Help me pick a CPU for DAW...multi-cores or higher GHZ??

[tl32]

Originally Posted by jcschild

sorry but i completely dis-agree. in REAL WORLD audio tests the AMD flat out sucks period.
and you cant say well AMD is less. for every cheap AMD i can show you an equally priced Intel that will outperform.

AMD had their hey day 5 yrs ago.. and has not been able to catch up since

Scott
ADK

You should also consider the issue of intel's bias compiler. A compiler takes all of the code which makes up a program, and builds a binary executable or dll.

Intel makes a very sophisticated compiler which is very good at optimizing your code when it build your program. One of it's features, is that it builds a program so that depending on which CPU the program is running under, it may optimize differently to suit the cpu architecture. It does so using a function which gets the architecture of the cpu, and the vendor.

The controversy, is this:

“ The Intel compiler and several different Intel function libraries have suboptimal performance on AMD and VIA processors. The reason is that the compiler or library can make multiple versions of a piece of code, each optimized for a certain processor and instruction set, for example SSE2, SSE3, etc. The system includes a function that detects which type of CPU it is running on and chooses the optimal code path for that CPU. This is called a CPU dispatcher. However, the Intel CPU dispatcher does not only check which instruction set is supported by the CPU, it also checks the vendor ID string. If the vendor string is "GenuineIntel" then it uses the optimal code path. If the CPU is not from Intel then, in most cases, it will run the slowest possible version of the code, even if the CPU is fully compatible with a better version.

Intel C++ Compiler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And many audio programs are compiled with the Intel compiler because it gives the best performance for intel cpu, which most people use.

So it is difficult to tell from benchmarks, without knowing which compiler was used to compile the program.

[jcschild]

been down this road before. its moot.

FYI Stieny optimized for yrs for AMD (and intel) and had numerous Opteron systems..

guess what software is my default tester....

[tl32]

Originally Posted by jcschild

FYI Stieny optimized for yrs for AMD (and intel)

Using which compiler? It is not possible to optimize equally for both with the intel compiler.

[EastWest Lurker]

I Am Now a Slave Owner :: Film Music Magazine

[tel3caster]

Originally Posted by JLiRD808

Lol that CM 212+ kicked ass. No joke brought me down about 30C degrees from the stock fan/sink!!

Glad to hear to it! Hope you've also opted to overclock to get a little more life out of your current build.

[DAW PLUS]

Originally Posted by tl32

You should also consider the issue of intel's bias compiler. A compiler takes all of the code which makes up a program, and builds a binary executable or dll.

Intel makes a very sophisticated compiler which is very good at optimizing your code when it build your program. One of it's features, is that it builds a program so that depending on which CPU the program is running under, it may optimize differently to suit the cpu architecture. It does so using a function which gets the architecture of the cpu, and the vendor.

The controversy, is this:



Intel C++ Compiler - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And many audio programs are compiled with the Intel compiler because it gives the best performance for intel cpu, which most people use.

So it is difficult to tell from benchmarks, without knowing which compiler was used to compile the program.

Correct. But since that is what is being used by developers, there is no point in thinking about what AMD *could* do while in reality, it leaps behind. It doesn't matter whose fault it is, it is a fact that currently Intel is faster with our DAWs for the same money.

[Puffpastry]

Definitely go Intel.

Get a CPU like the Intel Core i7-3770 and you have the best of both worlds, quad core and 3.9 GHz turbo.

Plus, get a good CPU cooler like the Thermalright Venemous X or Ultra 120 and you can safely overclock the CPU even more.

maximumpc.com is a great resource for recommended components and system builds.

[anewcomb28]

Howdy all, I wanted to comment so bad on this topic that I became a registered user just to do so.

I selected my computer hardware around my DAW's (Cakewalk - Sonar X1 "by ROLAND") suggested hardware requirements and chose an intel i7 "Sandy bridge" 2670qm equiped laptop. Cakewalk states that they "worked closely with intel" and built their newest SONAR X1 to perform at it's best with a Hyper-threaded Intel i7 with "8" to "12" threads.

(Cakewalk also got invited to the 2012 Intel NAB show to do a presentation on an Ultrabook using an i7 and it was mind blowing!) Studio Quality Sound on an Ultrabook™ Device with Cakewalk | Intel Software Adrenaline

I chose a laptop over a desktop for portability and also for the simple fact that cakewalk states on their site that they used i7 "sandy bridge" laptop workstations for their overseas NAMM type shows and that the laptops handled everything perfectly and with only a 1.5 millisecond latency. (The idea of powerful portability impressed me... that, and I can connect a large external monitor if needed). They also deisigned the software to utilize the processors threads in the best possible way which also conserves a "little" energy.

I've used every sonar from 5 to X1 and have never questioned or second guessed performance after building my machines around my DAW's suggested hardware. By doing this, I have always enjoyed just making music instead of dealing with performance issues or always wondering if I'm not getting the best out of my software. I guess what I'm getting at is, if you have a favorite DAW, look at the suggested hardware and shoot for that, whether it's AMD or Intel.

Just to give an idea of my normal workload, I now have a current project with the following going on at the same time with no bouncing or freezing going on....all real time; 1 EZdrummer track, 4 Guitar Rig5 tracks going, 7 "huge" synth tracks of Omnisphere running, 1 vocal with effects plugin, FL Studio running through REWIRE into 1 track, 6 compressor plugins and 11 eq plugins all at the same time at 1.5 ms latency without any problems or dropout and I'm still adding more! I like the fact that I can edit, tweak settings or swap plugins durring playback without poping or crashing for that matter... That, and the 8 CPU meter bars barely show usage! It works great with the hardware they suggested! And the best part..., the ability to do this on the road with 4 hours of battery if needed! Too bad my KRK's are to big to carry

One last thing, and this is only my thoughts.... AMD makes some nice fast chips at great prices but in the big, money making, "hardware Hassle free" audio and video industry...Intel is the standard for one major reason...because their higher end processors performance, power and reliability is untouchable! However, there are plenty of AMD CPU's that can get the job done for a lot of people's needs at a fraction of the price and if your on a budget it is the way to go....I just chose to save my $$'s and not take any chances