|
How much cpu power do i need? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
All of it. |
|
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Processors are getting so heavy these days that RAM and Harddrives are starting to be the bottlenecks of our systems. |
i can't tell if you are joking :p
RAM and HDDs have always been the bottlenecks of our systems. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Processors are getting so heavy these days that RAM and Harddrives are starting to be the bottlenecks of our systems. |
Er... those have always been the bottlenecks. It's just certain applications (media production, games, high-end graphics, software development, scientific/engineering/math research/sims, AI, and so on) that have to crunch through enormous amounts of complex calculations that require a lot of processor power, in some cases requiring specialized hardware (most notably GPUs and DSPs).
The speeds of CPU, RAM, and external disk have not changed relative to each other in an order-of-magnitude sense. If anything, they are less of a bottleneck today with smarter CPUs (L2 and L3 cache) and smarter operating systems (Vista with Readyboost/Superfetch etc.).
Edit: Haha dude beat me to the punch by like 10 minutes. That'll teach me to drop a deuce in the middle of writing a post. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
i can't tell if you are joking :p
RAM and HDDs have always been the bottlenecks of our systems. |
No, if u run out of CPU then the CPU is the bottleneck.
Nowadays with the new CPUs you wont run out of processing power, thus making the RAM and Harddrives the weak spots of the systems.
But yeah i understand what u mean, im just saying that one should look into faster Harddrives and RAM instead of CPU power. As very soon it will be almost impossible to run out of it.
So let me rephrase what i said. RAM and HD are starting to become the REALLY BIG bottlenecks on our systems. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
No, if u run out of CPU then the CPU is the bottleneck.
Nowadays with the new CPUs you wont run out of processing power, thus making the RAM and Harddrives the weak spots of the systems.
But yeah i understand what u mean, im just saying that one should look into faster Harddrives and RAM instead of CPU power. As very soon it will be almost impossible to run out of it. |
faster memory and storage would always result in lower cpu intensity at the same buffer levels... so that's a case of why the ram/hdd would be the bottleneck in media work. but yeah, the memory/storage bottleneck is more an issue for more "general" computing, so i do see your point. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| Soon it is not going to matter which CPU we have, we need to have fast RAM and Hard Drives to notice the difference. |
|
|
| Stef |
| Personally i use a 2.6ghz dual core, with 4 gigs of ram and a 250gb HDD with 7200rpm. Its too bad nothing i use supports dual core =( |
|
|
| echosystm |
i'm using a 1.8ghz c2d at the moment and it's fine for me :p
i don't use a lot of synths though, maybe only like 3 per song. |
|
|
| B_man |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
i'm using a 1.8ghz c2d at the moment and it's fine for me :p
i don't use a lot of synths though, maybe only like 3 per song. |
Haha... I wish I had your effeciency... In my current track I'm using 5 synths (4 instances of one + Vanguard) for the basslines alone. I've had to render the basslines in pieces to make it work for me. Otherwise it's a CPU eater. |
|
|
| echosystm |
serious? what daw?
i'm using cubase and windows xp. i keep my computer pretty clean so theres no bull in the background. at 5.8ms i have no problem running a song like...
2x legacy cell
1x zebra2
1x halion one
2x guru
3-4 compressors, eqs on most channels (usually glisseq), limiter on master, an amp simulator, a distortion plugin or two, glitch/camelphat or some other multieffect.
something like that wouldn't go much above 50% for me. if i tried to do the same thing in ableton though, i wouldn't even get halfway. |
|
|
| B_man |
FL...
I run XP as well... you can see my system specs in a previous post. I was getting between 50-60 percent CPU in the project with:
kick -- (2 samples), parametric EQ, stereo-EQ, reverb, multiband-compression.
full-on-bassline -- Split into two FX channels:
LOW - (Vanguard with no internal FX) Shared the kick FX
MID-to-high basslines: (4x 3xOSC) blood-overdrive, delay, post-filtering, slight reverb, multiband compression.
Hats with delay, reverb, and some flagus...
I also had an additional Vanguard and freeware-rock synthesizer running in the background. When these two synthesizers would run, my CPU would be maxed out. |
|
|
| 4everX |
depends on how many plug-in you use, i've a [email protected], 4gb Ram@800mhz and i use 12 or 13 istance of virtual instrument plus a lot of effects (eq, compressor delay...)
my CPU is often over 50% about 60-70% |
|
|
|
|
