afaik, Cockos Reaper, Tracktion Waveform, Bitwig Studio, Harrison Mixbus are DAWs with native Linux support

 

Reviving the thread. I just watched yesterday a video explaining very interesting things about these this transition from Intel/AMD to ARM.
Be advised there are overstatements all over the video. Probably because the guy wants to gain more audience using sensationalism.

The coolest thing for me because it's been ages since the last time it's a new CISC vs RISC CPU architecture battle (Intel/AMD vs ARM) due to the many-core age.

 

Last edited: May 29, 2019

Actually Reaper codebase for Linux and Mac uses a layer of Windows emulation (especially the GUI), but it's so well optimized than still outperfoms pretty much everything (in terms of RAM usage especially).

 

Kind of looks like windows and Mac are headed to arm. If as mentioned in video windows becomes highly stable after transition would be interesting to see where software devs go.

Overall I get why the transition is nessesary now. Hopefully this ARM is dope.

 

That's nonsensical. Any programmable logic device is "a computer", whether it's an iPad, car, or drum machine.

In fact - my monitor, keyboard, and mouse are each a computer in and of themselves. So my setup of one tower is actually a network of several computers.

 

Then they are fuckups, IMO. Having goals means trying to put yourself out of business. You SUCCEED at your goals, meaning that your mission is accomplished, and then move on to the next goal/problem. Milking a problem indefinitely isn't service, it's "rent seeking".

 

Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8cx SMASHES Intel Core i5

 

This was one of the videos I saw while reading about this tech thing. Really interesting. And still there's a layer of Intel/AMD emulation in the Windows that goes with that ARM based CPU.
How long until they can keep up with AMD/Intel fastest desktop CPUs? And to be able to produce them in great quantity. That's the golden question.

 

I'd say to all the Apple sheep, jump now and don't wait to be pushed!

 

My solution
https://www.tonymacx86.com/threads/mod-g5-mk-i-mk-ii-hanakintosh.193768/#lg=post-1258282&slide=15

 

@wouala woualouf I don't understand your whole post's imaginary tone like what you describe isn't already happening or possible.

The question is not whether these exist, but can you afford them...
https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...alable/platinum-processors/platinum-9282.html
https://www.amd.com/en/products/cpu/amd-epyc-7702

Errr they do. Currently up to 2 cpus but cluster scaling is here since the dawn of servers and helps server builders leverage the power of multiple machines so i don't understand what you are trying to say here.

Sorry, but no they wouldn't. Dual or more cpu systems come with a noticable latency which makes them unfit for anything that needs fast responsiveness like daw work or gaming. For serious music projects which need tremendous horse power to run plugs and samplers etc, technologies like VSL's Ensemble Pro allows them to run multiple machines with almost zero latency.

All these are already sold, just not from Apple. This is not crazy and certainly not your idea.

Seems to me you don't entirely understand the Apple crowd. The only bad advertising for them was when Steve may he rest in peace, announced switching to Intel cpus back in '07. They needed to be different and Steve was putting them alongside the "Hi, i am a pc" guys, one and the same actually. I remember Apple changing the '06 ad to the 2007 mac guy saying: "i am a mac and i am a pc too". What they deliberately forgot to put in there is the pc saying that he can be a mac too :D

They actually make a shitload of money from "authorized repairs". And their repair policy is the worse possible. Their warranty is also a bit of a joke too.

As shown previously 4 cpus is a no go for the obvious latency reasons. You should also remember that the Workstation market uses about the same hardware as the Server market. The difference is in the implementation and usage. In other words, if you think HEDT Intel cpus are not Xeon cpus, you better think again. Same goes for AMD's Threadripper. They are essentially "watered down" server cpus designed to meet specific needs of the smaller Workstation pros and computer enthusiasts.
As i mentioned in another thread you can buy a 64 core AMD Epyc for 7k with a SuperMicro mobo that can support up to 4tb of ram.
My question is simple but also rhetorical. What is it that you are doing that demands this power?
Cheers

 

Last edited: Nov 9, 2019

Everybody is going mad but this has to be done in future. Only Apple have nuts to make that decision. This decision will revolutionize the industry and we'll see RISC-V based CPUs in consumer products.

There is not much we can get from x86 architecture.

It is gong to be a disaster for professionals and developers, but let's see how this will get handled.

 

What can Risk-V help make, is advanced smarter machines dedicated to specific tasks. For musicians this may help build hybrid machines of all types from smart workstation/samplers to all kinds of virtual consoles etc.
But, for computing as we know it, my estimation is it will be very hard to pull it off. Surely Risc-V may scale well for server tasks, IBM knows a thing or two, but using such an architecture for latency demanding applications such as a daw or an online game i dunno if these cpus will really be suitable. If i can guess for example, the new -Arm powered- Surface Pro X, although i like its concept, it exhibits "underwhelming performance", if we can believe the recent reviewers. From what i gather reading the most prominent reviews is it has the performance of a 300-400 dlr tablet but starts at 1100. And it can't run x86 depended apps. I mean ffffsss... MS wants so bad to be on par with Apple's pricing, market status etc, hilariously pathetic too. Or is it pathetically hilarious... Whatever.

The thing is Apple switched from RISK to CISC (x86) because Intel was hands down faster. But let's do some simple math, shall we?
A single core cpu of 4ghz can execute one instruction at the speed of 4 billion cycles/sec. An 8 core cpu of 4ghz will execute 8 instructions at the speed of 4 billion clock cycles/sec. Note here that each clock cycle equals one instruction fetched and executed by the cpu. This should mean 32 billion instructions per second. Which i reckon should be more than enough for just about everything Audiosexers are involved with.
Now, sometimes i wonder why people constantly worry about hardware. Were you ever in any doubt that the hardware isn't enough ? For what it's worth i am not. You can have as much as you can buy really, like a building size cluster with thousands of cpus lol. The problem as i see it, is and always will be, inadequate software that cannot fully leverage and scale along to the horse power it runs on. Not to mention stupid OS's, all of them. Buggy DAWs themselves too, the whole lot of them hehehe.
Cheers
EDIT: And the problem to having inadequate software which essentially makes us all perpetual beta testers does not originate from the people who actually write the code. It comes from those who manage these creative persons we know as programmers. This top tier of suit executives who down the bottom line know less than everyone else, yet they get to manage companies.

 

Last edited: Nov 9, 2019

Apple getting all this love by some, and i'm like

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

WHY SO BASEMENT???