Hi @jussi_laako
Congratulations on getting V5 out of the door and making it so much fun. I have been really enjoying it since release, and been pushing my M1 Mac Mini over the edge on multiple occasions.
I was wondering if you might consider an option of being able to show HQP server performance on the client page, it can help to quickly know what is likely to work or not. I normally use my Mac mini headless and jump onto VNC Viewer when I have crashed it or need t restart, but now I am using HQPlayer Client more on my PC and I thought this might be a useful feature.
Though I can also see why you might not want to do it.
4 Likes
thinking out, it feels for me like tremendously heavy change. I’m imagining one of the typical architectures => client sits on one PC, HQ Player Server (Desktop or Embedded) sits on another PC (Win, Mac, Linux) and all these feeds NAA. One is certainly interested to capture the server performance, but here you would have different makes / architectures of CPU’s, different count of cores or hyper threads on different operating systems you need to talk to. Looks heavy to incorporate, where as alternatively you can always have a performance monitoring via remote session. For Linux for example terminal SSH session and “htop” or “i7z”, gives you the visibility you need, etc…
just my 2 cts, Jussi will tell better of course.
2 Likes
Thanks Igor that was part of my thinking as to why he might not want to do it
Superficially it seems very useful, but maybe mostly to new HQP users like myself still working through the limitations of what the M1 Mac can do with HQP.
(but unlike my faster PC it is completely silent so from that respective I am very happy with it)
2 Likes
Well, I’d say not only for new users, @Michael_Harris .With my overclocked 12900KS system stepping from HQP4 to HQP5 I’m exploring the horizons anew 
to certain extend.
But in any case, IMHO, bare CPU performance statistics is not always fully representative. For example, if I push the limits and set ASDM7ECv3@1024x48, it will play (!) but with frequent drop outs. In CPU utilization however I will see only very slight increase from total of 18% to 19% or smth… and also will see slightly higher, but not 100% utilization of two cores 1 and 5 (since I’m doing 2ch listening). i.e. visibly it seems there are tons of headroom, but apparently the bottle neck is smth else I wish we know! hahaha
2 Likes
And yes I am finding that out as I extend my horizons with the many many options of the latest version
2 Likes
