FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 

Intel core i9 for tomorrow's plugins / VSTs ???
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Software  
Author Intel core i9 for tomorrow's plugins / VSTs ???
Overkill or sweet spots ahoy??

i'd go for a ryzen, some zippy ones about to come out
it's not the software you need to worry about. it's hardware compatibility. USB chips, thunderbolt etc. if your devices don't play nice w/the ports on the motherboard it doesn't matter how much power you have. there's a lot of info on this in gearslutz computer forum. people havig issues w/thunderbolt audio devices in certain configurations.

so, i think the thing to do is find that compromise of "new fast" vs "fast enough and compatible"

the things that have been out for a bit are generally easier to troubleshoot and configure for an audio set up.

that being said the processors out are super fast already. the i9 and ryzen stuff is really really capable of doing so much with a windows system obviously.

there's a GS thread in the computer subforum called "Today we build a studio PC" or something like that.. and it's full of good info for building custom audio workstation.
IME today's computers are more than fast enough to run a bunch of plugins without sweating too much.
The pain points are sample playback for multisampled stuff especically.
And of course, if you insist on running your DAW at lowest possible latency you are going to be constrained in the number of plugins.

I see little difference in the number of plugins and softsynths I can use on my 3.5ghz 6 core Mac and my 2.2ghz 4 core.
wanted to buy a new PC end 2018/early 2019.
wanted a Ryzen setup first, but some surfing showed me that a i9/9900k, overclocked to 4,9ghz (or 5ghz) would be the way to go. ( vs. 16core Ryzen )
ESPECIALLY if SMALL buffer sizes are from interest !!!
Buffers from 256samples and especially: *up*: the Big AMDs could be something. Buffers at 256 or lower: i9/9900.
*thats just the conclution i ended with* ! nothing more !
( state: end last year )

calaveras wrote:

I see little difference in the number of plugins and softsynths I can use on my 3.5ghz 6 core Mac and my 2.2ghz 4 core.

really ?

i use a 2012 macmini, 2,6ghz,i7, quad,
and could easily eat double or triple the CPU power.
Just for FX !
......running ONLY 1 VST-instrument, everything else is the FX behind it ! ( parallel tracks) . "live playing" .
Bringing buffers down to 512 or 256 or 128 would be then another question plus the next level of performance boost i´d had to have beside above.
No clue how todays top machines do compare with my 2012 mac and what the numbers are (?)

But i decided that the most important factor for me is to have the mac trackpad/good,....
The different in performance of most current consumer CPU's is not really that great especially on single core applications. Compared to older stuff they are amazingly fast. Compared to GPUs (for parallel applications) they are quite slow. For our use, as was said above, the peripherals and interfaces may make a bigger difference.
calaveras wrote:
...The pain points are sample playback for multisampled stuff especically...

So this is my main concern as my work involves large .wav files in multiple layers with plugins being automated etc. Does this fall under single threaded or multi threaded processing???
UltraViolet wrote:
The different in performance of most current consumer CPU's is not really that great especially on single core applications. .

What i read made me think different, and mainly that there IS a difference when we speak super fat CPUs vs. buffer settings of 64 vs. 128 vs. 256 samples

has graphs and numbers vs. buffer settings. worth to look at if interested in small buffers vs. superfat CPUs the-bench-just-a-little-bit-of-history-repeating/
Whole different game for applications that use all the cores. Especially compute bound applications that aren't competing for main memory. Then 8 cores can be 8 times as fast as one.
Ryzen all day for VSTis.

Looking forward to the new ryzens and being able to massive up-sampling and do everything in 96k and above.
I went with AMD for my last build, the latest Ryzen processors blow Intel out of the water
ranix wrote:
I went with AMD for my last build, the latest Ryzen processors blow Intel out of the water

not disagreeing w/you but i think that's putting it a little strong. they are quite good. as good and better in some cases and certainly more affordable.

the benchmarks are starting to come in for the new ryzen series... it's probably what i'd get if i were to build a windows system.. i'd have to find the right motherboard though. the proprietary little cooling fan on some of the motherboards looks like a nightmare if it dies.

here's a good long thread at KVR

and some links to the benchmarks coming in. bench-tested-3-is-it-the-magic-number/
i wouldn't look into the benchmarks that much.
For audio it all depends on the audio program, multi core options and so on.

All i know is from experience the high end vstis (buchla easel for example, roland cloud stuff like JP8 iare near perfect or up-sampled solo rack stuff i run) freaking fly very well on my current ryzen 5 system.

Maybe something to do with the coded intelligence in the AMD chips? Anyway im not a tech head: but i can see that the ryzen seems to boost very well and starts crunching like magic when I most need it. Like the rzyen kinda knows what to optimize and when. The buchla easel in full poly for example runs flawlessly -even with touch screen- at 20-25% cpu, i think at over 3gig upboost. no noise. It has never crashed, whereas an intel macbook with a poly buchla easel v, just froze, over heated and crashed. The thermal throttling on mac books is just insane; so freaking hot to touch. Maybe it is just apple?

I'm not running kontakt and never will.
I will never ever go back to intel or mac.
^^ yeah.. there's good options for anyone's needs i think.

the i9 macbooks had throttling issues that were severe but they seem to have fixed it in this current mac book pro. macbooks have been hot ever since.. forever i think.

anyway.. AMD seems really on the ball w/this series of chips based on all the stuff i've read.. which isn't a ton but enough to see where the hype is and where the reality is. they're pretty close together!

i'm not super tech about it all either.. just trying to be in formed in the event i say farewell to apple OS. currently i'm using old macs because they work so why move on?

but when they crap the bed i'll either be looking at a used/refurb/NOS mac of some kind or a windows sytem. it really depends on how OS X evolves beyond mojave.

the encryption stuff and T2 chip seem like weird places to go and who the fuck wants a glued together laptop?

my 2011 macbook pro is doing fine even though it is no Mojave compatible. high sierra is where it lives for good. it's kind of a relief.

anyway... windows 10 seems solid in many many systems for audio work.

long story short.. yeah.. AMD Ryzen seems a clear choice for a lot of people.
Choice words and well said, i get ya - sounded like my situation, trying to hold onto the old mac.

imac 2010 - with sdd, max memory, fire-wire apogee rock solid. Stuck and stuck on with it for so long, but had to move on because dsp and vsti improvements where hitting the cpu.
Bought new mac book pro 4 core for $AUD3200, updated os for thermal issues but didn't perform for the money, plug ins crashed.....dunno, maybe it was dud. dunno, but my old imac seemed' better'. Returned the mac book back next day.

Picked up a huawei matebook ryzen quad core for $us480 bucks - mac book clone, really great stuff. Absolutely superb computer, superb touch screen for vstis and ableton, (prefer it to push 2!) and windows 10 without bloat ware.
I would never go back to mac. Win 10 is awesome.
i'll definitely be looking into testing out the latest huawei matebook pro, but really I'm hoping for a super ryzen mobile update by end of year.
The new Ryzen 9 3900X is at the top of the benchmark ratings, even beating out the server and workstation CPUs woah :

The 16 core Ryzen 9 is due sometime this fall and will be even faster. There are also rumors that Intel is close to releasing new and faster processors that may beat the Ryzen 9.

The Core i9s are still the fastest for single threaded applications, but AMD has almost caught up in that area as well.
what is the situation with thunderbolt and ryzen motherboards?
Is it still a no show?
Some ASRock X570 motherboards have TB(thunderbolt header) like the Taichi and some future models will have TB built-in ports like the Creator. srock-x570-overclocking-support-thread.html
is thunderbolt really necessary when we have USB 3? i dont really know the merits of one over the other
My only experience with Thunderbolt with with a so called docking station. It never worked right. Don't really know if Thunderbolt was the problem or just the idea of using a high speed serial connection as the only communication path for a docking station was to blame. Kind of soured my view of Thunderbolt.
joey wrote:
is thunderbolt really necessary when we have USB 3? i dont really know the merits of one over the other

PCIe and TB(Thunderbolt) audio interfaces have lower latency.
Amazing how the USB RME Babyface Pro has way better latency than any
other USB audio interface, even better than some PCIe ones... -low-latency-performance-data-base-108.html#post14004379
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> Music Software  
Page 1 of 1
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group