The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Sandy Bridge Preview tests
Old 6th January 2011
  #61
Lives for gear
 
Timur Born's Avatar
 

Since the 2010 Macbook Pros' ExpressCard slot is still somewhat faulty I'm not sure about Apple caring too much for them. On the other hand they put in new PCIe 2.0 hardware in 2010, so there *is* some progress being made.

Thanks for the info on SB. thumbsup
Old 7th January 2011
  #62
vfr
Gear Maniac
 
vfr's Avatar
 

Thanks Scott for the heads up on the Sandy Bridge CPUs! I'm surprised at the discrepancies between the various models.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcschild View Post
the 2600k was basically keeping up with a 980x.
That got me interested!

However, the benchmarks don't seem to support that? Also it is a little confusing to me if you are benchmarks refer to the 2600 or 2600K (with the "K" at stock settings)?
Old 7th January 2011
  #63
Lives for gear
 

well basically the first benchmark run we tried we had overclocked it sort of. with the SB chips things are very different (bios settings)
and got some numbers @ 128 buffer of 228+
980 does 236 so thats dang close. realistically the real proof shows at 64/32 buffers..
32 buffer is 168 vs the 980s 201 so not so close but still the fastest single 4 core.
2600 or 2600k would be the same at stock speeds the k is for ocing..i will add OCed #s in a few days..

Scott
ADK
Old 7th January 2011
  #64
Lives for gear
 

May as well go the K? It's not that much extra cash? How fast have you got the RAM on those machines Scott? UD5 and UD7 Gigabytes look the
Old 7th January 2011
  #65
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcschild View Post
980 does 236 so thats dang close. realistically the real proof shows at 64/32 buffers..
in test-world perhaps but real-world dont more people use 128 samples mainly?
Old 7th January 2011
  #66
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ekwipt View Post
May as well go the K? It's not that much extra cash? How fast have you got the RAM on those machines Scott? UD5 and UD7 Gigabytes look the
ram is running at 1600 heh without having to have a k chip but yes for the few $ more k is the way..

Scott
Old 7th January 2011
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWAN808 View Post
in test-world perhaps but real-world dont more people use 128 samples mainly?
thats the point. 32buffer ability will give real world ability better than 128.
Old 7th January 2011
  #68
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcschild View Post
thats the point. 32buffer ability will give real world ability better than 128.
Trying to understand - because it puts the CPUs under more pressure? Because as far as I know most people dont use 32 samples much...
Old 7th January 2011
  #69
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWAN808 View Post
Trying to understand - because it puts the CPUs under more pressure? Because as far as I know most people dont use 32 samples much...
It'd be nice for me to have that capability... meaning using 32 for tracking lots of VI's
Old 7th January 2011
  #70
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWAN808 View Post
Trying to understand - because it puts the CPUs under more pressure? Because as far as I know most people dont use 32 samples much...
yes more pressure.

and i know numerous composers (or drummers) who prefer 32 or 64 and no higher..
Scott
ADK
Old 7th January 2011
  #71
Lives for gear
 
jamwerks's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SWAN808 View Post
in test-world perhaps but real-world dont more people use 128 samples mainly?
For mixing, even 512 is fine (imo). But for latency (recording or programming VI’s) 64 lets us and the machine be one.
Old 7th January 2011
  #72
Gear Head
 
kurt1111's Avatar
 

Scott, how is the 2600k for HD video editing?
Old 7th January 2011
  #73
Lives for gear
 

Eric has it in his paws now that audio is done with it. will be testing AVCHD and Red 4K in Adobe, Avid, Vegas. i am hoping to now about Adobe by late today...
Old 7th January 2011
  #74
vfr
Gear Maniac
 
vfr's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jcschild View Post
2600 or 2600k would be the same at stock speeds the k is for ocing..i will add OCed #s in a few days..
Thanks for all the information Scott

When I checked the specifications, the 2600 and the 2600K have more differences than the "K" version just being the unlocked version of the 2600. The intel website lists at least three other differences between the two series of chips (not that the differences are that major, but there are differences).

Intel® Core
Old 7th January 2011
  #75
Lives for gear
 
valis's Avatar
Features that target either 'next generation virtualization' (buzzword happy) i/o mapping and 'embedded' usages. So those charted differences are probably not relevant to most audio users (or overclockers on the desktop).
Old 7th January 2011
  #76
vfr
Gear Maniac
 
vfr's Avatar
 

The surprising thing to me is that the "K" version omits these features. I agree these differences are not important for most typical applications.
Old 8th January 2011
  #77
Lives for gear
 
valis's Avatar
You're looking at it wrong, the 'K' series is aimed at enthusiasts and the non-K is validated for embedded (think cooling equiv of 1u rackspace) and virtualization (often in 1u racks....) where overclocking is rather...unlikely. Also think business & OEM channels' needs, not consumer...and it makes some kind of sense.
Old 8th January 2011
  #78
vfr
Gear Maniac
 
vfr's Avatar
 

That makes sense, thanks valis.


Quote:
Originally Posted by meloco_go View Post
Interesting, how's the TDP and estimated price of 2600?
The preliminary prices are (for 1000 unit purchases) $317 for the 2600K and just under $300 for the 2600 (non-k)

Here is a link to a comparison of efficiencies:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...2-nm,2831.html

It's looking good
Old 8th January 2011
  #79
Gear Head
 

so if I'm understanding this correctly, for daw

980x still is king for pc's

this is because sandy bridge in this round is aimed at consumers who will benefit from the onboard video features

the next round of sandy bridge processors may be more suitable for pro audio, but we have to wait for that

the 2600 line of sandy bridge in this round, however, does have nice processor speed potential, but a lot of this is due to turbo boost, which causes unwanted audio artifacts due to dpc latency spikes

and thus someone building a pc daw in the next couple of months should just assume 980x is top of the line, not any of the 1st gen sandy bridge

is that right:?
Old 8th January 2011
  #80
Gear Addict
 
Melodioso's Avatar
 

Any idea why all the 1155 mobos only have 4 RAM slots? That limits the total RAM to 16GB...
Old 8th January 2011
  #81
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melodioso View Post
Any idea why all the 1155 mobos only have 4 RAM slots? That limits the total RAM to 16GB...
Because they are the replacement for the 1156 current midrange and remain dual channel. The highend i7 replacements come out later in the year and I imagine they'll be tri-channel.
Old 8th January 2011
  #82
Lives for gear
 

quad channel actually...heh

scott
ADK
Old 8th January 2011
  #83
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by geist View Post
so if I'm understanding this correctly, for daw

980x still is king for pc's
yes to a point. 970 as well
composers (due to the higher memory bandwidth) or very heavy projects

Quote:
this is because sandy bridge in this round is aimed at consumers who will benefit from the onboard video features
while this may be true for main streamnot so much for audio hoowever honestly onboard video has been fine for audio for some time with a few exceptions. this go round we seen a few issue with the onboard but really cant judge it 100% just yet. fine for low budget hobbiest systems. i think Waves may not like it and on large projeects zoom to track would be effected as well so... the improved intel video seems more geared to main stream and DVD movies.

Quote:
the next round of sandy bridge processors may be more suitable for pro audio, but we have to wait for that
not correct its very suitable now
Quote:
the 2600 line of sandy bridge in this round, however, does have nice processor speed potential, but a lot of this is due to turbo boost, which causes unwanted audio artifacts due to dpc latency spikes
this go round turbo on is not creating DPC however this is motherboard dependant (and tweak dependant) as we seen some serious anomalies with this. even from the 2300 to the 2600..

i thought the X58 platform was a difficult DYI build this looks to be even more laden with potential pitfalls

Quote:
and thus someone building a pc daw in the next couple of months should just assume 980x is top of the line, not any of the 1st gen sandy bridge

is that right:?
the 6 core systems are still king yes and the X58 has a better memory platform. 17GB/s to 27GB/s (however 6 cores have changed the memory controller once again and are now around 23GB/s) whist a 950 OCed is still hitting 27-28GB/s or slightly higher. (or stock even)

however the Sandy bridge replaced the 1156 socket and in doing so has nearly doubled the power of the midrange platform. so it will matter more about your workflow.

Scott
ADK
Old 9th January 2011
  #84
Lives for gear
 
Neenja's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melodioso View Post
Any idea why all the 1155 mobos only have 4 RAM slots? That limits the total RAM to 16GB...
Because they will have a "high end" chip/MB later in the year with more and triple/quad channel.
Old 9th January 2011
  #85
vfr
Gear Maniac
 
vfr's Avatar
 

This is a little off-topic, but I don't really think it is a good business decision that intel has so many different different CPU socket designs. It seems that they offer many of the same or similar CPUs in several different socket versions. I know that these are targetted for different types of users, at slightly different price points, but I would have though it would have been more cost effective to have only a couple of socket designs, and then processor and motherboard manufacturers could realise some cost savings and hopefully pass that on to consumers (as if). I see no good reason to offer both 1156 and 1366 versions of CPUs/MBs (not to mention other socket form factors like 1567 etc.).

Sure, when new technology usurps older legacy designs a new socket design may be needed. But three different form factors for core2 CPUs?
Old 9th January 2011
  #86
Lives for gear
 
Neenja's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vfr View Post
This is a little off-topic, but I don't really think it is a good business decision that intel has so many different different CPU socket designs. It seems that they offer many of the same or similar CPUs in several different socket versions. I know that these are targetted for different types of users, at slightly different price points, but I would have though it would have been more cost effective to have only a couple of socket designs, and then processor and motherboard manufacturers could realise some cost savings and hopefully pass that on to consumers (as if). I see no good reason to offer both 1156 and 1366 versions of CPUs/MBs (not to mention other socket form factors like 1567 etc.).

Sure, when new technology usurps older legacy designs a new socket design may be needed. But three different form factors for core2 CPUs?
They will be phasing some of them out. 775 and 1156 are EOL and 1366 will follow.
Old 9th January 2011
  #87
Lives for gear
 
valis's Avatar
1366 will follow (in being retired) when there's a replacement later this year, just like 1156>1155

vfr, before this latest sandy bridge launch the LGA-1366 & 1156 were clearly delineated in the first gen of nehalem systems as 'high end' and 'mainstream'. Now that Intel is moving forward with the next generation of i-series cpu's, the same thing applies to the 1155 socket cpu's that are debuting now. As has been stated already the higher end 'performance' cpu's that will follow later this year. The cost differences are actually considerable enough (closer to Xeon vs consumer cpu socket in previous years) that you'd know if the higher performance was necessary and how long you can wait until you have a new build.
Old 9th January 2011
  #88
Gear Maniac
 

So, to buy SandyBridge 2600 for DAW or not?

And which MBO you guys recommend for that cpu?
Old 9th January 2011
  #89
Lives for gear
 

gigabyte UD5 and UD7
Old 10th January 2011
  #90
Gear Maniac
All things being equal, does it make sense to have a 2600k in a H67 motherboard? If the graphics is good enough(?)for DAW work, then it should lead to less heat and therefore less noise via fans ans still be overclocked if needed.
Am I missing something about the difference between the H67 and the P67 motherboards?
Thanks
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Warp69 / Music Computers
23
Pasta4lnch / So many guitars, so little time
4
Ghede / So much gear, so little time
3
audio_images / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0

Forum Jump
Forum Jump