TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Production Laptop
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 I make simple, melodic EDM. It isn't as CPU heavy as most styles but towards the end of a project I can't play my projects to do a final mixdown without constant skipping. I'll have any combo of like 3-10 sylenth and 2-10 nexus instances. Those are probably the main things taking CPU.

What is your current CPU? Nexus and Sylenth don't use much CPU per instance relatively speaking.

quote:

Originally posted by djnitride What is your current CPU? Nexus and Sylenth don't use much CPU per instance relatively speaking.

It scores like a 2,500 on the benchmark test.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 It scores like a 2,500 on the benchmark test.

Whats the actual model though just for context here. I am not familiar with FL's benchmarking methodology, its more useful to know exactly what CPU you have now.

quote:

Originally posted by djnitride The latest M.2 is PCIe 3.0 Yes, I know there have been PCIe drives that take 8+ lanes for quite some time but remember this thread is about laptops right BTW, I get speeds of close to 800MB/s on my Macbook Pro M.2 SSD where as my SATA3 Samsung Pro 840 tops out at around 400MB/s.

Are you sure those speeds are right? And are you sure they're for random access, and not sequential read/write benchmarks (which are basically meaningless unless your main purpose is single file transfers?

The Samsung 850 pro tops out at 550mb/s, so nearly using the 600mb/s bandwidth, but still 800mb/s is impressive.

OWC reckon they've been able to get 1.2gb/s from their new M2 SSD's in a retina mac book pro as it negotiates 4 x lanes of PCIe.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN Are you sure those speeds are right? And are you sure they're for random access, and not sequential read/write benchmarks (which are basically meaningless unless your main purpose is single file transfers? The Samsung 850 pro tops out at 550mb/s, so nearly using the 600mb/s bandwidth, but still 800mb/s is impressive. OWC reckon they've been able to get 1.2gb/s from their new M2 SSD's in a retina mac book pro as it negotiates 4 x lanes of PCIe.

If you think about it doing many things in audio production like loading large sample libraries is largely sequential, hence why my Macbook has a much slower CPU than my desktop but still loads sample libraries much faster.

Random access or "Random IOPS" is largely the same on both the M.2 drive and the 840 Pro. The difference in M.2 is the removal of the SATA3 bandwidth limitation which allows for much higher sequential transfer speed.

The random IOPS bottleneck is in the storage controllers rather than the link.

quote:

Originally posted by djnitride If you think about it doing many things in audio production like loading large sample libraries is largely sequential, hence why my Macbook has a much slower CPU than my desktop but still loads sample libraries much faster. Random access or "Random IOPS" is largely the same on both the M.2 drive and the 840 Pro. The difference in M.2 is the removal of the SATA3 bandwidth limitation which allows for much higher sequential transfer speed. The random IOPS bottleneck is in the storage controllers rather than the link.

you;re right about the true bottleneck being in the controllers but loading libraries are not sequential; they're collections of thousands of different files. Sequential only relates to to large singular files, and aside from loading in the master video track for a scoring session or bringing up a 3 hour lossless audio mix to edit with, you hardly use the full sequential functionality potential at all.

For sequential we're talking about single file in the GB or TB realm, not libraries of files, each one being a discrete task in terms of access.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN you;re right about the true bottleneck being in the controllers but loading libraries are not sequential; they're collections of thousands of different files. Sequential only relates to to large singular files, and aside from loading in the master video track for a scoring session or bringing up a 3 hour lossless audio mix to edit with, you hardly use the full sequential functionality potential at all. For sequential we're talking about single file in the GB or TB realm, not libraries of files, each one being a discrete task in terms of access.

Depends on the sampler format. Many samplers bundle alot of samples in a few files allowing you to take advantage of fast sequential speeds. Omnisphere comes to mind as well as certain proprietary sampler formats.

Of course, what you mention is also true alot of the time.

quote:

Originally posted by djnitride Whats the actual model though just for context here. I am not familiar with FL's benchmarking methodology, its more useful to know exactly what CPU you have now.

Intel Core i3-2330M

quote:

Originally posted by Trancelover03591 Intel Core i3-2330M

The laptop DariusX linked earlier in the thread has somewhere between 2X and 3X more horsepower than your current system for just a bit over $800, seems like that would get the job done for you just fine:

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-...l-Core-i3-2330M

MSI is generally considered a pretty solid brand. Has a great CPU and 8GB of RAM, sounds like more than enough for what you need.

quote:

Originally posted by djnitride The laptop DariusX linked earlier in the thread has somewhere between 2X and 3X more horsepower than your current system for just a bit over $800, seems like that would get the job done for you just fine: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-...l-Core-i3-2330M MSI is generally considered a pretty solid brand. Has a great CPU and 8GB of RAM, sounds like more than enough for what you need.

Sounds like that will work great. Thanks for the input!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.