electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Articles  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links  |  Store
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
Live streaming at radio.electro-music.com

  host / artist show at your time
  Faux Pas Quartet and friends Music From Last Thursday
Please visit the chat
 Forum index » Instruments and Equipment » Windows as a music workstation
Athlon 64 X2 vs. Pentium 4D
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Blue Hell
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Author Message
Ivity



Joined: Dec 29, 2005
Posts: 233
Location: Moscow, Russia
G2 patch files: 57

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 10:18 am    Post subject:  Athlon 64 X2 vs. Pentium 4D Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I want to purchase brand new PC for recording/production/mastering and that's a general question:

What's the best solution for computer music workstation: dualcore Pentium 4D and Athlon 64 X2 or singlecore Athlon 64 and Pentium 4?

I saw many discussions with various opinions, but, unfortunatly, at didn't find the answer Sad

Somebody tells that Pentium 4D is the best solution (even better than dual processor AMD workstation Shocked ) somebody tells, that multicore processors works in singlecore mode in most of DAW environments (such as Cubase and etc.) and good singlecore processor is better than dualcore and so on... Rolling Eyes

Any thoughts?

_________________
Igor
www.myspace.com/phoiod
www.bl-project.com/Ivity.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Afro88



Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Posts: 701
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Audio files: 12
G2 patch files: 79

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Anyone who says a singlecore is better than a dualcore is either jealous or very badly misinformed. With a dual core machine, you can run specific apps in single core mode. Cubase supports x2, so it's not an issue, but something like Protools has a spack if you try and run it with both cores assigned to it. When you only assign one core it runs fine. I don't know of any scenario where it would be better to have a single core cpu, especially when using your computer to write dsp intensive electronic music! Dual core essentially means twice the power. Real world, because of bussing and memory sharing slow downs, you'll see at least a 50% increase, probably more. I used to run Cubase sessions at 80% with 10ms latency, and I can now run the same session at 40-50% at 3ms latency.

Beware though, there have been issues with PCI-x/PCI-e motherboards, I'm not sure if they have been resolved. Check out your DAW's forums to see what runs best. I'm running an Athlon64x2 on an nForce3 motherboard and it runs great.

As for Athlon vs Pentium in the dual core market... I went for the Athlon because it was designed from the ground up for dual core operation. The Pentium D's weren't, and suffer in some areas because of this. I saw some benchmarks around that showed the Athlon's performing better than the D's in audio codec translation, so I went for the Athlon. But to be honest, there really wasn't that much of a difference. There's a site around that hosts a huge table of results of a Nuendo performance testing session that people have run. Can't remember the name of it off the top of my head though sorry....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ivity



Joined: Dec 29, 2005
Posts: 233
Location: Moscow, Russia
G2 patch files: 57

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Thank you very much Afro, great explanation! Very Happy
_________________
Igor
www.myspace.com/phoiod
www.bl-project.com/Ivity.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17618
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 125
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I just got a single core AMD 64. (I'm runing 32 bit XP). Single core was much cheaper. I'm upgrading from a single processor 1.4 GHz AMD Athalon to a 2.4. The 1.4 never gave me any problems so I figured a single core would be fine and I could save a $120. If in a couple of years I find I want a dual core, I'll just buy a new chip - they'll be cheaper and I'll use this slow single core ( Very Happy ) on another computer - maybe a file server.

I agree with Afro88, a dual core shouldn't be slower except under some perverse benchmark.

BTW, I'm using an Asus motherboard. Seems to be supreb. My old G2 USB hangs are a thing of the past.

Only problem is now the computer is complaining about it hurting when I reboot it. Wink

_________________
--Howard
my music and other stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Ivity



Joined: Dec 29, 2005
Posts: 233
Location: Moscow, Russia
G2 patch files: 57

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Thanks for the answer Howard Very Happy
Also, a good point of view...
BTW: Does Live support multicore CPU?

_________________
Igor
www.myspace.com/phoiod
www.bl-project.com/Ivity.html

Last edited by Ivity on Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:58 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Afro88



Joined: Jun 20, 2004
Posts: 701
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Audio files: 12
G2 patch files: 79

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

No it doesn't unfortunately Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ivity



Joined: Dec 29, 2005
Posts: 233
Location: Moscow, Russia
G2 patch files: 57

PostPosted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Afro88 wrote:
No it doesn't unfortunately Sad

Thats a pity... Sad

_________________
Igor
www.myspace.com/phoiod
www.bl-project.com/Ivity.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17618
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 125
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 6:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

BTW, I would always pick more memory over a faster processor if one is to make a choice.
_________________
--Howard
my music and other stuff
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
jksuperstar



Joined: Aug 20, 2004
Posts: 2488
Location: Denver
Audio files: 1
G2 patch files: 18

PostPosted: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I have a dual core pentium, and it *screems*. My friend has a single core, which is higher freq. (my dual core is 1.82 GHz each, while his single core is 3.2GHz). We both run the same apps (live + VST plugins), and don't see much difference. I do expect to see a change when Live is recoded for dual core, which is scheduled for v6.

Point is, with all CPUs, don't buy for the future, just buy the best deal for what you need now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
glitched



Joined: Mar 25, 2006
Posts: 80
Location: phila., pa USA

PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2006 9:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I know this thread was left for dead in July, but I thought I'd update it by saying that Live 6 does indeed have multicore/multiprocessor support.

My question for those who have gone the dual-core route is this: Have you noticed any significant performance increases in Live (or other apps/plugins)?

Although I'm running just fine with my AMD 64 3000+, it's been a couple years since I've upgraded anything.

Is it worth it?

-d
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Moderators: Blue Hell
Page 1 of 1 [10 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Instruments and Equipment » Windows as a music workstation
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
e-m mkii

Please support our site. If you click through and buy from
our affiliate partners, we earn a small commission.


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use