gotta ask it since the price drops...quad core??
Home > Home Recording Forum > Computers & Software > gotta ask it since the price drops...quad core??
Posted on Jul 28, 2007 10:49 pm
kennethwsmithjr
The Eternal Student
Member Since: Oct 08, 2005
Wow, it's been a while since I've lurked around here. I'm in the process of upgrading my computer hardware. I've gone with a core 2 duo 4400 and a motherboard thats AGP compatible (can't bear to throw out the 7600 gt) as a reasonable upgrade.
But the real question... quad cores dropped to sub-$300. I can build an all new insane-spec'd computer for $1300 with the 2.4ghz quad-core processor now.
Are any of the music applications using multi-threading? Are any developers planning on using it? It will be a multi-purpose PC mind you (games, multi-threaded optimizations, music, etc.)
Otherwise, I'd just be better off getting a higher clocked dual core...
Thoughts?
~Kenny
[ Back to Top ]
Jul 31, 2007 01:32 am Multi-threading has been in use for, literally, decades now. Anything that can't multi-thread has a problem. I think you're confusing it with SMP (symmetric multiprocessing), which is use of multiple CPUs (or cores, in your case). The answer is yes, most audio applications are able to use multiple processors; in many cases they have the capability to use much more than you'd ever want/need for practical use. Cubase can (supposedly) use an unlimited amount of processors (remember, an application doesn't see a difference between cores and CPUs). This isn't by any means a new technology... hell, in 1992 there was a 4 processor machine with a 64-bit bus. Granted, they were 50mhz 486s, but it was still just expounding on older multi-processing machines.
To shorten an already long response, any audio software that doesn't support SMP probably isn't worth your time.
zekthedeadcowEat Spam before it eats YOU!!!Member
Since: May 11, 2002
Jul 31, 2007 03:14 am The issue is probably going to be the OS... I think XP only allows 2 CPU cores in the EULA and it will probably require Vista Ultimate to use Quad...otherwise you'll be running a server version of windows.
Jul 31, 2007 10:54 am I don't have a multi-core processor to test with, but from reading MS' site, it looks like XP Pro can support however many cores you want.
"Windows XP Professional can support up to two processors regardless of the number of cores on the processor."
Need to get one of these quad Core 2s to try out... my 754 Athlon 64 is starting to show its age XD
Jul 31, 2007 01:24 pm naw, XP can support as many (processors) as you want, you just have to have something that'll utilize the cores, which depends entirely on your software.
For example: MPI. I've got my quad core running an optimization right now, and 3 of the 4 cores are 100% used, and the tasking processor (which tells all the other ones what to do) ranges 35-55%.
XP pro limits your usable ram to 4gb. Vista has no such limitations. The downside: Vista uses more memory to run any application than XP does at this point (for now, anyways), so you might NEED the extra RAM.
So, back to my original question: what audio software is parallelized to take advantage of multiple cores?
Looks like Cubase was voted as a yes. Any others?
pjkPrince CZAR-mingMember
Since: Apr 08, 2004
Jul 31, 2007 02:51 pm reaper does
actually, i think the developer is developing on a quad duo of some sort.
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
Jul 31, 2007 08:31 pm Right now Sonar 6 is the only DAW that take full advantage of multi processor based systems. And if your gonna do a quad core I would highly recommend going with AMD. They are outperforming the Intel chip when used in audio type set ups.
Jul 31, 2007 09:10 pm they're outperforming the AMD quad cores? that's really surprising... all the benchmarks I've looked at www.anandtech.com and www.tomshardware.com have more or less smoked the AMD quad core, which is just two dual cores (eg. quad fx-74), for a whole lot less dough.
Are the AMD processors more stable in audio applications?
I'm upgrading to a core 2 duo right now, do you think I should wait to build a new quad core system till AMD comes out with their new "real" quad cores (supposedly september)?
Noize2uCzar of MidiAdministrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002
Aug 02, 2007 10:46 pm Yep, that is the chip I'm talking about. I'm not heading to quad until that chip is released.
And the second gen FX chip is a real quad. But there are only a couple of MoBO's that have the northbridge set up to deal with using its pipeline properly. most of the boards out do not have a northbridge chip that is truly quad core ready.
And as far as the benchmarks go, head out to a gamers site to see a different set of benchmarks on what the Intel vs AMD really is. Most of it depends on the MoBO that is for sure in the audio/video realm. But AMD has long been known to way under rate their chips. Thats why they are the over clockers CPU. They can be pushed way past their limits without fear of major meltdown.
MSI went as far as building a software app that can run the bios from Windows to allow for making adjustments for over clocking without having to reboot into the bios every time you want to tweak and check.
Aug 03, 2007 07:52 pm ah, gotcha. it'll be interesting to see how AMD performs compared to the current higher-clocked intel cores.
Speaking of overclocking headroom, I had a near 50% overclock (2.9ghz) on my core 2 duo e4400 yesterday... stock cooling, crappy motherboard, and ddr2700 ram.
