scenario using Green Z. Its not a large number, but it scales up as you move up the buffer settings. I posted some details Here

I don't want to shift the focus here to StudioOnes Hybrid buffering, to be honest I understand what they are doing to a point, but I can't get my head entirely around why its raising even the I/O monitoring buffers as well as spiking the playback buffer, which is the hybrid approach's main draw card. Steinberg's ASIO Guard makes waay more sense to me.

I Digress


Hi TAFKAT, thanks for the great posts as usual. I have been following this topic with interest for some years.

Not to derail the topic to a RME vs Presonus debate, but if ones' insterest is mainly to run 2-3 plugins with 02-03 inputs for Live Performance, it does seem that Presonus Quantum nails it. What do you think?

Maybe it is really the deal for Ableton users. I was thinking to upgrade to RME UCX, but at the half the price and with better latency, the Presonus just seems more logical...
Old 10th October 2017
  #1593
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I have tested and posted results for the Mackie Onyx Blackbird using the same 4.1 revision driver, performance is very good and consistent with all interfaces running that unified TC Applied driver.

The Blackbird rated better than the FocusriteSaffire units I tested due to lower I/O and RTL. Respective I/O and RTL results for the Onyx-i will depend on the AD/DA being used.

Other Saffire Pro units have different AD/DA converters and even lower RTL than the tested Saffire Pro 24, and are slightly better than the Blackbird. Below are the actual measurements from my Saffire Pro 40.

Output routed directly to output channel:

3.52ms 32 buffer
4.98ms 64 buffer
7.88ms 128 buffer
13.68ms 256 buffer
25.30ms 512 buffer
48.51ms 1024 buffer
94.95ms 2048 buffer

Output routed through DSP mixer:

3.57ms 32 buffer
5.02ms 64 buffer
7.92ms 128 buffer
13.73ms 256 buffer
25.34ms 512 buffer
48.56ms 1024 buffer
95.00ms 2048 buffer
Old 16th October 2017
  #1594
Here for the gear
Hello and thank you for your thorough work! This might be a stupid question but can I expect the same LLP performance for any of the Focusrite Scarlett mk2 DAC's e.g. the 2i2 or Solo compared to the benchmarked 6i6? Why I ask is because all the interfaces below the 6i6 are bus powered and maybe that reduces performance, I don't know much about how a USB DAC works on a technical level.
Old 16th October 2017
  #1595
Gear Head
I see the original babyface latency numbers but can't find the babyface pro numbers.
It it supposed to be better then the original but I would like some real numbers plz

Thanks
Old 24th October 2017
  #1596
Gear Nut
 

64 buffers are the least buffer size for loadiing CV....
It's how much CV plugin can be loaded per 1ms latnecy at 64 buffers..
The max cv number at 64 samples was devided by the RTL latency number ....high score means better performance...

so the ranks are the following

1.rme hdspe aes/adi8qs 45.46487838145033 cv/1ms
2.presonus quantum 45.28729125389188 cv/1ms
3.rme fireface UFX plus tb2 44.73161033797217 cv/1ms
4.lynx aes16e 44.6677833612507 cv/1ms



5.rme fireface UFX plus usb3 38.74300473525613 cv/1ms
lynx two-c 37.69317753486619 cv/1ms
rme hdsp aio 34.99562554680665 cv/1ms
rme fireface ufx fw 31.88097768331562 cv/1ms
rme fireface ucx fw 31.04384943733023 cv/1ms
esi julia xte 28.99951667472209 cv/1ms
rme fireface ucx usb 26.28696604600219 cv/1ms
rme fireface 800 26.22950819672131 cv/1ms
rme babyface driver 0.984 25.09860164933668 cv/1ms
avid mbox pro 3 driver 1.0.11 23.74893977947413 cv/1ms
foocusrite saffire pro 24 driver 4.0.0 23.7408851958623 cv/1ms
rme fireface ufx usb 23.73417721518987 cv/1ms
presonus firestudio mobile drivr 4.0.0 22.72358383379322 cv/1ms
motu 424:24 i/o 19.51219512195122 cv/1ms
mackie onyx blackbird 15.80715273661332 cv/1ms

Last edited by bluesj; 26th October 2017 at 07:26 AM.. Reason: more clear
Old 24th October 2017
  #1597
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Apologies for being under the radar recently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EYHN View Post

Not to derail the topic to a RME vs Presonus debate, but if ones' insterest is mainly to run 2-3 plugins with 02-03 inputs for Live Performance, it does seem that Presonus Quantum nails it. What do you think?
If you have Thunderbolt capability and the Presonus specs suit, then its a good option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenbrink View Post
Hello and thank you for your thorough work! This might be a stupid question but can I expect the same LLP performance for any of the Focusrite Scarlett mk2 DAC's e.g. the 2i2 or Solo compared to the benchmarked 6i6?
The Gen 2 driver should perform consisitently across the range, only real difference with the higher models is the inclusion of the DSP mixing/routing capabilities. Bus powering will not effect LLP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by webstersp View Post
I see the original babyface latency numbers but can't find the babyface pro numbers.
I'll confirm some BabyFace Pro numbers shortly.

Old 10th November 2017
  #1598
Gear Head
 
BeatMachinery's Avatar
 

Has anyone tested MARIAN PCIe cards??? Any info about performance and Latency?

Im very interested in these cards cause the offer me an 8 analog output solution.

Any experiences?
Old 13th November 2017
  #1599
Latency is good, on par with RME units.
Performance was sub par 3 years ago, but they released improved drivers since then. I haven't benched them yet though.
I cannot get the card to run on a Ryzen build, it works on Threadripper. It seems incompatible with some hosts like Bitwig, due to a different ASIO implementation.
Old 14th November 2017
  #1600
Gear Head
 
BeatMachinery's Avatar
 

Look at a mail which I recived from a person at MARIAN regarding latency performance of the Seraph 8 card
Attached Thumbnails
Audio Interface - Low Latency Performance Data Base-screenshot_2017-11-14-06-37-51.jpg  
Old 15th November 2017
  #1601
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatMachinery View Post
Look at a mail which I recived from a person at MARIAN regarding latency performance of the Seraph 8 card
I measured 5,096ms @64 samples 44.1kHz with the old driver.
I hope to check it today, albeit with the AD2 Interface.
Old 15th November 2017
  #1602
Gear Head
 
BeatMachinery's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS View Post
I measured 5,096ms @64 samples 44.1kHz with the old driver.
I hope to check it today, albeit with the AD2 Interface.
I would really appreciate that. Im between the seraph 8 and the rme raydat. But I want to be sure of my path to follow...
Old 16th November 2017
  #1603
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

O.K, finally managed to connect the dots with this.



RME Babyface Pro : Class leading LLP performance on par with all of the other RME USB2 siblings .

Lower overall RTL due to the respective converters used.

Not much else to say past same ole same ole from RME.

I also have some amended UCX results which I had accidentally left out of the last full listing.

I'll upload an updated listing in the next few days with the Babyface Pro and amended UCX results.

Old 16th November 2017
  #1604
Gear Head
 
BeatMachinery's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
Here are some tests with a Motu828x thunderbolt
also with USB 2.0
I am not even sure I did this right, sorry for the N/A figures. My system kept generating errors. This is Tested on Windows 10, i7 7700k, asrock fatal1ty z270 Itx

The first image is with thunderbolt, the second with USB 2.0




I've heared that this motherboard has a half of the thunderbolt transfer speed. Only 20 Gb instead of 40. I was wondering if this affects the performance of a thunderbolt interface... A presonus Quantum for instance
Old 16th November 2017
  #1605
No this Mobo has 40gb. However all Thunderbolt audio interfaces right now are thunderbolt 1 or 2. So until we get thunderbolt 3 on a device we will have 20gb/s
Old 16th November 2017
  #1606
Lives for gear
 

Thunderbolt 3: https://pro.focusrite.com/category/a...tem/red-16line

Still yet to be released, however....
Old 19th November 2017
  #1607
The question is why does an RME baby face pro have half the rtl of the Motu 828x via Thunderbolt
Old 19th November 2017
  #1608
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
O.K, finally managed to connect the dots with this.



RME Babyface Pro : Class leading LLP performance on par with all of the other RME USB2 siblings .

Lower overall RTL due to the respective converters used.

Not much else to say past same ole same ole from RME.

I also have some amended UCX results which I had accidentally left out of the last full listing.

I'll upload an updated listing in the next few days with the Babyface Pro and amended UCX results.

What's your sample rate here, in the future can you always post that as well please
Old 19th November 2017
  #1609
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
The question is why does an RME baby face pro have half the rtl of the Motu 828x via Thunderbolt
Different drivers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
What's your sample rate here, in the future can you always post that as well please
44.1 kHz.
Old 19th November 2017
  #1610
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
The question is why does an RME baby face pro have half the rtl of the Motu 828x via Thunderbolt
I cant comment on data I cant see , your image link is corrupted.

Sample rate is 44.1
Old 19th November 2017
  #1611
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I cant comment on data I cant see , your image link is corrupted.

Sample rate is 44.1
Hi, check the page again, because I see it fine. Also someone else reposted my images as well.

Are all of your tests done with 44.1?

I did various tests with different sample rates and buffers

I'll do some more testing today
Old 19th November 2017
  #1612
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
The question is why does an RME baby face pro have half the rtl of the Motu 828x via Thunderbolt
I recall some of your measured figures from currently unavailable images.
I don't think, there is some error. Results are somewhat in-line with what I know from MOTU previous line-ups of integrated interfaces.
I've got very similar results from my old Firewire Traveler or some of their later Hybrids (USB/FW).. basically RTL around 7-8 ms at 64 samples.

The 828x is somewhat transitional model, where they apparently added new bus - TB.. to the older interface base.
After that, MOTU launched completely new line-up of AVB interfaces, which were improved in all aspects. It sounds better (IMO), has better latency performance (regardless of bus), features completely overhauled remotely controllable DSP mixer and it's easily expandable via AVB.

The answer lies in what we (me and Chris from ADK) already wrote to the thread with your hypothetical dream interface, where you was surprised nobody made or reworked their interfaces for TB 3, if that's clear future and everything else hinders performance.
Used data bus isn't most important factor for performance, but it's the attitude of vendor and focus to low latency performance during development. Data bus give you just certain performance potential, which can be utilized (or not).

It's bit more complicated than how it can look like (hey, a bus can reach gigabytes per second, this would be fast as hell), because to reach those very quick RTLs in a stable way, everything needs to be as streamlined and efficient as possible.
From use of "quick" converters, through synchronization, buffer management, fast interrupt handling, efficient DMA (where applicable) etc.
So all elements in pathway from/to DAW is important.. hardware, firmware, low level driver, ASIO/Core Audio interface to DAW.
If something isn't up to the task (can be easily not so optimized part of code, constraints of used microcontroller.. whatever), you usually need to increase some buffer length to avoid dropouts, add some offsets, introduce settle times at some parts etc. All of that increase latency of course.

Michal
Old 19th November 2017
  #1613
Sorry about that. It was in a shared folder in google photos. Try this and let me know if this works
Motu 828X connected Via thunderbolt 2









And here below is USB 2.0





Old 19th November 2017
  #1614
Lives for gear
 
loopy's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
Sorry about that. It was in a shared folder in google photos. Try this and let me know if this works
Motu 828X connected Via thunderbolt 2









And here below is USB 2.0






I can see them now.
Old 19th November 2017
  #1615
Lives for gear
 
TAFKAT's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallon426 View Post
Hi, check the page again, because I see it fine. Also someone else reposted my images as well.

Are all of your tests done with 44.1?
I can see the data now.

The answer is quite simple, and its something that I have maintained from the beginning of this project, it will always come down to the efficiency of the drivers/controller, no matter the protocol.

As I noted earlier, all results are at 44.1.

From the data listed I suspect that TB implementation on that earlier interface is not native but most likely the older FW controller via TB.

No surprises, the results for the 828 Hybrid FW/USB are listed in the Database and are inline with yours.

Old 19th November 2017
  #1616
Lives for gear
I vote this thread to be a Sticky. Long overdue.
Old 20th November 2017
  #1617
Quote:
Originally Posted by TAFKAT View Post
I can see the data now.

The answer is quite simple, and its something that I have maintained from the beginning of this project, it will always come down to the efficiency of the drivers/controller, no matter the protocol.

As I noted earlier, all results are at 44.1.

From the data listed I suspect that TB implementation on that earlier interface is not native but most likely the older FW controller via TB.

No surprises, the results for the 828 Hybrid FW/USB are listed in the Database and are inline with yours.

Those Donkeys at Motu were misleading then if that's the case. Ha. I wonder how the presonus quantum stacks up.
I'm curious to try
Motu 624
Presonus quantum
Resident audio t4
Apogy

Presonus is boasting RTL of 1.35 or something on 32 buffers. I wonder what they are using to test that. I find it interesting that these companies haven't been in a latency race. I should have just bought RME years ago and be done with it. Now a pcie card won't fit in my case. I have an ITX Inwin Chopin. I'm sure we will see TB3 interfaces in Namm this year. I just hope they focus on the drivers and quality. Less on DSP effects and whatnot.
Old 20th November 2017
  #1618
Lives for gear
@ Dallon426
Quantum was already tested by Vin, see: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/12868080-post1578.html
It seems to be performing very well IMO.. Also several other folks reported positively about that at both Mac and PC.

I wouldn't really think about Resident audio.. It's basically TB budget interface (with all compromises of cheap pieces) and they haven't touched its drivers for years AFAIK. Unless one has very small budget (hopefully you can return 828x, if you're not satisfied) and really insist on TB, it doesn't make much sense IMO.

So if you're fine with software monitoring through DAW.. (there's no DSP mixer for low latency monitoring outside of DAW).. Quantum (or upcoming smaller Quantum 2) might be your ticket to better low latency performance at your current system.

With regards to waiting to TB3..

Michal
Old 20th November 2017
  #1619
Gear Nut
Hey Tafkat, can you maybe test new RME Digiface USB?
I know it's adat device so results will vary with choice of converters (same as RME Raydat).
Mobility and number of IOs sounds great for the price but i'm little skeptical about 32/32ch thru USB2...on the other hand RME doesn't deliver hyped half-products
Old 21st November 2017
  #1620
Well I put this Motu up for sale and just bought a presonus quantum 2. I'll run tests when I get it!
I can't do a pci card and based off of tests and my wants/ needs this looks like a good deal. 575.00 shipped. I'm good with that!
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