Reaper is running 10 audio tracks. Not to mention the guy is shamelessly opening the mixer window showing half his channels peaking lol.
Low end phones can run 10 audio tracks np. Where's the virtual instruments please. The only wonderful thing about this imho always, is the Pi4's low cost. But is it really low ? A full Pi4/4gb pack will set you back 100eu. Considering you can get an x86 computer with ~3 times the performance of the Pi4 for about 200, then the only advantage of the Pi4 is the miniature size and Linux is no advantage even for Reaper users. The videos of Pi4 running Win10 oT show a very unstable and ultra low performance comp.

If you can show me where on the video the Snapdragon runs an x86 app plz... Unless you are interested in MS office. Benchmarks are not usable apps, but you know that of course. Personally, i 'd love it if ARM could catch up but they can't. Not atm imho. Unless Apple can port their entire code to ARM, which may change the scenery radically. We 'll just have to wait and see i guess

Bro @Von_Steyr this is the only chart i can -sort of- trust:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
And here you have the top 10, 6 to 4 in favor of AMD. The fun factor and one to get you thinking is AMD has 4 consumer cpus in the high end top 10, which not so long ago was dominated by Xeons.
Lemme explain how i see it. Until very recently, AMD played 2 basic roles in the cpu market for the past 20 yrs or so. One was the budget company for those who wanted a cheaper comp. Second and most important for me, was the disruptive role, whenever they could. Athlon x64 was AMD's last great consumer cpu before Ryzen. But disrupt they did with it, Intel only started gaining dominance with their Core architecture which borrowed heavily from the AMD paradigm, losing the northbridge and integrating it inside the cpu.
But as will all discover after TR3 and Intel 10xxx HEDT are released, the roles have already switched. Now it's Intel with the disadvantage so now they will play the disruptive role. And because cpu wise they are behind, they will play with their pricing alright. Starting with their 10xxx HEDT they have already cut cpu prices by an unheard before 50%. If this ain't disruptive i dunno what is man. Imho, the cpu war will light up seriously when those Intel cpus are released anytime soon. Not because they bring something new, but because of the slightly higher clocks and half price vs the previous gen, makes the 10xxx series look appealing. So, the upcoming Intel 10920X, 12c/24t @ 3.5ghz for ~680$ will be only about 100$ more than a 3900x. Considering that it supports 48 pci-e lanes vs 20 of the 3900x (albeit being pci-e 3) and higher boost clocks, it is a viable solution for a high end DAW machine. My guess, there will be serious war on the cpu market hehe. But this will favor all of us here :D
Cheers

 

Last edited: Nov 24, 2019

Like Adam Smith wrote
"This benchmark is misleading, the 8CX has a 1080p screen and the Intel has a 2k screen. Higher resolution = more Pixels to push which means lower scores in benchmarks. Also the Intel was running Windows 10 version 1809 vs the Snapdragon running 1903. You may not think that's a big deal but MS really optimized 1903 and compared to 1809 I've noticed it runs alot better on older hardware. 2. What's the BIOS options on this machine? If it doesn't have secure boot unlock I'm not going to recommend anyone buy it as the last thing the PC needs is fucking locked bootloaders"

Still, we are comparing a mid-end Laptop CPU with a High End ARM Chip.

To Speak in Numbers
In CPU Benchmark i5 8250u got 7,649 Points
So the ARM chip got a bit more or a bit less let´s say 7,300-7,900 (sadly there is no direct compare)
An AMD 3900X got 31,896 Points.
So AMD got around 400% more than ARM
By the Way the strongest Laptop CPU Intel Xeon E-2286M @ 2.40GHz with 18,203 still times 2-3 the ARM Chip

And that’s why many believe ARM will take many Years to fill the gap.
(long live the old rule Desktop > Laptop )

Still, its impressive how strong ARM CPU’s got in so little time.
But they can't compare to High-End Chips at the moment which many of us use in their Pc’s for there DAWs

(I know CPU Bench isn't all
8CX is an 8 Core CPU
i5 8250 is only 4 Cores
3900X is 12 Cores)

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php?t1=i5-8250U&b1=Find+CPU

 

@taskforce I think I consider a DAW something else than you then
I primarily record and mix/master audio recordings, barely use any virtual instruments - for about 28 tracks any dualcore i3, i5 or i7 is totally enough, having at least 6 cores is enough for moderate live orchestra mixing and broadcast, seriously;
virtual instruments are different thing, I'd still consider offloading them across few VEP servers more efficient, so again, then mixing main node could be relatively weak computer;
just because AMD sells 16 core cpu for price of two 8 core cpus doesn't make it a better deal, when audio processing depends on low latency which two computers can usually provide better than one...

(but I may be wrong, this is just how I see things)

 

I pressed like because we agree on most . Especially on the smart offloading of cpu tasks to VEP using more comps.
Where we differ, is imho you 're too optimistic 'bout the whole ARM thing. Where do i base my opinion? ARM haven't released a single desktop machine. Ever. And by the numbers they 're rolling out cpu products each year (as showed in my earlier post), it should be obvious they don't care much about the desktop either.
So yes, the guy was running a DAW but just audio tracks is not a 2019 daw definition, if only by textbook terms. Because since an already long time now, Wavelab, Premiere, Vegas and many others can do multitrack rec/mix and master, also support VST FX plugs and they are NOT even considered DAWs. You may use your DAW for just rec/mix of audio sources, np. But others use it as their whole studio in a box.
So when we 're talking DAW performance- 10 audio tracks with no FX whatsoever is a task even a 20 year old computer can handle easily.
Speaking of which, i dunno how you do your track count, my 19 yrs old Pentium4 ran 30-40 audio tracks with EQ and a couple of buss comps and a universal reverb send, using Seagate Cheetah SCSI 10000 rpm hdds.
Cheers

 

Where do you buy your things dude? It is 750$

 

You can never get the reliability of Intel and AMD on ARM. No one writes desktop apps for ARM!

 

it´s entry level price Europe, never said i´ll buy it for that price, dude

 

Intel Core i9-10980XE proves lacking compared to Intel's own products. Also bested by R9 3950X & Threadripper 2990WX.

If the Threadripper 3 is what we are all hoping for, Intel has a lot of explaining (spinning) to do.

 

My post about it somewhere else:
Ryzen 3800X for a DAW?

 

@metaller
Yep, it lacks behind 9980XE in many multi-threaded scenarios. It looks like the new vulnerability patches (ZombieLoad etc.), have taken yet another toll on Intel's cpu performance, with this one being the first of a series of lower performing chips.
The only people who will opt for these will be those needing a lot of ultra fast pci-e 3 storage or multiple graphics cards. 48 pci-e lanes is better for ws than the 20 of AMD, but AMD's AM4 Ryzen 3xxx cpus are considered consumer products not HEDT. A quick look at Intel's new price means, you can get a decent mobo+10core cpu with 48pci-e gen3 lanes for as little as ~800$.
Looking at how the cheapest TR3 with 72pci-e 4 lanes and 88 in total along with a decent mobo will set you back at around 1700-1800$, i realize that Intel has invented a new category all of sudden. This "poor man's HEDT" lol, sits just between AMD's high end, more modern, scalable TR3 offering and AMD's desktop platform. At least in terms of connectivity and pci-e lanes. Because the performance is nothing to get excited about.
Cheers

 

Last edited: Nov 25, 2019

Actually most DAWs if not all calculate one Track in one Thread.

 

Threadripper 3000 Launch Overview - AMD's Victory Lap

 

I was going to say something but the thread (I mean this topic lol) has already derailed far beyond the no-return line.
So don't mind me, just here for the show.

 

Indeed my friend, im just building my arm based ryzen killer daw comp.

 

Dope! Now the billion dollar question: can it load iZotope Ozone 9 in less than a second?

 

Well, besides extremist or too worked up positions there are a few interesting solid facts:

1. Intel is in trouble with high end desktop CPUs. It now seems a fact they failed making 10nm CPUs. They just dropped prices a lot. And not because of the black Friday. But they are not dead, nor they'll be anytime soon.

2. It seems even one-core performance of AMD's is on par with Intel's.

3. Probably of all the computer software, music production is the least benefited by higher number of cores
3.1. Because it's real-time. But renderings should f*ing fly with last AMD's
3.2. Because the other real-time software, like non-linear video editing and games are heavily GPU- assisted

4. ARM. I'm the first one excited about ARM making desktop CPUs. But it's a long road. Mac, Windows, no matter what. Not happening anytime soon. Middle run at best. It's a good thing a big player like Apple will switch to ARM. Not so a good thing PCs barely give them benefits nowadays compared to mobile stuff. Remember, I'm talking about high end CPUs. Mobiles will be the first, and there're already a few ones.

Also, a great deal of important software is optimized for Intel. It's not the same even if they also have SSE2, AVX, etcetera. The differences sometimes are negligible, other times quite big. Of course, not AMD fault.

 

Theoretically we should all be excited about ARM entering the desktop cpu market. But afaik they haven't and from what i read so far, it isn't in their roadmap either. And lemme be clear about this: Laptops are not desktops. ARM does dominate the mobile phone and tablet platform of course but i don't see them deviating from this course anytime soon. What Apple will do with ARM's designs is Apple's business alone, as outsiders we can only speculate. Apple has the resources to pull this off but imho not really according to their laptop or desktop example they have been following since they went with x86 cpus. They already have a strong cpu powering their phones, but i haven't seen them trying to port a more powerful version of their Arm based iPhone/iPad cpus to a laptop which would be the easiest thing to pull off, especially when the market is crowded with all these Chromecast laptops out there (which i kinda hate lol) .
So they will have to pull a really big one to produce a cpu core to match Intel's and AMD's high end desktop cpus.
The desktop users don't care much about power savings and that is arguably ARM's best quality. These are for companies who deploy tens or hundreds of client pcs and server clusters.
I don't think ARM will hit the desktop anytime soon if ever. Apple on the other hand is another story.
Still, even for Apple, the already existing cpu instruction set has to be supported and licensed from Intel/AMD or renewed with similarly equal (or even more advanced) instructions. The latter would mean re-writing the entire OS and compatible software code which may take years.
Having said all these, i do hope i'm wrong and they pull a hat trick, a new player in the pc cpu market will mean even more competition and even lower prices for us, not to mention wider choice options.
Cheers
PS: If i had to choose between ARM and VIA's own company named Zhaoxin it would be the latter since they already make x86 cpus. And yes i know VIA was the synonym of bad performance and faulty chipsets but they 're still there making x86 cpus (although they 're a fabless company but so is AMD) and distributing them in the Chinese market.
A strong investment and some added quality control could theoretically make them a global contender once again imho.

 

Last edited: Nov 26, 2019

I think you're missing the point where this all becomes BIG business - SOFTWARE and SERVICES,
let's briefly point some numbers of total market share (desktop/mobile) combined:
Android 40.55%
Windows 35.94%
iOS 17.71%
Mac OS 4.08%
Linux 0.87%
(rest being insignificant)

quickly summing those numbers, entire desktop share is inferior to mobile market and people apparently are spending money anyway, so from software developer point of view, why not put effort into potentially more profitable platform? in nowadays software-based world, there is no valid excuse to demand less money for mobile app than desktop software IF end user is happy with what they get for money they pay,

question isn't if ARM dominates desktop market, question is what platform developers will choose as their source of income,
just take a look at for ex. MS Office, Adobe CC, Dropbox etc.. they are desperately trying to avoid being stuck on one platform (leaving rest of the market to competition)

 

I never doubted Android's share. But you are shifting the issue here. Obviously communication is most important for people. This is why Android has this share. Smartphones are indeed a great mobile platform but they can't substitute workstation comp(s). At least not atm or in the near future. Each to their own is my opinion.
I do agree 100% with your last phrase though and this for me is the only reason you see Adobe and MS (and surely all else at some point) jumping on the mobile wagon. They see a new market and opportunity for profit and imho it's ok, they 're supposed to do so. But adapting to new platforms is one thing. Replacing the already established ones is another very different thing and a bit of a long shot.
Cheers mate.
PS: Including Android and iOS in the computing platforms is kinda annoying, at least to me. Yes they can do things. But wtf man, should i now consider my fridge a comp since it runs with an OS and is sort of programmable? hehehe....