i5 750 vs i7 920 for audio production (Cubase, Protools etc.)

[kutmasta]

Hey everybody,

I'm putting together a new PC soon. I game occasionally and I also do some audio production work, with everything "in the box" so to speak, so lots of VSTs and virtual instruments. I won't be doing any overclocking, unless it significantly improves performance.

Will I see a big increase in performance from i5 to i7 for this sort of stuff? because including the motherboard and memory I can save about £100 getting the i5 instead.

 

[DragonQ]

I don't do any audio production but it probably depends on whether the software you're using is optimised for multiple cores. For example, Adobe Audition 3 only uses a single thread so it isn't as staggeringly quick at encoding/decoding on an i7 compared to say x264 encoding, which uses all 8 threads.

 

[Chiz]

I'm running Ableton Live 8.0 on my new rig. this is primarily what i bought the new rig for. 4gb and Phenom 550. You have multi-processor support through Ableton and it runs a charm.

I know this is the complete opposite from your setup, but i've multiple vst's and large collection of samples etc and it manages without any issues so i'm assuming you'd not have an issue with either the i5 or i7.

 

[kutmasta]

Thanks for the help guys, any more suggestions or comments?

 

[jbloggs]

What about the i7 860 (which also has HT), which performs better than the 920 with Turbo enabled...

 

[entireweb]

Infact audio production is one of the few worlds where multithreaded apps rule. In with case you want the most cores possible. With the i7 860 & i7 920 you get 8 using hyperthreading. With the i5 750 you only get 4. So you should forget about the i5.

The advantage of the i7 860 vs the 920 for audio work is that the i7 860 uses less power. This makes for a potentially quieter computer, which is essential for audio work.

So IMO get an i7 860.

 

[kutmasta]

Will the 860 and 920 perform similarly? I'm thinking of putting together a SFF system so I imagine the lower power consumption would help too. Aside from the dual vs triple channel memory, are there any other big differences between 1366 and 1156 that I should be aware of?

 

[OzZie]

Cubase has always had issues with Hyperthreading, so you may have to disable it to get it to operate normally. Pro Tools (from v7 onward) fully supports up to 16 cores/threads, so you'll have to issues with power.

 

[easyrider]

I don't do any audio production but it probably depends on whether the software you're using is optimised for multiple cores. For example, Adobe Audition 3 only uses a single thread so it isn't as staggeringly quick at encoding/decoding on an i7 compared to say x264 encoding, which uses all 8 threads.

"Work More Efficiently
With new multi-core processor support and an optimized mixing engine, Adobe Audition 3 helps users save time by allowing them to work with more tracks and effects on the same machine."


750 is more than enough for audio editing.

 

[hughythomas]

New Sonar was built from the ground up to offer superior hyperthreading to Core i7s specifically. I appreciate it ain't Tools but as you do all your production work "in the box" I'd say it's worth the extra £100 for the i7.

I am in a similiar position as you and although I was keen to save some moola you can't really take the chance with DAWs as its a professional workstation which you need to be able to rely on day-to-day.

 

[dtokez]

i would agree get the i7, probably better in the long run.
having said that im running nuendo with at least 30 plug-ins and 30/40 audio tracks on a e5200 clocked to 3.4ghz seemlessly