|
How much cpu power do i need? (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
Anyhow, this benchmark you have shown is old. The OCZ Vertex and Summit SSDs are not on them - these are the first cost effective SSDs to offer good performance. |
Granted. That was the newest one I found, and I assumed that the new drives were similar in performance to the Apex because they weren't that far off in the benchmark you posted. The HDTach/HDTune benchmarks show a WAY bigger difference.
That one was only from January or so; I'm surprised that the change over just a few months would be that dramatic. But if those figures are accurate, then I guess the technology really has taken a leap. Hopefully you're right that they'll come down in price soon, because the prices are even more ridiculous than the previous generation.
I'm also assuming that they've resolved the issue with that ty JMicron controller whereby the drive would stall for upwards of 2 or 3 seconds when the queue started to fill up. The benchmarks don't test that.
| quote: | | We are comparing the best hard drive from over 2 decades of development to the crappiest SSDs from only a few years development. |
Point of order - flash memory is over 10 years old. Just because they added a SATA controller to it doesn't make it a new technology.
| quote: | | It's only a matter of time until they are cheap as piss. Lack of economies of scale are the biggest thing inflating SSD costs. |
Maybe you're right, and time will tell, but I'm not convinced; "economy of scale" implies a slim profit margin multiplied over millions of customers, but Intel and OCZ already have the manufacturing capacity, so they don't need higher margins or millions of customers. Maybe it's more like a lack of real competition, or they're just charging an arm and a leg right now because they can get away with it. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm also assuming that they've resolved the issue with that ty JMicron controller whereby the drive would stall for upwards of 2 or 3 seconds when the queue started to fill up. |
Yep! The new OCZ drives have cache and a better controller. The old drives didn't even have cache, so it's pretty obvious why they sucked :p |
|
|
| PutBoy |
| Get a decent sound card, they help alot. |
|
|
| crazedonee |
| i would step up to a power mac it may be like 3 or 4 thousand after you get what you need but you cant go wrong with 8 processors. |
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by crazedonee
i would step up to a power mac it may be like 3 or 4 thousand after you get what you need but you cant go wrong with 8 processors. |
Heh. I have a dual core CPU dating 2 years back. The equivalent of what the threadstarter is planning to buy.
And in the countless of projects i finished last year i have yet to reach over 50% on the meter, usually i stay at around 20-30%
And when i later upgrade my CPU to a Quad Core i will not need any more power ever it seems. |
|
|
| echosystm |
| quote: | Originally posted by crazedonee
i would step up to a power mac it may be like 3 or 4 thousand after you get what you need but you cant go wrong with 8 processors. |
this is bad advice.
you should always buy at the cost/performance sweet spot, and never more than +100% more power than you need. when you buy a $3,000 laptop, it is worth less than half this in 6 months time. if you bought a $1,500 laptop now and then spent another $1,500 upgrading to a new one in 18-24 months, you will always be better off. |
|
|
| body125z |
| quote: | Originally posted by echosystm
this is bad advice.
you should always buy at the cost/performance sweet spot, and never more than +100% more power than you need. when you buy a $3,000 laptop, it is worth less than half this in 6 months time. if you bought a $1,500 laptop now and then spent another $1,500 upgrading to a new one in 18-24 months, you will always be better off. |
cant agree more with u...
and for the history i ordered a dual core 2 ghz laptop made from acer...
its not that fast but with a good usb sound card, i hope it will work satisfying enough....
of course i will try to work with light producing software, staying away from the cpu eater ones ;) |
|
|
| palm |
| uses samples instead of synths. saves alot of computerpower it seems. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by palm
uses samples instead of synths. saves alot of computerpower it seems. |
At the expense of memory usage and/or disk I/O. Most samples are also dry, and you'll see that CPU getting eaten up once you start loading on the FX. |
|
|
| Stef |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
At the expense of memory usage and/or disk I/O. Most samples are also dry, and you'll see that CPU getting eaten up once you start loading on the FX. |
Agreed, it came out the roughly the same for me when i bounced stuff to dry audio. Might as well just use the internal VSTi effects in conjunction with normal minimal effects. |
|
|
| DJ Robby Rox |
If you are running certain patches on Genesis, z3ta, or other CPU whores you will save an easy 15% cpu (on a slower computer like my pentium d) bouncing the dry sample to SF2 than using send fxs that you're going to most likely need anyway for other samples/synths.
This is to *balance the workload, which sounds relevant to the OPs actual predicament.
But still, get a faster chip. |
|
|
| Beatflux |
| quote: | Originally posted by body125z
and for the history i ordered a dual core 2 ghz laptop made from acer...
|
Why are people getting laptops for production? |
|
|
|
|
