[pulseaudio-discuss] arecord CPU consumption high with pulseaudio

Jim Duda jim at duda.tzo.com
Sun Mar 30 06:50:38 PDT 2008

Well, I do notice that parec doesn't have the same issue, so maybe the 
issue is that arecord isn't all that good with pulse, hence, the need 
for parec.

I do retain the claim that later versions of pulse have higher cpu 
consumption when using a combined_sink.


Jim Duda wrote:
> I've noticed that when I use arecord without pulse, raw alsa, the cpu 
> consumption of arecord is very low, almost zero.
> However, when using arecord with pulseaudio, I find cpu consumption very 
> high.
> With 0.9.6, I found that arecord ran in the high 90's, and using ^C to 
> kill the process wasn't useful.  I had to kill -9.
> With >= 0.9.9, I found that arecord ran around 75%, and using ^C would 
> work consistently.
> I have a 2.8 Ghz P4 with hyperthreading.
> Is it expected that arecord usage be so high with pulseaudio?
> I also found another curious note.  With 0.9.6, a combined_sink results 
> in pulseaudion consuming ~ 10-20% cpu while playing a wav file.  With >= 
> 0.9.10, I have found that using a combined_sink now consumes 50%.  I 
> don't find this unreasonable giving what combined sink is doing, just 
> thought I'd pass on my findings.
> Example:
> load-module module-combine sink_name=misterhouse 
> resample_method="src-sinc-best-quality" 
> master=alsa_output.pci_1274_5880_alsa_playback_0 
> slaves=alsa_output.pci_8086_24d5_alsa_playback_0
> Just attempting to route audio out 2 different cards.
> Jim

More information about the pulseaudio-discuss mailing list