1 Topic by pianovincent (edited by pianovincent 2016-07-19 14:23:51)

  • Registered: 2016-07-19
  • Posts: 12

Topic: raydat latency inquiry

Hi, RME.
I just upgraded my 9652 to raydat.
Right after set it, i realized that raydat is 0.2ms slower than hdsp 9652 which uses pci slot.
Comparing to my friend's raydat, installed in almost same spec, mine is two times later.
I'm using intel 4790k with gigabyte z97 ud5h.
Of course, raydat is sticked to right pcie slot.
Hope to get some advices.
Thank you.

  • From: Germany
  • Registered: 2007-04-10
  • Posts: 9,849

Re: raydat latency inquiry

How did you determine that, what does "slower" and "later" refer to?

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

RME Support's Website

3 Reply by pianovincent (edited by pianovincent 2016-07-19 14:45:55)

  • Registered: 2016-07-19
  • Posts: 12

Re: raydat latency inquiry

hi, daniel.
Thank you for your reply.
i can check  latency values which is shown through audio device window in cubase.

regards, WT

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 13,411

Re: raydat latency inquiry

Can you pls provide the absolute numbers along with sample rate and asio buffer size ? Thanks.
Also a good idea might be, which driver versions you use on both machines.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub14

5 Reply by pianovincent (edited by pianovincent 2016-07-20 10:00:18)

  • Registered: 2016-07-19
  • Posts: 12

Re: raydat latency inquiry

Hi,ramses.
OK..
Thanks to RME's support, drivers are always newest one. Ver 4.14 is installed now.
And I'll write down the amount on '44.1khz'.
in & out latency will be stated.

In 32 buffer, 9652 = 0.748 & 1.497 / raydat = 0.771& 1.519
In 64 buffer, 9652 = 1.474& 2.222/ raydat = 1.479& 2.245
In 128 buffer, 9652 = 2.925& 3.673/ raydat = 2.948&3.696
In 256 buffer, 9652 = 5.828& 6.576/raydat = 5.850& 6.599
In 512 buffer, 9652 = 11.633& 12.381/raydat = 11.655& 12.404
In 1024 buffer, 9652 = 23.243& 23.991/raydat = 23.265& 24.014
In 2048 buffer, 9652 = 46.463& 47.211/raydat = 46.485& 47.234
In 4096 buffer, 9652 = 92.902& 93.651/raydat = 92.925& 93.673

The values would be lower in higher sample rates.
And the values are based on cubase 8.5's device.
Hope this helps you.

- WT from Seoul

  • vinark
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2009-06-05
  • Posts: 2,863

Re: raydat latency inquiry

A quick calculation reveals that the difference is one sample......roughly 0.022ms. Apparently something is one sample slower. Could be the adat receiver or the mixer but it is not much....

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
BFpro fs, 2X HDSP9652 ADI-8AE, 2X HDSP9632

7 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2016-07-21 07:17:33)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 13,411

Re: raydat latency inquiry

I get the same values with my RayDAT. Cubase 8.5.20. Driver 4.14. So your card is ok.
I would regard this difference as neglectable.

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub14