just ran across this video on the internet,
pretty much shows
Windows 10 + 32GB ram + i9-9900K @5GHz (8cores)
barely outperforms
Windows 7+ 16GB ram + i7-5820K @4.5GHz (6cores)
when running a decent project in FL Studio (roughly at 9:50 testing starts):

 

testing on 2 different windows versions? does not really seem reliable...

 

only thing to learn from this video: that guy is full of it

( . y . ) on thumbnail is a good warning sign in general

 

you think so?

in my opinion it's perfectly reliable, because Microsoft boasts Windows 10 superior performance, Intel boasts new Intel cpus superior performance,
heck Microsoft even purposedly cuts off older hardware from Win10 and cuts off new hardware from Win7 by their artificial driver and kernel limitations...
so yea, it is reliable in Microsoft standards, so why not take it as a guideline



anyway, I'm not here to offend anyone, just felt such test might be useful for most of the people trying to build new PCs for audio, there's lots of wisdom in the video - although obviously it's not all the ultimate versatile truth

 

our tzzsmk...

 

I have to agree with @Kwissbeats: As way of comparison this test is not reliable. The test fallacy lies in its use of 2 different operating system while trying to decide which CPU is better for music production. If you are comparing two different CPUs you must use the same OS and the same system built in order for the test to have validity and reliability. The only variable should be the CPU itself. Did he prove with 100% certainty that there is NOT much performance gain between the 9900 over the 5820? He did not. The use of 2 different OS, and available memory leaves too much room for speculation. Ideed, as you said it could be argue that there is not much performance gain in using W10 over W7 and that was not even the purpose of the test.

 

I highly doubt more cores can't and are not utilized byfl studio & daw's general (especially reaper)
I gues it's up to the plugins you use, and the amount mixer lanes/routing in the case of fl studio.

 

I knew there's something fishy with her voice!!!

 

the point was look how great win10 performs...i thinks its valid test then...

btw ...whats that game at 1:06

 

Hehe, I actually have that Case shown in the Video. Besides that, AMD has won the Battle for now with Ryzen and Threadripper.

 

taskforce puter guru said the new ryzen coming this year will be wiping intel notebooks...price shift for that horsepower maybe on top

 

as for this video: ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero does not have thunderbolt possibility so not a good choice for audio production. Rest of the video is pretty good

 

@tzzsmk I am sorry brother. I have to agree with the Pirate and the other guys. That comparison isn't very fair and not quite relevant either. Different tech from different era. 5820K=22nm/Q3 of 2014/6c/12t @ 3.3ghz-turbo @3.6ghz. 9900K=14nm/Q4 of 2018, 8c/16t @ 3.6ghz-turbo @ 5ghz. Anyone having a board with a 5820k nowadays, will want to upgrade to the higher Haswell-E cpu parts for more pci-e lanes, as the 5820k is a "cut down lanes version" with 28 pci-e lanes for Intel's HEDT platform of the time. And of course:
The Z370/Z390 Intel platform has no future - it's dead end, no upgrade path. For serious users, the new HEDT Intel cpus for the already existing X299 seem as a better overall choice if you want to go Intel anyway. 48pci-e gen3 lanes, 10900X - 10c/20t for ~600$,10920X - 12c/24t @ ~700$, 10940X is 14c/28t @ ~800$, 10980XE is 18core for ~1000$. Cheapest x299 board with TB3 header is the Gigabyte x299 UD4 Pro at ~235$. Best high end board, probably the new Gigabyte X299X Designare 10G (600$), with built-in dual 10g Intel lan and dual TB3 ports.
(Intel has meticulously avoided bringing a new 16core cpu to market, so to avoid the straight up comparison and embarrassment).
On another note, i assembled recently a Ryzen 9 3900X with 32gb ram @ 3600mhz on a ASRock x570 Taichi. Both at stock clocks, it smoked the 9900k on a ASRock Z390 Taichi Ultimate with the same ram, with 25%-30% more plugs/vstis/track count etc on 10 different daws, with less power consumption & practically no noise with a cheap 55$ Cooler Master ML240L RGB liquid AIO cooler at BIOS silent mode, cpu hitting 4.2-4.3ghz at turbo. Both comps with a Radeon 580 8gb, Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500gb and 2x Seagate BarraCuda Pro 4tb.
I still wait for the 16core 3950x to fall in my hands lol.
On an additional note, x570 has true 8 gen4 lanes for the chipset. So up to two m.2 pci-e gen 4.0 drives can be installed running at full speed without compromising any Sata slots. So paired with a 12 or 16core Ryzen9 the platform can constitute for a (slightly limited against HEDT parts) powerful workstation too, if 1 GPU, 2x m2 and 6 or 8 sata slots cover your peripheral/storage needs.
This cannot be said for the Z390. Some good choices but too many compromises there, stupid Intel DMI, ultra stupid Intel Vrock (whoever though of that as clever, needs a serious ass whooping for fks sake). Faster ram makes little to no difference. Pci-e is limited to gen3. The platform consumes more power for less performance. (As mentioned) No upgrade path unless you 're thinking of starting with a i3 9100F lol. And whoever thinks that with Intel cpus, TB3 connectivity is built in the cpu, is missing the bigger picture, TB3 peripherals still have to communicate through Intel's DMI which cannot go beyond pcie gen 3.0 @ x4 speeds.
Cheers

 

Last edited: Feb 12, 2020

We could see that coming in that interesting thread talking about AMD bringing big guns (many core 7nm) and Intel failing to manufacture 10nm's. Still I'm gonna look again for the latest (not sponsored) reviews, it's a lot of laughs

That's what caught my eye the most.