Homemade desktop...

> > > Homemade desktop...

Posted on

Member Since: Sep 13, 2008

I'm planning on building a Windows based system to mostly run Sonar 8 producer for audio production. I am planning on mostly using it for recording of live instruments and mastering, but I will do a bit of MIDI production too. What would you guys recommend for the CPU, motherboard, Ram, High capacity Hard Drives, case and power supply? I'm looking to build something that won't need to be upgraded anytime in the near future...

[ Back to Top ]


Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Jun 07, 2009 08:57 pm

AMD Phenom II either in the X2 dual core or X4 quad. I had stayed away from the quad as its speed was not up to what I needed and found it in a dual core which I am still happily running. It runs simultaneous 32 and 64 bit calculation's so it works well for me running Sonar 8 PE and all my synths. Since Sonar can take advantage of the 64 bit processor without needing a 64 bit OS to run.

I would now switch to the quad seeing the spec it is running out at now. And the top porcessor their 955 which clocks stock now at 3.2 gig and is available in Black Edition which is an unlocked chip. Meaning you get the full power of the chip, not a watered down version such as Intel quads.
www.amd.com/us-en/Process...,30_118,00.html

For a MoBo I have been running nothing but MSI as it is one of the most compatible boards for AMD. I run the K9A2 Platinum products.amd.com/en-us/Mo...id=59&id=76 and have had not problems with it. Facility for running up to 6 SATA and 2 eSATA drives on one board. You can configure RAID if you need to but I don't run them in an array.

I use the Antec Sonata Solo case. www.antec.com/Believe_it/product.php?id=MTk= It has a very good quiet factor and is very easy to set up. I've got all SATA drives in with space for more. 2 internal DVD and 4 internal HD.

I am a huge Seagate fan and have only ever crashed 1 Seagate drive since drives were only about 750 meg from them.

My personal set up uses a 500 gig for the OS or C drive. Then 3 750 gig internal for samples and one main audio drives. I use 2 1 TB external drives for main storage and back up. That is probably more then any normal person is ever going to need.

But the drives are all the newest version of the Barracuda drives. And are very faithful.

Ram I run 4 gig of Crucial Ballistix. I know many will say the Ram is Ram. I personally call BS on that one as I've tried several different makes and styles and in this type of situation pushing the limits it is worth the extra dosh for higher end ram. This is what I run, you can find it other places as well. www.maxcomputer1.com/prod...products_id=700

And just so you know. I am not really in need of an upgrade from the dual core I am running now in that same type of configuration. I'd simply build a new rig to add to what is here now and this original dual would still stay running for the studio.

Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006

Jun 08, 2009 01:47 pm

Wait a minute now...

The only thing unlocked means is that you can overclock it with the multiplier you choose. The Intel chips are locked at certain multipliers but you can still overclock if you want (who overclocks a DAW?).

I do not understand the "watered down version such as Intel Quads" line, what exactly does that mean? Why is my watered down 2.6Ghz Quad outperforming the 3.2Ghz AMD in every task but gaming?

They both make good CPU's and the prices are very similar right now. Whatever offers you the best deal $$$ wise should be your choice. What is you price range BTW?


Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Jun 08, 2009 03:54 pm

They lock the higher voltages because their chips explode if not cooled way past normal cooling needs for OC. And even running nominal on some all cores do not function fully. That is not on every chip by them though so take that with a grain of salt.

Intel has a reputation for playing it safe. Most AMD chips are open to be exploited, Black Edition are built with the higher end cores and made to run to the extreme.

AMD only recently released a quad going to 3.2 so I'll assume your talking about a dual core in the comparison with the 2.6. My guess would be the MoBo and the pipeline used for the chip. My dual running at 3.2 absolutely spanks my buddies Intel quad running on a comparable MoBo and the same software set up. Same amount of RAM as well. But then again, I did spend an awful lot of time digging and benchmarking DAW performance only.

Watered down meaning that Intell and AMD were guilty of not opening the 4 cores up completely. On most calculating the Intel was only using 1 or 2 of the cores, even though it could have been faster using the 4 as people were thinking it should. Not so true now with most of their chips. Although they still lock down their chips for the most part and play it safe.

The other thing is that the AMD chips are opened for using the fastest bus speed a MoBo can handle and they run in full duplex mode full time. Intel chips at the moment can only run in half duplex. So if a MoBo can handle 35 GB/s of I/O bandwidth and AMD can push 33.1 for the AM2 and 37 for the AM3, were as the Intel can only push 16.1.

Now granted that is if the MoBo, chipset and ram are all on the same page as far as bandwidth goes. Again, that is why I spent months researching and benchmarking to find the perfect combination. Not everybody is going to spend the time to do that.

But AMD does keep a running list on their site of the MoBo that are well matched for the CPU's they offer.

But in the end, ya they are both good CPU's. AMD is usually the best bang for the buck. But if you are buying a pre built PC and it has and Intel for a good price, don't let that stop you.

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Jun 08, 2009 03:54 pm

Geez, did I run on a bit?

Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006

Jun 08, 2009 05:07 pm

A tad, something I am guilty of as well :)

Overclocking aside though, all the things mentioned sound like great features but really the benchmarks say the Q9550 and 955BE are neck and neck. They seem to go back and forth depending on what is tested.

anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=3551&p=8

In the end... the watered down, older tech, half duplex Intel is right on par with AMD's newest, unlocked, full duplex chip that is also clocked 400Mhz faster.

And on the 3.2Ghz, that is the stock speed of the quad 955 BE... the processor I was comparing to my i7 920 @ 2.6Ghz.
www.newegg.com/Product/Pr...-AMD-_-19103674

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Jun 08, 2009 06:11 pm

I always take any published benchmark as a half truth, even in AMD's case. Most of them are done with a certain amount of bios in mind. And as I said, that includes AMD. The gamers simply love that chip because it is bullet proof and really has no limits that can't be overcome. Intel, well they build a sturdy dependable chip. Why it cost 3 and 4 times as much is beyond me to be honest. When the quads hit the 3.2 mark finally Intel chips were $1000 more then the Phenom. WTF is that about????? They are not worth that much money no matter what.

If I want calculation's that can't be beat I'll go with a 6 core Opteron.

Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006

Jun 09, 2009 02:54 pm

The extreme edition are stupid expensive I agree, but why buy a 3.2Ghz extreme when my 2.6Ghz beats the AMD 3.2Ghz BE already :)

And yes, benchmarks should be taken with a grain of salt but half truth seems a little harsh. Anand are pretty savvy folk and provide detailed lists of the testing enviornment used (MB, drivers, timings, voltages etc...). It gives a nice roundabout of where things lie.

Alas, I think we have tainted this thread enough and am now going to stop. We will have to agree to disagree :) I do love a good hardware chat with a guy who knows what he's talking about though (even if he is wrong!! jk) :)

Czar of Midi
Administrator
Since: Apr 04, 2002

Jun 09, 2009 07:35 pm

Virtual smack upside the head, followed by a friendly virtual beer.

We should have a track count dual, your quad against my dual.

We'd have to do it on skype though to keep us both honest. As I think were both to dishonest to tell the truth now.

But ya, Its fun to let the inner geek out once in awhile.

> > > Homemade desktop...

Related Forum Topics:


If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.