Evidragon, is this completely modelled, or sampled with modeling algorithms ?

For the most part it's additive synthesis which uses analyzed data from real recordings of the instruments (like Pianoteq in that regard) from what I reckon, so no samples included at all.

How will be the evolution of processors (short run) besides the mult cores, if the material reached their limit ?

Evidragon, is this completely modelled, or sampled with modeling algorithms ?

Greg.

A 20 violins modelled instrument or a giant huge pipe organ, unfortunatelly have no estimation to appears soon, give the bad prognostic of computer power for the next years.

You didn't hear that Wallander Instruments is secretly working on WIVI Strings?

Just so you know, currently WIVI wind instrument player can manage about a 100 separate players on a normal 2-2.5 GHz dualcore CPU! How's that for using the available CPU?

Also, CPUs don't really need to evolve much in terms of speed - speed is pretty much enough as it is now, the only evolution will be in parallelization (going for more and more processing cores). And actual software support from certain programs for multicores is weak! Majority of VST instruments use only single core, for example! It's not CPU's fault - it's the programmer's fault for not utilizing the available multicores correctly! Thankfully, Modartt does this!

This increase energy consume, and can't be compared to the old evolution we had, since it's now a arithmetic progression and not a geometric progression like before.

This is a obstacle to modelled instruments developments, since computer power evolution it's the key to modelled instruments get way better.
A 20 violins modelled instrument or a giant huge pipe organ, unfortunatelly have no estimation to appears soon, give the bad prognostic of computer power for the next years.

I presume this would greatly lift the heavy load that goes to main CPU, and yes, allow even more computations to be done in realtime. More computations = more precise model = better and more nuanced sound!

Still trying to understand, though: would using the video chip allow more complex calculations?

I'd like to point out, though, that I agree with EvilDragon that the main advantage of this would be the opportunity to use a more sophisticated model rather than the higher polyphony

I for one would benefit from this way of programming pianoteq, if it works!

I'll vote positively.

I must ask: What is CUDA processing? It doesn't seem to be a programming language, from what I can gather.

Answering briefly, it is standard coming from nVIDIA for driving computing made on GPU (graphic card processor).

GPUs have slightly different architecture than regular CPU (central processor, usually coming from Intel or AMD). Modern GPUs are tens or hundreds floating point processing units that can do no more than floating point numbers calculations, while CPUs are just few cores made for general purpose such as device handling, floating point calculation but also integer calculation, operating system and process/application handling etc.

While single GPU processing unit is weaker in terms of performance than single CPU core, GPU units simply outnumber CPU cores so much so altogether they have much more computing power than CPU cores.
That's why for all algorithms or processes that can be divided into separate calculation chunks GPU computing seems to be good alternative. And IMHO this is the case of audio synthesis here in Pianoteq.