# Does working in 44hz vs 48hz (and 16 or 24bit) affect system performance?



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

Hi!
I'd like to know if anyone knows whether it is more effective (performance wise - glitches, loading times, CPU, - maybe even RAM? etc.) to run projects at 44hz and 16 bit. Is that already enough of a difference to cause notable performance differences?
Thanks!


----------



## EvilDragon (Mar 2, 2018)

Running things at a higher sample rate will always take a bit more CPU. 16- vs 24-bit is not a perceptible difference CPU-wise. However difference between 44.1 and 48 is not that big. 44.1 and 96, now that's considerable already.


----------



## FriFlo (Mar 2, 2018)

I am not sure, but I think going to 48Khz (even if all/most of your sample libraries are 44.1) will use more ram. The difference should be exactly the same as the difference between 44.1 and 48 - about 8% more ram usage. I remember reading that at some time here - not sure if it is correct, but it would be easy to test it ... I am just not at my DAW right now.


----------



## AllanH (Mar 2, 2018)

Another piece of data: my audio card operates natively at 96 kHz. I have found that working at 96kHz requires the least CPU at the expense of memory. I would not be surprised if audio interface drivers had a fair bit to do with latency and overall overhead. Take a project and measure.


----------



## Maxime Luft (Mar 2, 2018)

both 44hz and 48hz are very low sample rates, I'd recommend working with at least 48kHz


----------



## EvilDragon (Mar 2, 2018)

FriFlo said:


> I am not sure, but I think going to 48Khz (even if all/most of your sample libraries are 44.1) will use more ram.



At least as far as Kontakt is concerned, no it won't, because Kontakt's DFD buffer size works in kilobytes rather than milliseconds. If it were milliseconds, then it'd depend on sample rate of the samples the library consists of (NOT your audio card sample rate!) - example of millisecond DFD buffer size are Falcon and HALion. One thing that happens when library samples have a different SR from your DAW project, is you get on-the-fly resampling, which imparts a small CPU hit (or significant, depending on interpolation algorithm selected in Kontakt and the difference in sample rates). Also note when samples are repitched (zone stretching or changing tune of samples), you're also doing resampling.


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

Maxime Luft said:


> both 44hz and 48hz are very low sample rates, I'd recommend working with at least 48kHz


I'd love to work at 96khz but I did it once and it was a disaster for my system!
Most pro-composers I have seen daw-casts of also seem to work at 44khz. It's totally fine I think, but at 96khz the frequencies are a bit cleare, the hi-end in particular. But it's not enough of a difference to endure this massive load on my system, even if I get a better one soon.


----------



## EvilDragon (Mar 2, 2018)

Well, you can always work at 44.1k, then when rendering the project, change the project sample rate to 96k... Your offline render will be slower, but eventually it will be done.


----------



## Jaap (Mar 2, 2018)

EvilDragon said:


> Well, you can always work at 44.1k, then when rendering the project, change the project sample rate to 96k... Your offline render will be slower, but eventually it will be done.



+1 on this actually 

I always have my work project on 44.1 and change later the sample rate before exporting anything to the one that is required for the project.
Only exception is when I work with recordings and custom samples as I always record those at 48/24 and will work then with a project with those rates.


----------



## ptram (Mar 2, 2018)

By the way: I always work at 44.1, from the old CD days. Now that the physical support is nearly gone, and video is mostly the distribution support for music, should we switch everything to 48?

Paolo


----------



## Nmargiotta (Mar 2, 2018)

EvilDragon said:


> Well, you can always work at 44.1k, then when rendering the project, change the project sample rate to 96k... Your offline render will be slower, but eventually it will be done.



Out of curiosity, what is the benefit from having the final bounce 96k? I work solely in 48k because the editors I deliver to and ultimately the final distro request 48k, (all of my work is to picture) I could see a benefit delivering 96k to the mastering house? Have them do the downsample with the hi-end converters?


----------



## EvilDragon (Mar 2, 2018)

Well, depends on the plugins used. A lot of virtual synths can benefit from higher sample rate (even if they have their own oversampling) and sound cleaner in the top end.

Do a test: take this higher quality 96k render, then downsample it via the bestest available resampler (which costs an absolutely great price of $0 and is called SoX). Then compare it with regular 48k render you do directly from the DAW. Compare the three versions (96k raw, 96k downsampled to 48k, outright 48k from DAW) and see if you hear any audible benefits there.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 2, 2018)

I'll take twice the performance and spend my sound quality money where it makes a real difference (like mic preamps, etc.) instead of on more computer. If I were recording live acoustic ensembles regularly, okay, but for MIDI + overdubs... nah.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 2, 2018)

And the answer to the title of this thread is no. 44.1 or 48 doesn't make a noticeable difference. It isn't 8% more to go down to 44.1kHz.

I see EvilDragon has a much better answer (that Kontakt doesn't care).


----------



## Lionel Schmitt (Mar 2, 2018)

EvilDragon said:


> Well, you can always work at 44.1k, then when rendering the project, change the project sample rate to 96k... Your offline render will be slower, but eventually it will be done.


Yea. But... if I use convolution reverbs, wouldn't that mess up the impulses?


----------



## EvilDragon (Mar 2, 2018)

If it's a good convolver, it will resample things on the fly.


----------

