Cross 1.7.1 vs 2.2.0 & problem with 48 sample rate

[Support@MixVibes]

More math to do so if your computer can't handle it, it will strugle at giving you the latency you want.

EDIT : http://support.Apple.com/kb/HT1314

[Alexkidd]

Thanks for the clarifications. Now i'm more than happy with 2.9ms of latency. almost unnoticable.

More math to do so if your computer can't handle it, it will strugle at giving you the latency you want.

EDIT : http://support.Apple.com/kb/HT1314

[BennyB]

Basicly a lower sample amount mean your CPU have to work on audio more.

When you give 128, it means your buffer size (128 samples stored in the buffer). The buffer empties constantly, while the CPU is filling it with new data.
If the buffer is smaller, the audio samples that the CPU puts into it, have to "wait" less, to be sent out as music, meaning a lower latency.
However if the CPU has a bigger load, it can't send samples that quick meaning it might drop them, or send with a little more delay, and when the next sample arrive to the buffer, the buffer might empty untill that time, which means drops in the sound, or glitch-like sound.

The bigger the buffer the "lazyer" the CPU can be, since it has more time to send those samples, before the buffer empties.
That is why the standard buffer size for the Windows handled stuff are roughly 2048 samples, so the CPU can higly multitask next to audio.