64-bit native

[qvkslvrguyinkc]

Hi, so I'm going to probably be joining the list of people asking for 64-bit native. My reason isn't "just because" or "aren't all computers since 2007 64-bit capable at this point?" or "Do it for Dale!"

I work with large audio files from time to time and would like to see the 64-bit native so I can take advantage of the fact my computer has 16GB of RAM. I've noticed that my Core I7 isn't much faster than my Core 2 Quad when it comes to opening and processing large audio files, especially when I put them together in multi-track setups where they can hit as much as 3GB (either 96/24 or 192/24). I know there are (usually) better (commercial) apps out there that would handle my workflow better, but there's something I enjoy about the sparseness of Audacity's interface.

Thanks.

[cyrano]

I'm not against Audacity having 64 bit as a native audio format...

BUT

That has nothing to do with your computer being 64 or 32 bit. Those are address ranges and play a role in how much ram can be put in your machine.

Even a 32 bit computer can handle 64 bit audio, if the software permits.

[steve]

would like to see the 64-bit native so I can take advantage of the fact my computer has 16GB of RAM

Audacity is probably not even using 1/2 GB, so making more RAM available will not offer benefits. On the other hand, adding multi-processor support could give big performance gains (Audacity currently uses only one processor).

[Gale Andrews]

would like to see the 64-bit native so I can take advantage of the fact my computer has 16GB of RAM

Audacity is probably not even using 1/2 GB, so making more RAM available will not offer benefits.

If Audacity ever fixed and re-enabled the "Audio cache" feature whereby audio data is written to RAM rather than disk, there would be speed benefits.


Gale

[jh90s]

I'm no coder, so please excuse my lack of knowledge on this, but how much refactoring of the code would have to be done to add multi-core support? It'd be great if Audacity could use whatever amount of cores you have in your machine.. Would that improve effect previews? I'm assuming it would.

[steve]

Would that improve effect previews?

What's wrong with effect previews?

[jh90s]

Nothing major: It just takes a few seconds to start the preview (noise reduction, high quality pitch change). I'm guessing it'd be even faster if this would be implemented.

[steve]

I'm guessing it'd be even faster if this would be implemented.

Probably not.

[Gale Andrews]

I'm guessing it'd be even faster if this would be implemented.

Probably not.

I understood this varies from effect to effect. Some effects push the CPU hard so depend on how fast the CPU is, while others are input/output (IO) bound, so depend how fast the disk is. Some effects are evenly balanced between the two.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/868568/what-do-the-terms-cpu-bound-and-i-o-bound-mean.


Gale