The most powerful PC

[JMWS]

Hi!

I´m getting a new PC and I need it to be very powerful.

My current setup is:
Cubase SX 3.1.1
Emu 1820M (updating to Fireface 800)
2X AMD Opteron 252 2,6Ghz, 1Mb L2 cache
Tyan Thunder K8SE

Year and a half ago I paid for this setup approx 3500e and it´s probably 10% of the power that I really need! Everyday is been grinding of the teeth because the lack of power.
So I´m hoping the technology would be advanced by now and I would finally get a DAW that would satisfy my needs.
Probably the technology isn´t that advanced yet that one PC would run 200 audiotracks with 3-4 plugins in each + 100 VSTi tracks in realtime with lowest latency, am I right? That´s what I really need. But hopefully I could at least double the power that I have now...

Okey, hit me with recommendations of processors mainly. But other parts too like watercooling (I need it to be noiseless) and motherboards and memorys...

[SONICA]

Hello,

since you are using Cubase SX3 and there are some issues with 8 core, then take a look at the Quad Core systems.

Q6600, QX6700, and XEON 3220.

[s.d.finley]

Why not have another PC just for VSTi's?

[jbuehler]

Originally Posted by JMWS

that one PC would run 200 audiotracks with 3-4 plugins in each + 100 VSTi tracks in realtime with lowest latency, am I right?

WTF are you working on? Geez...........

[s.d.finley]

Originally Posted by jbuehler

WTF are you working on? Geez...........

Thats what I was thinking too!!

WTF indeed!

[jcschild]

HI,
the system you have will do 200 tracks (with the right HDDs)
if your adding 3-4 effects per track on that many tracks i would question your engineering skills.
However i will assume this is scoring to film (the only logical explaination for that many tracks)

if you are talking about the included effects in Cubase the system you have upgraded to dual dual core 285's would pull that off most likely.
if you are talking about waves IR/ Voxengo/ Sony Oxford native and other heavy hitting plugs you would need a dual quad Xeon.

100 VST isnt possible as of present due to memory limitations of XP.
with Vista and say 8-16G of ram yes. however few samples work well on Vista.
and few if any are actually large address aware so until that happens it does not matter how powerful the system is your hosed on sampling (with out freezing/bouncing)

the only option is mulitple VSTi boxes

otherwise a dual quad Xeon would do what you ask. and as mentioned Steiny products have a mulitcore issue right now.

SCott
ADK

[captain caveman]

Here's a thought.....

The Emu 1820m is not the best soundcard for low-latency operation. Even thought it is a PCI card, the low latency is around the same as for the Fireface which is firewire and so you'd expect it to be worse. I had the 2 running at the same time (Fireface 400) for a day or so whilst I tested them, before my Emu fried.

So if you are getting crackles in audio at low latencies, getting an interface like the Lynx 2 would allow you to run the CPU meter much higher (into the 90%+ without your audio breaking up) than the Emu or Fireface.

[JMWS]

Let´s just say that I have very big projects. Of course those numbers I said are not exactly like that, they were just to give an idea what I need, and that is lot´s of power! It has to do also the way I work, I don´t like to do any workarounds. I kinda compose, record and mix at the same time (yep, that´s right, so please don´t judge me for that and please don´t tell me to change the way I work ). So I may left lot of ideas hanging around in the project too. And I like to do everything in the same project. Now I´m working on one song in 4-6 different projects, it´s very frustrating.
I also would like to do this with one machine. But maybe the technology isn´t still "there". Sometimes I feel like we are living in the stoneage.

I have also thought about the Lynx seriously, but Fireface 800 seems more practical. And it´s more familiar since I already have one with my laptop. But it isn´t still written in the book that I won´t take the Lynx afterall.

Okey thanks for the tips so far! Let´s see... Those Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6700 look very interesting. By the way are the QX6800 out yet?

Now the main thing I´m wondering and worried about, is that if I get QX6700, will Cubase 3.1.1 support it? And is it possible to get two QX6700? And will Cubase support two of them?

I vaquely remember that the Cubase will support dualcore, but what about quadcore, dual dualcore or dual quadcore? That is the big questionmark in my head now...

[statikcat]

I think jcschild said everything I was goign to say. You can't run that many VST in XP. I will emphasize that there is no need to run 3-4 plugins on 200 tracks or that many plugins if you know what you are doing. You may be exaggerating but if that is even close to the case you need to learn how to use group tracks and fx tracks and instruments properly. You can say "I dont want to change how I work" .. well what if it is the difference between working properly AND getting more power out of your machine? Isnt that what you want?! Anyway I respect that you have found a way that works for you.

Btw.. I am going to take a stab here.. I am going to guess you are doing sfx for film AND scoring in the same project? I tried that once lol. I would suggest doing sfx and scoring in separate projects and break the film into 5-10m segments. Haha.. just a guess. I think we are all really curious as to what you are doing

[jbuehler]

Originally Posted by JMWS

Sometimes I feel like we are living in the stoneage.

You have got to be kidding right? I think most people are crazy! We are so far in the future right now it is straight nuts. Just think about how much cell phones and computers have changed our lives and what is possible to so many now (Example: recording & producing), and that is only in the last 10 years. I guess until we have hover-cars nobody will believe we are there yet.....Anyway, just some thoughts fer ya and now I will spare this thread from anymore worthless posts

[True North]

Scott layed it out pretty clearly but the one thing you really need to consider is your DAW.

Even if you had Dual - Quad Xeon , Cubase would not be in a position to really take advantage of that power becuase it has issues with scaling CPU efficiencies at lower latencies.

You should really consider trying Reaper. I am not a MIDI guy but apparently there it's not quite up to Snuff with Cubase yet, but the power it can bring is very impressive. A fellow gearslut member sent me a long outline and a screeshot of his experience with Reaper.

Originally Posted by Ten

Its (screenshot) running 10 instances of Native Instrument's Massive all playing back 16 notes poly at the same time in ultra high quality mode. The best bit though this is at 96k samplerate and 32 samples soundcard buffer (0.33ms latency.) As you can see, all 8 cpus are almost pegged in the task manager but there is no audio glitches or problems with playback.

I almost fell off my chair. If you have ever used massive in ultra high mode youll know it EATS cpu when playing multiple poly. Let alone this was 10 instances of 16 poly at 96k AND 0.3ms latency.

While again this is a pretty limited test, Nuendo would die with a single instance at 96k and that kind of latency.

I was really impressed with Reaper on many fronts. It does not integrate well with Waves plugs and UAD plugs. I have some significant investments in those plugs so I decided to stick with Cubase. If I wasn't attached to those plugs I wouldn't even think twice about moving to Reaper.

To my knowledge there isn't a DAW app that is anywhere near as efficient in a Multicore environment - good luck with your search.

[Spyrow]

Originally Posted by JMWS

+ 100 VSTi tracks in realtime with lowest latency

I'm sorry man, but you can't load more than 64 VSTi's with Cubase

[JMWS]

Sorry, I ment like 100 VSTi TRACKS, like in 100 sounds, if I load one instance for example EW Symphonic Choir, I get 8 sounds already with the Kompakt instruments.

Anyways I´m not doing film, just music and kinda long songs. I use symphonic elements, could be 30-50 tracks in one part. Then there could be other part later in the song, where I use the symphonic element differently and I need new 30-50 tracks for that, much easier to mix and arrange the song that way. And then I have the 20-30 drum tracks with samples. 20-30 distortion guitar tracks (yes I use lot´s of different sounds, even with distortion). Then there´s the 20-30 clean and acoustic guitar tracks. 2 bass tracks . Then maybe 50 synth and samples tracks (I use different sounds for every part of the song). Then vocal tracks could go even to hundred, since I´m doing these crazy choir parts. And a song could have several of them, so I want to have them on separate set of tracks, again easier to mix. And then all my ideas hanging in the project, even more tracks. So you see, lot of tracks.

And I know how and definately use group/folder/FX tracks thank you very much.

BUT, it all comes down to my final guestion: What would be the most powerful processor (or computer setup) for Cubase 3.1.1. today?

DAW change isn´t a possibility at the moment.
It seems that that QX6700 would be the best, but will only one of those improve significantly the performance over my two Opterons? If not, there´s not really point to waste money. I would need to at least double the power I have now.

[jcschild]

HI,
a single Core 2 duo already blows away the opterons you have
the QX6700 (quad) would smoke it so bad it aint funny.

a core 2 duo comes very close to being on par with opteron dual cores (read 4 cpus)
a quad core again smokes the opteron dual duals. that 4 cpus vs 4 cpus.

the opteron was my fav system to sell until the core 2 duo/quad.

scott
ADK

[JMWS]

Really??? Maybe there is hope for me afterall...

[jcschild]

FYI i have done 192 live tracks 48k on that opteron you have. (well a church in TX has that i sold one to with 3 MAdi cards in it has)

Scott

[Spyrow]

Buy a core 2 quad, freeze some tracks, join tracks & automate the VST's, use groups to share VST's, use FX Teleport, and when you are ready to mix bounce your VSTi's to audio tracks and use the max latency you can, then bounce your high load VST's to audio (you can always undo in Cubase when doing offline procesing). There is a lot of workarounds to deal with large projects. The most important I think is going to the max latency when mixing. In that moment it doesn't mind an high latency and your cpu relax a lot. I'm using 2024 without problems, if you are needing more cpu change to 4000, 8000... In 8000 it's very noticeable and a bit annoying but, it's that or nothing and if you were doing well you should never need to use it.

The most important thinking IMO: finish the song and then prepare the mix. Save every preset to recall it if needed so you can unload all your VSTi's.

[esaias]

Originally Posted by JMWS

Sorry, I ment like 100 VSTi TRACKS, like in 100 sounds, if I load one instance for example EW Symphonic Choir, I get 8 sounds already with the Kompakt instruments.

Anyways I´m not doing film, just music and kinda long songs. I use symphonic elements, could be 30-50 tracks in one part. Then there could be other part later in the song, where I use the symphonic element differently and I need new 30-50 tracks for that, much easier to mix and arrange the song that way. And then I have the 20-30 drum tracks with samples. 20-30 distortion guitar tracks (yes I use lot´s of different sounds, even with distortion). Then there´s the 20-30 clean and acoustic guitar tracks. 2 bass tracks . Then maybe 50 synth and samples tracks (I use different sounds for every part of the song). Then vocal tracks could go even to hundred, since I´m doing these crazy choir parts. And a song could have several of them, so I want to have them on separate set of tracks, again easier to mix. And then all my ideas hanging in the project, even more tracks. So you see, lot of tracks.

And I know how and definately use group/folder/FX tracks thank you very much.

BUT, it all comes down to my final guestion: What would be the most powerful processor (or computer setup) for Cubase 3.1.1. today?

DAW change isn´t a possibility at the moment.
It seems that that QX6700 would be the best, but will only one of those improve significantly the performance over my two Opterons? If not, there´s not really point to waste money. I would need to at least double the power I have now.

I want to hear this stuff. :P

Get the fastest quad Xeons (top of the line Dell or maybe even a Mac Pro! ), some UAD's / Powercores etc.

and upgrade your audiointerface to INTERNAL (PCI or PCIe) Lynx or RME if you want low latencies.

If you have loads of tracks, you might want consider having fast scsi or 10k Raptors (and run them in RAID 0)

Are you sure you couldn't get away with simpler mixes? and try to finish the song first (tracking etc.) becaus that is the only place where you need low latencies.

-Tomi

[Krank]

Yeah, could we please get to hear some of your work? I'm for one promise not to snicker in any way regardless if I like it or not. I'm merely curious.

[Adebar]

Originally Posted by JMWS

I´m getting a new PC and I need it to be very powerful.

Get a MacPro with Boot Camp. Very fast and quiet too.

[wilkinswp]

Yes, please post a short mixed clip if you can. I'm curious to hear it too.

[kafka]

Originally Posted by esaias

I want to hear this stuff. :P

Get the fastest quad Xeons (top of the line Dell or maybe even a Mac Pro! ), some UAD's / Powercores etc.

I just got my Dell 690. I'm totally impressed with how powerful it is, even with a single dual-core 1.6GHz Xeon. It's been smooth as glass for everything I've tried on it using PTMP. The potential for dual quad-cores is incredible. You'd probably want to start with a faster CPU or a quad core, and then go to a second processor from there.

[FreeQ]

Hi...

If I comprehended the above right. in brief reading, it was mentioned one can use 1 PC to run Vst & the other to run their DAW?

Can someone please suggest HOW that can be done, sync'd properly & what are the intricacies of compatibility needed to join both systems?

thanks & happy new year.

[FlatBeat]

Originally Posted by FreeQ

Hi...

If I comprehended the above right. in brief reading, it was mentioned one can use 1 PC to run Vst & the other to run their DAW?

Can someone please suggest HOW that can be done, sync'd properly & what are the intricacies of compatibility needed to join both systems?

thanks & happy new year.

Start a new thread man this one is from 2007

[hipass]

The new i7 Intel chips represent a huge fundamental upgrade for audio power. These new processors is going to blow everyone away. But like almost everything Intel does the second generation is where it's going to be at.

[jrwaltb]

hipass "The new i7 Intel chips represent a huge fundamental upgrade for audio power. These new processors is going to blow everyone away. But like almost everything Intel does the second generation is where it's going to be at"

(Sorry off topic)- I can't wait for these things to come out. Quad Core 2's are already fast but these are going to be nuts..

IMO Wait for these and upgrade to Cubase 4 (or whichever version can use 8 core). (I use samplitude 10.2 and it was made for 8 cores)!

[spinedoc]

ANy ideas when the second generation of the i7 is speculated to arrive? I am so close to getting the ones out now. I wonder what may be the downside..

[357mag]

Originally Posted by jbuehler

Just think about how much cell phones and computers have changed our lives and what is possible to so many now...

Cell phones suck. They should never have been invented. They need to be banned.

[Firechild]

You have to buy a Skulltrail Mobo Intel D5400XS and two QX9775 CPU:s to reach your goal, but as mentioned you can´t run Windows XP. You have to install Vista 64 bit or OSX Leopard on the machine.

[Jovas]

Originally Posted by spinedoc

ANy ideas when the second generation of the i7 is speculated to arrive? I am so close to getting the ones out now. I wonder what may be the downside..

The second generation Core i(7) will be, if the rumors and sources are correct, Core i5. They will probably hit the market within a half year, if the rumors and sources are right..

intel core i5 - Google zoeken