Western Front Forum

Professional Services => Sound Advice => Topic started by: Metallifux on April 26, 2010, 08:03:22 PM

Title: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on April 26, 2010, 08:03:22 PM
Hi all, looking for an uber nerd to help me in English choose a processor for my new rig. The machine will be mainly used as a protools and adobe premier rig. I'm looking at the i5 series CPU's but am tossing up on getting the i5-750 or the 661. Both processors are around the same price but the, 750 has 4 cores, larger cache. The 661 has a much faster clock speed and is of the new 32 nm size, but is only a dual core.

i5-750
- Number of Cores: 4 (Quad)
- Number of Threads: 4
- Clock Speed: 2.66 Ghz
- Max Turbo: 3.20 Ghz
- Smart Cache: 8 MB
- Bus/Core Ratio: 20
- DMI Speed: 2.5 GT/s
- Instruction: 64 Bit
- NM Process: 45
- Max TDP: 95 Watt

or the 661

- Number of Cores: 2 (Dual)
- Number of Threads: 4
- Clock Speed: 3.33 Ghz
- Max Turbo: 3.60 Ghz
- Smart Cache: 4 MB
- Bus/Core Ratio: 25
- DMI Speed: 2.5 GT/s
- Instruction: 64 Bit
- NM Process: 32
- Max TDP: 87 Watt
- Integrated HD Graphics (with compatible motherboards)
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: cyanide_christ on April 26, 2010, 09:05:51 PM
I think you'll find it doesn't make much difference if one is half a Ghz faster than the other. The RAM is more important to Pro Tools than the CPU speed. Apparently these hyperthreaded CPUs are completely different and the speed isn't as relevant as previous CPUs anyway.

My CPU was overclocked from 3Ghz to 3.25Ghz and due to some issues I had to reset it back to 3Ghz and there was no difference in the performance. I know it's only a quarter of a Ghz but still, it didn't seem to make a single bit of difference.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on April 26, 2010, 10:16:57 PM
Thanks coont, did you try running PT8 in XP mode before you went dual boot?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: cyanide_christ on April 26, 2010, 10:27:51 PM
Nah, couldn't be fucked. It runs really well now that it is the only thing I have installed in XP so I'm happy. I'm just going to wait for 8.0.4.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: DamoESP on April 27, 2010, 01:27:41 AM
I can tell you now as someone that actually understands and knows this shit......go the Quad core. Although Protools doesn't Multithread (In English......written to be used by and fully take advantage of a multiple core processor by assigning different processes to a different core) you will see a greater response from the quad core than the dual core. A Quad-Core will always preform better than a Dual-core with Hyperthreading...always.

Also the larger cache will greatly reduce wait times for CPU instructions, which will increase the overall speed of your PC (and Protools). Also, yes extra RAM will help, but if you've got a 32-bit Windows operating system, you can only use 3.5gb anyway as that is all that 32bit Windos OS can address. 64 bit Windows OS's can address more RAM, but they are still "unsupported" by Protools...though plenty of people have got it working fine.

End of the day, Quad core and 64bit OS are the future, its not long till AMD release their 6-core processors anyway and this argument will be null and void. But if you are going to be using this for Protools and Adobe Premier....Quad-Core and 32 bit OS is the way to go...not only will they run great, your general PC usage will be relativly quicker than a Dual-Core PC...though like I said, 64bit OS is fine if you can get Pro Tools to work on it, which many people have (plus its not long until Digidesign wake up to themselves and release a new version of PT that supports 64 bit).
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on April 27, 2010, 02:35:07 AM
Cheers guys will be going the quad i think. Will get Windows 7 professional 64bit and try and run PT in the XP mode, if that doesnt work i will try duel boot with XP until Digidesigns gets there shit together and release PT 64 bit.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: ecentrix on April 27, 2010, 02:43:00 AM
Quad core mate, Dual core is great for games .

Quad core is what you want for your application man.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: DamoESP on April 27, 2010, 02:52:51 AM
Quad core mate, Dual core is great for games .

Lol...what are you on about??? hahaha...come on buddy...you have no idea.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: ecentrix on April 27, 2010, 04:27:11 AM
Hahahahah, of course i know what i am on about man. Computers are my lief.

:D
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: DamoESP on April 27, 2010, 04:40:54 AM
Hahahahah, of course i know what i am on about man. Computers are my lief.

:D

lol so you say :P
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: nihilist on April 27, 2010, 06:37:05 AM
How many cores do I need not to give a shit about your nerdy argument?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on April 27, 2010, 07:22:09 AM
you like grindcore
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: nihilist on April 27, 2010, 07:50:37 AM
So... one?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on April 27, 2010, 08:48:00 AM
So... one?

yep your in
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Ingasm on April 27, 2010, 04:12:49 PM
All of you, go outside and play
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on May 30, 2010, 10:33:49 PM
Why not have both?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on May 30, 2010, 11:36:01 PM
Why not have both?

give me some money
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on May 31, 2010, 06:30:22 AM
I'm in the same boat.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Damo on May 31, 2010, 03:58:55 PM
Go the quad core, get yourself a nice set of low latency RAM - and be careful of the motherboard you purchase if you're replacing your current one.

Im about to upgrade my system and have decided this time on i7 930 and the Gigabyte X58A-UD3R. After reading all the issues people have been having with PT and the VIA firewire chipset, its good to know that the Gigabyte board uses a Texas Instruments Firewire controller onboard. Of course, you could just buy a firewire card separately if you're running via firewire, but why bother?

Im also liking the triple-slot DDR3 memory :)
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: cdtBEAST on June 01, 2010, 07:27:10 PM
Excellent advice Damo.
I did my research to make sure the pc I was getting had the right specs to match my software & my soundcard. Took a bit of fucking around but was well worth it.
Once I built it around those specs it has been bullet proof.
I know guys with later more powerful systems that have nothing but problems & 9 times out of 10 it is due to incompatibility issues.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Damo on June 04, 2010, 01:12:31 AM
Because Protools governs some of your core processes in order to gain stability and work reliably, the platform has always been picky about what it works with.

I have spoken to literally HUNDREDS of people who have bought new computers expecting it to just 'work' - Pity. :)

I have been reading some documentation lately around the whole Mac vs PC and LE vs HD thing - and the stats are pretty crazy. Its certainly not a one-horse race like it used to be. Mac's and PCs are performing equally well (win7 64bit), and some LE systems are even outperforming HD systems on many tasks. CRAZY.

It puts the whole question of 'what do I buy' right up into the air.

The trick is to get the right hardware, and run your system dedicated to music production - Don't even install an internet connection if possible.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on June 05, 2010, 09:32:59 AM
That could be my problem. I use my Pc for everything. sO I guess I need to get another Pc for the music stuff then?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Damo on June 05, 2010, 04:04:21 PM
...That would help.
And build it yourself - Its really good to know whats going in it. Pre-built PC's from stores usually have 'throwaway' components in them that the store is trying to move.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Archangel on June 21, 2010, 07:55:08 AM
but will it run Crysis?   :rofl:
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on June 21, 2010, 10:15:08 PM
That could be my problem. I use my Pc for everything. sO I guess I need to get another Pc for the music stuff then?

I have a bunch of PC's half built if you want one let me know
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on June 22, 2010, 07:06:23 AM
We might have to discuss this at the next gig.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Damo on June 22, 2010, 07:07:28 AM
but will it run Crysis?   :rofl:

HAH!!
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Mago_Haydz on June 22, 2010, 03:13:32 PM
...That would help.
And build it yourself - Its really good to know whats going in it. Pre-built PC's from stores usually have 'throwaway' components in them that the store is trying to move.

yeah, which more often than not, arent 100% compatible and will not last long at all.
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on June 24, 2010, 06:38:18 AM
We might have to discuss this at the next gig.

no worries man, they are old work PC's so basically everything but HDD... old but decent rigs to run PT
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on June 24, 2010, 07:07:15 AM
How many Cores?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Metallifux on June 30, 2010, 08:49:41 PM
How many Cores?

billions?
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on August 09, 2010, 07:04:05 AM
Hey I was at Austin Computers in bibralake last week and noticed a couple of 6 core processors out. Might bring the price of the quad cores down.

Oh DamoESP. I think the argument has become null and void. 8)
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: cdtBEAST on August 09, 2010, 11:48:48 PM
8 core or octo core is out now!
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on August 10, 2010, 06:37:47 AM
Fuckin Hell. That'll cost a fair bit. :o Man if money was no objective I'd build the PC DAW from Hell. :headbang:
Only trouble is I'd probly go completely mad with power.  ::)
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Damo on August 15, 2010, 04:42:07 PM
Fuckin Hell. That'll cost a fair bit. :o Man if money was no objective I'd build the PC DAW from Hell. :headbang:
Only trouble is I'd probly go completely mad with power.  ::)

^ Im part way through building one now :)
Title: Re: Clock Speed Vs. Multi-Cores
Post by: Nosaj on August 23, 2010, 06:56:56 AM
Heres something  helpful that I stumbled along. http://www.ehow.com/how_4850862_build-powerful-daw-computer.html