Processors, processors...

[DrWashington]

Hey everyone,

I'm thinking of upgrading to an i7 920. Has anybody had any direct experience going from what I have now, a Q6600 to a 920? Would it be worth it, or am I better off waiting for something better down the line?
_________________
"There is nothing in which people more betray their character than in what they laugh at." -Goethe

Cubase 5.1.1 on Intel Core i7 @ 3.8GHz, Asus P6X58D Premium mobo, 6GB 1600MHz DDR3, 1x 300GB 2.5" Velociraptor, 3x 750GB RAID 5, 1x 2TB Samsung, 1x 2TB Hitachi, RME HDSP Multiface, 2x GeForce 260GTX, far too many plugins...

[matjones]

My own last machine was not a quad... it was a dual e6600, but i do frequently help someone running the same cpu as you under win xp pro using C4, From my own personal point of view i would say yes it's worth the upgrade... just MHO.
_________________
C5.5.2 32/64Bit, RME HDSPe Mulitface II, i7 920 @ 2.67GHz, 6GB Corsair 1600 RAM, Win7 Ultimate 64Bit, BFD2 (BOMB, JnF, Deluxe, Jazz Maple, JEX & Oak packs), Korg Trinity plus, JV1080 + Piano & Ethnic boards, Korg Wavestation SR, Novation A Station, Pod X3 Pro, Yamaha E1010 Analogue delay (Dub city! ), Alphatrack, Warwick, Spector, Ashbory & Peavey Basses........... Loads of other junk and a full pot of Java!

[coachz]

that's about 2x the cpu speed
_________________
my setup and tips

[Laurence Payne]

Any upgrade is only worth it if it solves a problem in the way you currently work, or enables something new that you definitely need to do RIGHT NOW. Otherwise it makes sense to wait until there IS a problem to solve. Is there one now?

[ZeroZero]

I am using such a machine in 64 bit (which you should seriously consider for both Cubase and Windows) Everything is delightful no crashes no RAM issues. If you go 32 bit then your gains will be les
_________________
Cubase 5 64 bit, Core i7 920, 12 gig, Asus 6pt v2 mobo, Win 7 64 Ult, Liquid Saffire 56. Surround Sound set up (Reveals). EWQLS Orch Plat, Symphonic Choirs, Kontakt 3, Halion 3.5 64 bit, TruePianos, GPO, Westgate Oboe, The Stradivari, Gofrilla, British rail sandwich circa 1953, VSL Orchestral Strings 1, EWQL Orch Gold, BFD2, Absynth 4 Omnisphere, Trilogy, RMX IV, numerous synths and a whole load of outboard -sax player really.

[Lazzerman]

The i7 920 is superseded by the i7 930 - that in a short while will be replaced with i7 950.

So at least, go for the i7 930

// Lazze
_________________
http://www.ziden.org : Windows 7 Ultimate x64, i7 930@4.0 CPU, 12gb DDR3 ,Intel G2 160gb SSD, 60gb Vertex SSD, 80gb Intel G2 SSD.2tb Striped HDD, Geforce 480 1784mb, 2x24" LCD, Delta 1010LT, Motif MO66 + a ton of camera stuff. Cubase 5.5. 32bit, Komplete 6, RealGuitar, RealStrat, Ultra Analog VA-1, Moog modular, Prophet V

[Peace Dog]

[Laurence Payne]

[Peace Dog]

[DrWashington]

No, I'm posting in the right forum, I'm pretty sure. I'm running Cubase, am I not?

I don't want some gamer's opinion on this; that's why I'm posting here. I couldn't give 2 *flower* about 3D performance. I'm strictly concerned with my DAW performance, and specifically, I want to be able to run the likes of Zebra 2.5 and Alchemy without smashing the processor too easily. I also routinely use the Sonnox plugs, especially dynamics, reverb, and EQ, and PSP Xenon and Vintage Warmer 2. Also using REVerence quite a lot lately.

Basically, I want more headroom for softsynths, and as much of it as possible. I do plan to overclock some. I'm not OCing my Q6600. Just bought a Corsair Obsidian series case--I hear it's quiet and has excellent airflow. That would sure be nice; current case is alright, but gets a bit noisy when tracking sometimes.

I'm actually really having fun making music again lately. The issues are mostly disappearing, which is wonderful. I can't help but feel Yamaha's influence on this company has been for the better. 5.5 is a very strong release, and I'm happy they've gotten to this point. May it only get better from here on!

So, that's my question, basically: if I want to use a lot of Alchemy, Zebra, Sylenth1, FM8, etc., and I'm willing to OC within reason, would a 920 be worth it? Would the performance gains be like 50%? 100%? Anybody have any direct experience with this? I'm open to other procs too, but I hear the 920 is a killer and is a doddle to overclock.

Thanks for the feedback so far... it's genuinely helpful. What say you? Should I do it? Should I wait? What's the 950 going to offer that the 920 does not?
_________________
"There is nothing in which people more betray their character than in what they laugh at." -Goethe

Cubase 5.1.1 on Intel Core i7 @ 3.8GHz, Asus P6X58D Premium mobo, 6GB 1600MHz DDR3, 1x 300GB 2.5" Velociraptor, 3x 750GB RAID 5, 1x 2TB Samsung, 1x 2TB Hitachi, RME HDSP Multiface, 2x GeForce 260GTX, far too many plugins...

[Ron Garrison]

[DrWashington]

OK, I'll give it a shot. Thanks!
_________________
"There is nothing in which people more betray their character than in what they laugh at." -Goethe

Cubase 5.1.1 on Intel Core i7 @ 3.8GHz, Asus P6X58D Premium mobo, 6GB 1600MHz DDR3, 1x 300GB 2.5" Velociraptor, 3x 750GB RAID 5, 1x 2TB Samsung, 1x 2TB Hitachi, RME HDSP Multiface, 2x GeForce 260GTX, far too many plugins...

[darrena]

[DrWashington]

One of the other primary things I'm wondering about is how much cache size actually affects ASIO load, if at all. It seems more than anything that VSTs and VSTis would be hungry for for raw speed. Would love to get a 980X, but I don't think there's any way I can justify that expense. Well, maybe, but I've spent big on CPUs before, and have lived to regret it.

What I'd really like is 8 cores clocked stable at over 4 GHz. I'm trying to get everything running smoothly at 96kHz. I feel it's about time. No matter how hard I try to settle on 44.1 just to get things done, I keep coming back to 96k. It just sounds so sweet, and makes tracking so much more fun, which keeps me doing it.
_________________
"There is nothing in which people more betray their character than in what they laugh at." -Goethe

Cubase 5.1.1 on Intel Core i7 @ 3.8GHz, Asus P6X58D Premium mobo, 6GB 1600MHz DDR3, 1x 300GB 2.5" Velociraptor, 3x 750GB RAID 5, 1x 2TB Samsung, 1x 2TB Hitachi, RME HDSP Multiface, 2x GeForce 260GTX, far too many plugins...

[jcschild]

[darrena]

Wow. So is this improvement because of hyperthreading?

Need to get myself one of these i7 980x procs running at 4GHz I'm assuming that you can't buy an overclocked CPU like this from HP or Dell, though... but i bet the stock 3.33GHz isn't too shabby either.
_________________
[[da]
Core2Quad Q6600 2.40GHz, 6GB RAM, Win7 x64 C5.5.0 x64
Hardware: ProFire 2626; FastTrack Ultra
Software: Cubase 5, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian, NI Komplete 6, Sound Forge 10, bunch o' FX
music: http://lightsfadelow.com/

[thietavu]

[darrena]

I have been maybe unnecessariy scared of going with a non-intel solution. The benchmarks don't rate the Phenom II X6 aren't posted. Any idea how they compare to the i7 4GHz numbers?

EDIT: Looks like the X6 only is available at 3.4GHz. So is the 4GHz something that requires special surgery to overclock or is this something that you can do with any stock AMD PC (software or BIOS)?
_________________
[[da]
Core2Quad Q6600 2.40GHz, 6GB RAM, Win7 x64 C5.5.0 x64
Hardware: ProFire 2626; FastTrack Ultra
Software: Cubase 5, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian, NI Komplete 6, Sound Forge 10, bunch o' FX
music: http://lightsfadelow.com/

[jcschild]

not even close
even the Intel 750 (now 760 is same price) beast the AMD 6 core
dont waster your money as the 760 build is the same price
even better the X58 platform
_________________
Scott
ADK
home of the "Kentucky Fried DAW"

[darrena]

Ok. Well I think it will have to be the i7 6-core. Maybe in the winter
_________________
[[da]
Core2Quad Q6600 2.40GHz, 6GB RAM, Win7 x64 C5.5.0 x64
Hardware: ProFire 2626; FastTrack Ultra
Software: Cubase 5, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian, NI Komplete 6, Sound Forge 10, bunch o' FX
music: http://lightsfadelow.com/

[thietavu]

[darrena]

I'm certainly running out of horsepower on my q6600 now and that was a big step up from my laptop. I'm just not a fan of freezing. It will b a lot of work to reinstall Komplete 6, Omnisphere, Trillian, RMX, all of my VSTs, etc. From DVD and then all the updates, etc. so I had better be sure whatever I buy is a *substantial* step up--like 2-3x the number of VSTs before I have to raise the buffer over 512 samples.
_________________
[[da]
Core2Quad Q6600 2.40GHz, 6GB RAM, Win7 x64 C5.5.0 x64
Hardware: ProFire 2626; FastTrack Ultra
Software: Cubase 5, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian, NI Komplete 6, Sound Forge 10, bunch o' FX
music: http://lightsfadelow.com/

[leggy]

Re installing onto a new machine just have the 2 computers running side by side connected to a network and copy your libraries across. Will work for the Spectrasonics stuff too and save you A LOT of time and hassle.

Rob
_________________
Rob Lord
Stylophonic Music Productions
www.stylophonic.tv
Mac Pro 8 Core 3 Ghz, OS X 10.6.3, 32GB Ram, Sonnet Allegro FireWire 400 PCIe, MR816 X, CC121, Midi Express 128, Decklink SP. Powercore FW, UAD-2 Quad, Cubase 5 latest version.

[darrena]

Yea that would help with spectrasonics and native instruments. Not the actual DLLs and EXEs. But it does lessen the pain a bit.
_________________
[[da]
Core2Quad Q6600 2.40GHz, 6GB RAM, Win7 x64 C5.5.0 x64
Hardware: ProFire 2626; FastTrack Ultra
Software: Cubase 5, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian, NI Komplete 6, Sound Forge 10, bunch o' FX
music: http://lightsfadelow.com/

[JFHall]

jcschilds quoted....

[not even close
even the Intel 750 (now 760 is same price) beast the AMD 6 core
dont waster your money as the 760 build is the same price
even better the X58 platform]

HEY JCSCHILDS - WHAT FACTS AND TESTS DO YOU HAVE TO BASE THIS ON............... NOTHING!!! NOTTA!!! ZILCH!!!

YOU HAVE NO FACTS TO BACK THIS UP YET YOU PERPETUATE IN GIVING THIS "OPINION" WITH NO FACTS TO BASE THIS AT ALL. You REALLY need to chill with all the bogus poison you spread on websites slandering AMD just because you LIKE Intel. You are not helping anybody by doing this and the purpose of these forums is to help people, not spread your opinion so you can feel better about yourself.

FELLOW CUBASE JUNKIES...........THINK ABOUT THIS...the tests on the website that jcschilds keeps referring to CAN BE defined as bogus though it is implicative (and only implicative) of the results you may see using SOME processors. The tests ONLY uses MD5 and RXC, but NO OTHER PLUGIN AT ALL IS USED. NO VST INSTRUMENTS ARE USED IN THE TEST, AND NO SAMPLERS. THEREFORE, THIS TEST MEANS LITTLE. Yet Scott (jcschilds) perpetually insists on INTEL????


KEEP IN MIND VARIOUS SOFTWARE YEILDS VARIOUS RESULTS FOR VARIOUS HARDWARE!!!!!!

You cannot draw conclusions based on such shallow testing. (the tests can be seen here... http://www.adkproaudio.com/benchmarks.cfm )

Also note how so many charts use so many different CPU's in different tests, using different operating systems, and different DAW's - so it is difficult to really tell the truth.

To perform a REAL TEST, you must use CONSISTENT CONTROL MEASURES, CONSISTENT TESTS, CONSISTENT CHARTS, etc. This test does none of that.

SO DO NOT BE MISLED. The following link is to a custom DAW builder's website who shows AMD 965, 1055T, AND 1090T SCORE MARGINALLY TO WELL ABOVE THE i5 750!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

see this link... http://www.reyniersaudio.com/daw/digital-audio-workstation-computer-comparison


SCOTT, YOU JUST DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!!!!


IF YOU GUYS ON CUBASE want to know pricing, just research yourself on NEWEGG.COM...............SCOTT IS NOT THE ANSWER, CLEARLY.



HONESTLY, I currently own BOTH an AMD X2 ATHLON 2.8 DUAL CORE AND INTEL E6600 C2D 2.4. I use the AMD as my Audio workstation (DAW) and the Intel as my VST workstation linked together via ADAT light pipe running CUBASE simultaneously on both systems. I have for a long time been impartial to Intel or AMD. I get wore out on opinionated morons trying to sell you fellow Cubase junkies on one or the other. THE ANSWER IS BOTH. The real question is which is right for the performance level and price you need!!!!!!!!

BOTTOM LINE, WATCH OUT FOR BOGUS OPINIONS HERE AND DON'T GET LOCKED INTO BOGUS BENCHMARK TESTS...

THE BEST BENCH TEST I HAVE SEEN IS HERE - JUST PLUGIN THE CPU'S YOU WANT TO COMPARE, AND YOU CAN ADD COMPARISONS, ADD SONAR 8, AND SEE SOME RESULTS. ALSO REFER TO THE LINK OF REYNIERS AUDIO. YOU MAY WANT TO CALL THEM SINCE THEY BUILD BOTH AMD AND INTEL SYSTEMS AND THEY CAN GIVE YOU AN UNBIASED OPINION.

HERE ARE THE LINKS AGAIN...

BENCH TEST....

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=109


REYNIER AUDIO - BUILDER OF DAWS

http://www.reyniersaudio.com/daw/digital-audio-workstation-computer-comparison

RESEARCH NEWEGG.COM FOR PRICING. YOU WILL FIND THE I5 750 WITH GIGABYTE MOTHERBOARD P55-UD3 (MB PRICED AT 119.99) IS MOST CLOSELY MATCHED TO THE AMD 965 WITH AN MSI 870/770 MOTHERBOARD (MB PRICED 69.99). THE BOARDS HAVE NEARLY THE SAME OPTIONS - THE INTEL IS $80.00 MORE.

CHEERS

JF

[JFHall]

HEY GUYS...

CORRECTION ON THE GIGABYTE MOTHERBOARD, IT IS THE GA-P55-USB3. AND MORE SPECIFICALLY ON THE MSI MOTHERBOARD, IT IS THE 870-G45 AM3 AMD 770 (WHICH IS A 770 CHIPSET MB, NOT AN 870 CHIPSET AT ALL. FOR SOME REASON MSI NAMED THIS WRONG).

CHEERS,

JF

[Sid Chigger]

"FELLOW CUBASE JUNKIES...........THINK ABOUT THIS...the tests on the website that jcschilds keeps referring to CAN BE defined as bogus though it is implicative (and only implicative) of the results you may see using SOME processors. The tests ONLY uses MD5 and RXC, but NO OTHER PLUGIN AT ALL IS USED. NO VST INSTRUMENTS ARE USED IN THE TEST, AND NO SAMPLERS. THEREFORE, THIS TEST MEANS LITTLE. Yet Scott (jcschilds) perpetually insists on INTEL???? "

Scott is the owner of ADK Pro Audio, ya know.. The way I see it is these tests use those plugins because they are free so the tests can be duplicated by all of us on our own systems. Not everyone has Kontakt or any other VSTi...

It wasn't too long ago that Scott and co DID suggest AMD based systems over Intel.. Why? Because his testing and his customers experiences showed the AMD processor was indeed doing a better overall job.. That changed with the i7 chip from Intel.. Before that, it was the Intel chip that won out.. It's cyclical...
_________________
Studio: Win 7 64, Gigabyte X58A-UD3R, i7 970, 12GB, FF800 C5.5, WL7, VE Pro, UAD2 Quad - Home: C5.5, WL7, XP SP2, Dell Core 2 Duo 6600, 2GB, FF800, 1 UAD-1, 1 UAD-2 Duo -
Chigger Tracks

[jcschild]

Hey Chigger,

LOL i got a big laugh off this bozo... CAPS on more than 1/2 his post should tell you something. he must be like 14.

i thinks maybe he works for Reyneirs (not that they all dont have full time jobs and do it as a hobby)

whats even funnier is the benchmark link to reniers is a major joke. as a pro audio company i would be embarressed to put that test up there
it only shows the lack of knowledge behind the company with concern to pro audio/video.
has nothing to do with audio benckmarks what so ever but a useless (PasmarK) gaming test.

but then you know that already!
_________________
Scott
ADK
home of the "Kentucky Fried DAW"

[jcschild]

to the Bozo err i mean jfhall,

love guys who dont have a clue

from newegg
but first comments on motherboards. can you buy a cheap POS for AMD yes.
if you want the right mobo for MAD thats is 100% compatible with UAD/Poco/Multiple Audio interfaces etc.
for AMDyou want the

890FXA $179
P55 board (again the right one) $184 so a wash right there

AMD 1090t $265 which is what it takes to even come close the the 750.
Intel 870 $279 which absolutely kills the AMD

AMD 1055t $199
Intel 760 $208 kills both AMD's

in reality it takes the 1090t $265 to even come close to the 760 $208.

so who is less $
end game
end of story

and lastly anyone who has been on this forum for more than a week will tell you i dont post bias.
_________________
Scott
ADK
home of the "Kentucky Fried DAW"

[JFHall]

Scott --

ONCE AGAIN, YOU HAVE MISSED THE POINT AS YOU ALWAYS DO IN THESE FORUMS.

THERE IS NO PROOF TO ANYTHING YOU ARE SAYING. PERIOD.

WHERE ARE THE FACTS.

SHOW ME.

SHOW US ALL.

TAKE NOTE TO HOW CHILDISH YOUR REMARKS ARE.

BUT NO FACTS.

I WILL AGREE THE MOTHERBOARDS I LISTED ARE MAIN STREAM/BUDGET. BUT THEY ARE EVENLY MATCHED.

AS FAR AS YOUR REMARKS THAT THE AMD CANNOT COME CLOSE TO THE INTEL 750 CANNOT BE PROVEN. IN FACT, MUCH EVIDENCE INDICATES OTHERWISE, THAT THE I5 750 AND AMD 965 ARE CLOSELY MATCHED.

THE INTEL I7's ARE NOT EVEN THE ARGUMENT. THE I7'S ARE THEIR OWN BREED FOR THE MOST PART...THEY ARE AWESOME.

BUT YOU ARE NOT AWESOME, AS YOU PRETEND TO BE.

GROW UP, BE A MAN, ARGUE OBJECTIVELY (WHICH TO THIS DATE YOU NEVER HAVE)

OOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHH WOW, YOU RUN A STUDIO!?!?!?!?!

LIKE NO ONE ELSE HERE DOES.

NOW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE SCHOLARLY AND COME UP WITH SOME REAL INFO FOR EVERYONE, OR ARE YOU JUST GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THE SMUT?????????

REAL TESTS, REAL CONTROL MEASURES, REAL ANSWERS.........CAN YOU HANDLE IT???