-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
My current computer is a P4
- Thread starter dado
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 127
Currently nothing can touch core i7's performance when used for daw work, the chips are absolute stormers for running multiple vsti's at really low latencys.Head over to the official cubase forums and the computer setup section to see the real world benchmarks people have done on there.... it beats the phenom 2 by quite a big margin and also the core quads.
My advice to you and what I would do myself is save the extra and get a core i7 and it should set you right for a good few years to come.
My advice to you and what I would do myself is save the extra and get a core i7 and it should set you right for a good few years to come.
That was my idea too, but then I visited steinberg official site today. 
They recommend to turn the HT off due to problems for the time being whilst they investigate, the issue is not with cubase however but with third party plugins. That means I would only have 2.6ghz to make use of. I've also found out many vsti do not like 64 bit. It's all going down hill now. lol
They recommend to turn the HT off due to problems for the time being whilst they investigate, the issue is not with cubase however but with third party plugins. That means I would only have 2.6ghz to make use of. I've also found out many vsti do not like 64 bit. It's all going down hill now. lol
That was my idea too, but then I visited steinberg official site today.
They recommend to turn the HT off due to problems for the time being whilst they investigate, the issue is not with cubase however but with third party plugins. That means I would only have 2.6ghz to make use of. I've also found out many vsti do not like 64 bit. It's all going down hill now. lol
Thats a shame. You could always disable HT, run a 32bit OS, have 4gb ram and oc the holy bejesus out of the i7 tho. Seen some great speeds they've been pushed to on air cooling.
Soldato
It all depends of what plugins you use.
Four years ago i was using a P4 3.06ghz HT with Cubase and had no issues with plugins causing errors with HT. At work we have had no issues running Cubase 5 and the i7.
Wouldn't put me off an i7!
Four years ago i was using a P4 3.06ghz HT with Cubase and had no issues with plugins causing errors with HT. At work we have had no issues running Cubase 5 and the i7.
Wouldn't put me off an i7!
Associate
@dado
i would whole heartedly listen to Ozzie, he is running the upgrade to your Cubase and is running with i7 hardware, looks to me like he knows what he is talking about
as regards to your budget, for a normal C2Quad spec i dont see any problems with buying a XP64Bit OS and using the extra RAM to help a Q8-9xxx series CPU. have a look at the top of the range models OcUK on their Value ranges i.e. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-173-OK&groupid=43&catid=1078&subcat= and add the 64bit Vista OS and a 3rd party CPU cooler if your after overclocking
i would whole heartedly listen to Ozzie, he is running the upgrade to your Cubase and is running with i7 hardware, looks to me like he knows what he is talking about
as regards to your budget, for a normal C2Quad spec i dont see any problems with buying a XP64Bit OS and using the extra RAM to help a Q8-9xxx series CPU. have a look at the top of the range models OcUK on their Value ranges i.e. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-173-OK&groupid=43&catid=1078&subcat= and add the 64bit Vista OS and a 3rd party CPU cooler if your after overclocking
Last edited:
I suspect Steinberg are being cautious and any problems(if at all with hyperthreading) might occur if you try to run at insanely low latency.It wouldn`t put me off buying an i7 daw which i intend to do later.
Saw this from an article
"There has been a lot of discussion about what is best for samples playback and if more cores are better.
Samples playback is very memory intensive, memory speed and bandwidth are effected by several things.
GHZ of the processor, Front side bus of the processor, memory type (DDR2/DDR3) and of course platform (chipset and processor architecture). Little or no improvement is found with Quad core vs dual core.
A faster GHZ dual core will out do a slower quad core for samples playback. DDR3 1600 is better than DDR2 800.
Ideally when considering an overall picture of a project a fast GHz quad is best as the Quad cores do have a great effect on effects usage, overall project playback and high track counts @ high rez.
Some thoughts: the AMD Phenom II 720 is a very affordable and well performing answer for a samples(slave) box or an overclocked dual core.
The Core i7 is outstanding as a main system, or the more afforable overclocked Core 2."
Saw this from an article
"There has been a lot of discussion about what is best for samples playback and if more cores are better.
Samples playback is very memory intensive, memory speed and bandwidth are effected by several things.
GHZ of the processor, Front side bus of the processor, memory type (DDR2/DDR3) and of course platform (chipset and processor architecture). Little or no improvement is found with Quad core vs dual core.
A faster GHZ dual core will out do a slower quad core for samples playback. DDR3 1600 is better than DDR2 800.
Ideally when considering an overall picture of a project a fast GHz quad is best as the Quad cores do have a great effect on effects usage, overall project playback and high track counts @ high rez.
Some thoughts: the AMD Phenom II 720 is a very affordable and well performing answer for a samples(slave) box or an overclocked dual core.
The Core i7 is outstanding as a main system, or the more afforable overclocked Core 2."
Last edited:
It wouldn't be a problem adapting to new vsti's even if that was the unlikely case, I'm mostly worried about getting the i7 with the rest of the upgrades and then finding out that it's not able to run as many vsti's as my project requiers.
Ideally I would love to know when the processor runs out of puff.
For example, with my current processor P4 2.6 ghz I can use two top of the range ambient synth pads from the Massive vst and the processor would hit 95%
So with the i7 I would be able to run only 6 more?
Which means I would have to go down the freezing route again which I hate.
Soldato
Believe me, you'll get a lot more than 6 vst's running on an i7.
Our work i7 is subject to around 12vst instruments, and around 40-50 tracks and effects. Processor load is around 50% on a buffer of 512 samples, and that is at stock with loads going on. If you get the i7 and overclock it to 3.4ghz or more, you'll never have to worry about freezing again.
Our work i7 is subject to around 12vst instruments, and around 40-50 tracks and effects. Processor load is around 50% on a buffer of 512 samples, and that is at stock with loads going on. If you get the i7 and overclock it to 3.4ghz or more, you'll never have to worry about freezing again.