|
testing the e6850 for producing.
|
View this Thread in Original format
| soundrush |
hellouuuuu guys,
after a massive computer crash in june i finaly bought my new machine today :D
its an asrock mainboard with core2duo e6850 and 2 gigabyte of 800 mhz ddr2 ram.
as harddisk i use a samsung sata hd with 400 gb for the time being.
i payed 599 € for the whole system, pretty good price i think.
and.. i guess it will beat the pants off my old athlon xp 2800 system :whip:
will do some extensive tests tonight, review follows latter... |
|
|
| sterilis |
let me how good it is. im back home btw so i can start producing again.
talk soon. |
|
|
| toffy |
| Waiting a review! I am about to buy one of these soon. |
|
|
| [Alpha]Dave |
looks nice^^ I'm also in a desperate need for a new producing-computer..
I've been looking at core2duo before, but now core2duo has droped ALOT in price, at least here in Sweden, and so have the slightly better core2quad (with 4 cores instead of 2 as in core2duo).. So I'm probably go for that instead.. Core2Quad @ 2,6Ghz and 4GBs of RAM, man that's gonna be a dream to produce on! xD |
|
|
| 3F05Q |
| ...on that note, has anyone heard how the quads handle the mainstream production suites and VSTs? Good idea or bad idea? |
|
|
| mysticalninja |
| i have core2quad... is the win. |
|
|
| a98 |
| quote: | Originally posted by 3F05Q
...on that note, has anyone heard how the quads handle the mainstream production suites and VSTs? Good idea or bad idea? |
not all will support multiple, and the ones that support, usually support just dual. |
|
|
| 3F05Q |
| quote: | Originally posted by a98
not all will support multiple, and the ones that support, usually support just dual. |
Yeah, that I'm aware of. Let me rephrase my question then, since it wasn't clear:
I've heard/read that some programs that don't support dual run like crap on dual, even worse than w/ single cuz they don't know how to handle it. So I suppose my question is, does a dual proc. supporting program STILL take full advantage of one set up dual core processors?
I hope that's a bit more clear. |
|
|
| Diginerd |
I've been running a dual clovertown system for nearly a year now and certain applications scale much better than others.
Cubase is horrible at it. It does use all the cores, but if you have many live inputs the amount of "Baseline" CPU that gets chewed up is horrendous. If I have 32 I/O running, I'm at 1/3 CPU load.
Doesn't sound so bad until you realise that on a standard core 2 duo CPU the load is around 15% doing the same thing... To put that in perspective, I have 8 cores accross the 2 clovertown CPUs running at 2.4GHz on a 1006Mhz Bus (No, they're not "Release" parts for those trying to work out what chips I actually have), the core 2 Duo has 2 cores running at 1.86 GHz!
Bad bad bad Steinberg!
Pro Tools on the otherhand is awesome. Very very well handled multi threading. I can run flat out with no problems and the amount of plugins I can have running is insane.
So now I write & sequence on the core2duo, and record and mix on the clovertown machine..
I don't know about other apps as I don't use them.. Your Milage may Vary.. |
|
|
| echosystm |
Reaper has really good multi core utilisation. Probably the best of all of them. For the rest, I would stick to dual cores. FL and Ableton are absolutely crap at multithreading and you're best off with a SINGLE core.
Don't expect multi-core performance of programs to improve either. Chances are it is as good as it will ever be, due to limitations in the engine. |
|
|
| Aesthetic |
I don't really know about that man, the future is multicored isn't it? Seems a bit like the devs at these software companies are just going to have to bite the bullet one day and recode their wares.. unless they already are.
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Don't expect multi-core performance of programs to improve either. Chances are it is as good as it will ever be, due to limitations in the engine. |
|
|
|
| echosystm |
The problem is, when you look at it in a business-like (cost vs. benefit) way, it makes little sense for them to rewrite the engines.
I've heard rumours that Gol from Image-Line won't ever be doing it, because FL can't support it without a MAJOR rewrite. Now, lets consider that the average FL user is a complete nublet (it's true, everyone starts on FL, including me) and wouldn't know the difference. Clearly the benefit is minimal, and the cost is a lot. With the free lifetime updates, there is even less incentive. This is why IL are devoting their time to making bull plugins and DJ programs rather than fixing FL.
I'm basically heaps pissed off at them. Pretty glad I didn't end up buying FL! Suckers. :stongue:
Ableton et al. I can't speak for. Live does have much better multi-core support than FL, but it is still not great. Cubase and Sonar are pretty decent on quads, but again, nowhere near as good as Reaper. Reaper had the benefit of being developed right when multi-core started to be introduced. |
|
|
|
|
