Which is the preferred metric to judge CPU audio performance?

Steinberg seem to be suggesting clock speed, while other benchmarks seem to show more cores equal better performance.




Reference:
http://www.steinberg.net/en/support/steinberg_support_daw.html
http://www.scanproaudio.info/2016/06/28/intel-broadwell-e-the-new-audio-system-cpu-of-choice/

 

Last edited: Nov 3, 2016

without knowing too much technical stuff, i have always been under the impression that more cores are more important. there are some old 2010ish 12 core xenons (24 cores with hyperthreading and a daw that supports 24 cores eg logic x) that can handle a monumental number of plugins.
except for really heavy individual threads of plugins (eg. a mega mastering chain) where low clock speed multi cores like these 12 core xenons may struggle, a single incredibly fast core will shine. this is kind of a unique situation so i would still vote for more cores!
now all the ppl who actually know what they are talking about, feel free to shoot me down!

 

Number of cores.
The amount of processing actually done during a clock cycle will vary from system to system but generally, a 2.4 Ghz quad-core will give you better performance than a 3.2 Ghz dual-core.
The type and age of CPU makes a drastic difference. Processors can handle a greater load and process more data in a smaller number of cycles nowadays.

 

you are blessed my friend.
Well, i own a bi cpu 16 cores 32 threads machine with 2.6 ghz clock speed and 128 gb of RAM running on a nvme SSD at 2gb per sec transfer speed. Not to brag, just to show there's no bottleneck.
I use Cubase 8.5 pro.
I Would NEVER make that choice again. I would take the single 4Ghz CPU anytime, anywhere.
Multi cores are totally useless in my configuration. I don't know for other DAWs but for cubase it's just money thrown away.

 

Last edited: Nov 1, 2016

Cubase handles multiple cores pretty well actually. It's the slow clock rate that's killing you.

Multiple cores are useful for crunching Multiple calculations at the same time (like finding factors). If there's a single calculation to be done, MULTIPLE CORES DONT HELP.

Clock rate is good for single calculations.

The point here is one isn't more important than the other. You need both for a reliably fast system. Period.

 

There have been some complaints of not so optimal cubase utilization of multi core systems.
But it also depends of your work style, what you use, how much etc...
And 2.6 ghz is pretty slow for todays standards.
I would suggest you buy a 4ghz 4-6 core pentium cpu and use the 16 core as your farm, that way you will benefit from clock speed and number of cores.

 

If its Cubase more cores not gona help you much ;) but Reaper and Sonar the more cores the better ;) just my 2 cents . Sonar An Cubase are my most used DAW's but Reaper smokes them both in multi core processing EDIT>>> this on a i7 5820k 3.3ghz 6 core 12 thread ,and a i7 4770k 3.5ghz 4 core 8 thread processors 32g ram on both

 

Last edited: Nov 1, 2016

Would any one consider jumping to an AMD if Zen really proves to be a beast of a cpu and affordable?
http://www.pcgamesn.com/amd/amd-zen-release-date-specs-prices-rumours

Early estimates suggest the Zen architecture will compete with - but probably won't perform faster than - Intel’s current Skylake range of processors when it comes to single-threaded performance. That leads me to believe AMD will continue to price their Zen FX chips lower than the core-comparable Intel parts.

With a HyperThreaded quad-core i7-6700K retailing for $350 (£315) I wouldn’t be surprised to see the eight-core, sixteen-thread AMD Zen FX chip around the same sort of price. Intel’s own HyperThreaded octo-core Broadwell-E chip is a $1,100 (£949) part by comparison. I’d also expect to see similar pricing between the Core i5-6600K and the quad-core, eight-thread variant of the AMD Summit Ridge range. At the moment that would mean a price of around $250 (£215).

 

My understanding is that in audio processing in a DAW, the last plugin depends on the plugin before it which depends on the plugin before it et. al. therefore tying the processing to one core because it works serially, not in parallel. Things may differ when you are working with several different tracks, but ultimately everything will come down a master buss at the end. That's why when I start talking upgrades to any of my knowledgeable IT friends, I can't really listen to the gamers who are doing processing of parallel things. Their benchmarks don't really apply to the audio production workflow. But there is limited to no resources out there that address music production PC's specifically that I've been able to find except to ask your peers out here in AudioSex land and other such forums.

 

What do you mean by farm?

 

Option 2.if you use VSL PRO or similar programs.

 

Hell yeah buddy ive got plans to get this badass! i do use Intel for music tasks but ive still got a few AMD builds i did years ago an i lovem ;) they run hotter than my intel, but ive put my AMD FX 8320 cheap ass up against my i7 4770k an it held its on NO B.S.

 

TDP is almost 2x as much with an AMD compared to your i7.Should be good in winter time though, haha.

 

Sonar has now plugin load balancing that spreads the power thru all cores evenly ;) so if you have a heavy load on the master witch is most case it dont matter it keeps it even across the board

 

Rubs hands together<<< an winters on the way

 

I would say clock speed.
When I try to use a single patch (or instance) of a synth plugin and then I use a very complex patch, my DAW even with the "multicore use" feature activated is just using 1 single core for that plugin, and many times I want to use some of these sounds but since the core that it is using is 100% in use it starts to struggle so I cant play those sounds

 

@Utada Hikaru, same experience here. Working on Sonar.
@Jaymz, any sittings in Platinum that you're aware of that would help core balancing?

 

yes sir ! its not on by default so go to Preferences,Audio,click on> playback and recording> you will see it under>> use multiprocessing engine>>>check the box Plug-in load balancing >>> then click apply/ok an restart Sonar also im sure you know this but make sure your computer power settings are set to High Performance you will get alot more out of your cores = less cpu usage on your meters in Sonar... yes some do not know this

 

Last edited: Nov 1, 2016

for single CPUs yes, for XEONS nope.

 

Not really. I still have my I7 at 2.4 ghz and it's better , sorry, MUCH better at handling the same projects with less RAM and a regular SSD