only matters if you'd use PCIe 5.0 devices - they would run at half speeds,
it's more of a matter overspending on motherboard which couldn't utilize those PCIe 5.0 speeds being limited by cpu

 

8 core cpu @ 4.2ghz. Single core boost @ 5.1ghz, all core boost @ 4.7 - 4.8ghz. Now it ain't half bad and the integrated graphics are really good. But it will still need a new mobo and ddr5 ram. Now if you can find it around 250 euros might be something to consider. I 'd still go for the 7900X with another +70-80 as the performance is much better, actually a different ballpark to be exact, as the cpu starts with a base clock of 4.7ghz and can boost all 12 cores to 5.3 - 5.4ghz, single core up to 5.6 ghz.

They don't. The 7900 i.e. starts at 3.7 ghz base clock and it will boost all cores up to about 4.7 ghz. Which is 7900X's base clock actually.
Now these cpus are overclockable and that's why AMD puts em out, serious users on a tighter budget will get a 7900 and oc the fuck out of it @ 5ghz with np. But this just means the cpu will then consume more power than even the 7900X without oc. Btw, AMD offers ECO mode for their cpus. It's a setting that limits the power drawn by the cpu but also the performance as well. Around 25% to 30%. Still when you don't have active projects and just foolin' around browsing or watching a movie or whatnot, turning ECO mode on is the smart thing to do. All done via AMD's Ryzen Master control soft.

For DAW work it is a disadvantage as X3D cpus have their boost clocks and power draw limited when compared to their non x3d counterparts. The extra cache also does nothing in audio processing.
For gaming though X3D rocks like hell, also special scientific workloads.

Ryzen 9000 series is made at 4nm. Now the upcoming Intel Arrow Lake cpus set for release at October 24th, Core Ultra 9 285K, 265K and 245K are made by TSMC @ 3nm. Just like AMd Apple and Nvidia among others too. Intel are betting their arm, leg and one of their kidneys on these lol. Rumors so far are very positive and the cpus are great on paper spec but we 'll just have to wait and see. And yes we all want ARM to be good but all reviews show it's not totally ready yet. Mainly because Windows is not up there in ARM instructions support yet.
Cheers

 

I may have a second machine with a 5950X that may be for sale soon if interested, as I'm next few days. I also have 128GB DDR4 RAM (4 x 32GB), and a spare Gigabyte Aorus Master motherboard to go with it if interested in a complete base for your setup.

 

AMD 5700G is now a cheap 8 core option with great performance. I have one and another machine running 5900x. When working on music, I can't tell the difference between the two unless I'm doing some massive batch processing like converting 2,000+ wav files to mp3 in Audition.

AM5 and DDR5 isn't making enough difference in real-world. Ignore the benchmark stuff. You can save move with an AM4 system, cheaper DDR4 ram that you won't noticed a difference with. You can put more money toward a GPU like 4070ti if you render video, animation, do local Ai/ML tasks, or gaming.

 

You are not seeing the forest for the trees. If you observe the Windows Task Manager "Performance" tab (Logocal processors view), you should see the load being balanced all threads.

Ableton Live, Studio One & Cubase are among the least optimized DAWs on the market. Both for similar & different reasons. Cubase is known for having a hard limit of 16 cores among other issues. Cubase & Studio One use buffer guard to avoid CPU/Memory spikes which is not fool-proof. While all three have improved a little as of late, there are better options. Bitwig, Pro Tools (yes, more efficient than Ableton), Reaper & Waveform come to mind.

About CPU core & speed. You are somewhat correct. Consumer CPUs, motherboards & memory have an inherent limit as compared to workstation class of the same.

Threadripper & Xeon CPUs have better cache, more memory channels & more PCIe lanes directly from the CPU. This translates into greater bandwidth/throughput compared to consumer platforms. That being said, Zen processors operate more like workstation CPUs. Just less cache, Memory channels & PCIe lanes. The latest from Intel is now going this way with Arrow/Lunar Lake.

The trick no matter which way you go is knowing how to balance/optimize your choice of system components & OS.

 

Last edited: Oct 13, 2024

Cubase Pro 12 and above will handle as many threads as you can throw at it. As in the hundreds with cpus like Threadripper 64c/128t etc.
So does Studio One mate There are some caveats with all DAWs like as mentioned Ableton considers sidechained channels as one thread etc.
But in general multi-threading is not a problem and even with al lthe caveats there are workarounds. That is for smart users hehehe.
Cheers my friend, i hope all is good

 

by design how operating system scheduling works and audio processing works, there will always be diminishing advantages scaling up tasks over many more cores,
let's say with 16 core cpu (and disabled hyperthreading) it may be actually beneficial to give DAW only 12 cores, and leave Windows+services remaining 4 cores, this way there will be minimal to no issues with DPC latency and hiccups (because even if system/drivers overload some of those 4 cores with very long routines, dedicated 12 DAW cores won't relate)

 

5900x or 5950x are the best bang for the bucks

 

I do agree with both of your positions to a point. Live & Cubase as mentioned have of history of performance issues. There have been improvements of course. Live load balances more like Reaper does now but, CPU & memory usage is on average 7% higher using my DAW test session. Studio One is more like Pro Tools also with higher CPU & memory usage. Cubase engine on Windows is just not as smooth vs macOS (too many hardware & driver compatibility issues still).

Test Session:

• 8 Omnisphere tracks with unique 12 bar looped MIDI sequence on each track routed to a bus track ADHD Leveling Amplifier.
• No automation or other effects that could spike CPU/RAM during loop.
• First bar starts with only one track playing MIDI (soft pad or kick). This allows for a more consistent loop reset.
• Stop session, double tracks & observe system performance with Task Manager & DAW system usage option.

System usage should scale normally as tracks are doubled. You can see clearly how the load is balanced across are threads in each DAW vs you systems settings & optimizations. This is how I personally determine if a system is performing properly after any meaningful changes are made or, when testing a new system for possible improvements.

 

I just took delivery of this today, and plan to set up some time during the week.

I have two systems, both running X570 motherboards and a Ryzen 9 5950X and can't fault it to be honest. Rock solid and have had no issues. The order that arrived today is to upgrade my main system, but I will still have a 5950X secondary system. It truly eats through virtually anything and couldn't recommend enough, after taking the punt to move from Intel to AMD on it.

The fact I am now upgrading to a 9950X and X870 board should be testament enough as to how highly I regard my Ryzen and 5950X experience!

 

Last edited: Oct 13, 2024

I'm on a 5600G as well. No dedicated GPU. 4 x 8gb DDR4 and two NVME SSDs.

It's quite fast, I never freeze tracks, but when sessions get bigger I need to increase buffer size. I just don't like the latency of the bigger buffers (512).

 

i use a AMD - Ryzen 7 5800X3D with AMD 3D V-Cache™ Technologie.
is now sold out, will they produce it again?

 

Very happy for you mate. The board is actually one of the best non E mobos and it comes with everything onboard including 2 usb 40gbps ports and WiFi7, albeit the latter comes in the form of an m.2 module so it takes up the fifth m.2 slot (and some pci-e bandwidth probably). You just have to be careful in selecting what you will install in storage because of the 8 fewer pci-e lanes. For the moment AMD is making waves not with their desktop but with their Zen 5 EPYC cpus. They released a 192 cores cpu for fuck's sake lol. Guys are mental.
As much as i like your new shiny system i will be waiting to see what the Zen 5 Threadripper line has to offer.

I had this talk a few days ago with my main supplier. They will most likely become available again in two weeks give or take. There is still high demand on these and on 5700X3D. It is the poor man's high end gaming cpu hehe. Its impact on the gaming world reminds me of the Celeron 300A days (the really old poor man's gaming cpu haha) when everyone would buy that 300mhz cpu and oc it to 450mhz permanently until it was dead hahaha. Probably the best cheap cpu Intel has ever made. But hey, i digress, so excuse me for reminiscing. The 5700X3D and the newer 7800X3D are both available atm. And Zen5 X3D cpus are also on the way soon.
Cheers

 

Last edited: Oct 13, 2024

I agree on all the rest. Too many scientists all over the world are actually on hectic research on the whole cpu thing, so i 'm sure the major companies they will surely find a way to make more money haha.
This one here though is an interesting topic. The way i see it of course. Intel now is not Intel made, it's Intel designed made by TSMC. And while nobody's perfect, TSMC's track record is the best there is. So, the rebranding was a necessary move for Intel, as they had to move away from the recent fiasco that led them to lose about 70% of their stock price and eventually let go of 15000 employees, not to mention facing i don't know how many lawsuits including at least a massive class action one that i am aware of. Well, this Ultra naming scheme is kinda stupid but nobody serious enough about computing cares. The new Core Ultra cpus are expected to be very good, although people should not expect miracles. From the info i saw so far i think it will set Intel back on track. Anything else like 13 & 14 gen are to be avoided for sure of course.
Cheers

 

Last edited: Oct 13, 2024

I did contemplate waiting for the 3D Cache version, but I may use that on my secondary system as an upgrade being the ones I use for gaming etc. However, the Threadrippers are a little too heavy in the wallet for my justification and needs.

I did some research before picking this MSI and know it's pretty best best outside the X870E range (and arguably better than some E range boards). Whilst I think I'm happy with it, the one thing I'm hesitant about is whether I stick with this one of pay the £160 and get the MSI Carbon X870E board.

I previous had the Asus TUF range for Intel, and went with Gigabyte board for my first venture into AMD land, but never really been satisfied fully with either. I always see and hear good things about MSI, particularly their BIOS, options, and flexibility, so taken a punt on MSI this time.

From what I researched, for X870 (so far) it seems like the best board options for the mainstream without getting into crazy money territory are:

BUDGET/VALUE: ASRock X870E Nova WiFi
MID TIER/RELIABLE/VALUE THAT WILL SATISY MOST: MSI X870 Tomahawk WiFi
BEST: MSI X870E Carbon WiFi / ASRock X870E Taichi
​

.....may end up returning the MSI X870 Tomahawk WiFi today, despite being an amazing board, and ordering the MSI X870E Carbon WiFi Any thoughts on this @taskforce

 

Last edited: Oct 14, 2024

I really like this MSI Carbon board. Finally MSI got it right with this mid tier mobo (sort of because it's about 450 euros but this range of 400-500 is the new mid tier now ...). In the past i have been very sceptical on both Msi's mid and high end tiers, whereas i really liked their cheaper boards. Well, not with this one! This board is solid from all aspects. Doesn't miss features that should have been there, no hidden gimmicks and has implemented all it has correctly. I would love to test this board with a Thunderbolt interface as we haven't had an AMD MSI m/b with TB before. But now with USB4 being compatible with TB4 out of the box via pci-e tunneling i think things are gonna get really interesting.
The other mobo to take into consideration and it's also a very interesting board, is the Taichi Lite from ASRock. Now this board is exactly the same as the top end Taichi but without the RGB bling. The VRM on this board is quite the overkill lol.
So Carbon vs Taichi Lite, what gives.
The Carbon has a better backplate than the Taichi Lite, featuring 1 more type C USB and an additional 2.5gbE port.
The Taichi has 6 SATA ports vs Carbon's 4. Also the Taichi features a 24 (110A) +2+1 VRM solution vs Carbon's 18 (also 110A) +2+1 VRM. In Wendel's words (Level1 Techs), a 24 x110A implementation can really run like four 9950X hehe. Which is true of course, so this board is more oriented towards overclockers than the MSI board. I tend to like the TaichiLite's VRM more than the Carbon's, not because it's bigger in numbers, but because they have a huge cooling solution for their VRMs so they 're not gonna get hot ever under normal circumstances, not even with all PBO feats enabled and the cpu on full turbo speed.
The Taichi Lite is also a cheaper mobo, as it does away with all the visual RGB bling offering a very clean & serious aesthetic, whereas the Carbon still has some RGB there making it slightly more expensive. Both mobos implement WiFi7 on a pci-e M.2 slot.
Cheapest prices i could find for Europe is 415 euros for the Taichi Lite and 445 for the Carbon.
So the price difference is quite negligible. In terms of feats i like the Carbon better i must admit. In terms of robustness i prefer the TaichiLite.
But both boards are more than good enough, so it's a matter of choice really.
All my best and happy desktop music making mate

 

I think most of the important points about choosing your AMD Ryzen CPU have already been mentioned. I hope you find the right one... I have an old AMD - FX-8350 processor in the spare PC with Win 7 that cost 148 EUR new at the time, I got a used one for 69 EUR, which will serve as a replacement when I retire, because who knows what will happen in 15-20 years and how much the EURO will still be worth.

The loss in value is high but if you want performance and don't want to wait, you spend more money than you have to. But divide the CPU costs by 12x months and that times the user period of 10 years. For you 298 EUR : 12 months = 25 EUR per month - 10 years of use is 120 months - then the processor will only cost you 2.48 EUR per month in the future.

Remember that with your money you are also supporting future research and securing jobs at AMD. We see the same thing with DDR RAM and SSD - a flood in Thailand at Seagate and the hard drive cost three times as much. You rely on the greed of the users - then you look at the sales and when they drop the CPU also becomes cheaper.