Yes I agree, I have more stable and strangely more performance with turbo boost off, and I have tested, the hyperthreading, with or without performance are the same, so I don't useboth, and my cpus work nicely and most of all, don't go hot. I have a HP Z600 with two Xeon X5670 at 2.93Ghz and I don't need more, but I don't know AMD cpu, at the moment I don't need this amount of power

 

Have been waiting for refurb system prices to come down to grab a similar system but, with AMD releases over the past year, I am leaning more towards a new Ryzen system at the moment. This could change if Intel releases something comparable all-round.

Sidenote... Although Puget Systems sells overclocked systems, they do not advise doing so for a professional workstation.
ZWorkstations recommends 8GB of memory per core for professional audio systems.

Overall recommendation is:
32GB normal work load
64GB extreme workload

 

Last edited: Nov 19, 2019

If that is true why do many c users experience a more stable asio meter and elimination of other problems like dropouts and can achieve bigger projects and a bigger plugin number with a disabled HT.

 

Sorry for saying that but Cubase seems to suck in this case.

I don't have a good system at the moment to test, but someone from this thread can easily run a DAW bench for comparing different DAWs. Unfortunately, not many people care or do benchmarks for comparing different DAWs.

Here is the somehow old benchmark from 2010 (on Intel i7 920 Quadcore/ 2.66 GHZ/ Intel X58 / 6 GB DDR3-PC10600)
http://dawbench.com/win7-v-osx-3.htm


If you go to the link that I sent you, you'll see the proof for non-efficient Cubase code backend
http://www.scanproaudio.info/2019/0...00x-dawbench-tested-3-is-it-the-magic-number/

 

Last edited: Nov 19, 2019

That is a turn around in AMDs cpus then, because i remember even about a year and a half ago that wasnt the case when putting a top AMD against a top intel cpu. What you describe here was always, well at least in the last 10 years, the case with AMD trying to catch up.
I have to say i have a sour taste in my mouth when there`s talk about AMD and the reaason is ive been using it since the duron times, trough athlon, the first 64 bit cpu, x2, trough all kinds of phenoms till i switched to intel and the jump in performance was so big i couldnt believe it.
Did you try disabling HT on the pentium? In my case and many others, i can get a lot more stable environment and a better cpu utilization.
How did you test them, number of plugins, actual projects?

 

Cubase could do a lot better i agree, but if anything sucks its S1 which is probably the worst daw in general in multi core usage.
These tests dont show much really its real life projects that usually expose the biggest flaws.

@metaller
What kind of projects do you usually run, number of tracks, plugins, libraries etc?

 

Last edited by a moderator: Nov 19, 2019

In this benchmark S1 is doing better than Neundo. However, these are old. Studio One codebase was changed drastically on 3.5.

If I had a good system I would have tested all of these.

 

I have extensively tested S1 3.5 against cubase 8.5 at that time, there was a huge difference.

 

This has turned into quite a thread!

Here is something I stumbled across while looking for something else entirely (gotta like those youtube algorithms). Should more directly answer your query:

Ryzen 9 3900X in Ableton Live - CPU Showdown With Intel i7 5820k

 

As i know AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3rd generation were used for "Terminator DarkFate" graphics

 

But he is using the mme/directx driver(at 8:27min), will be better to see some asio performance.

 

The results stand on their own. Abelton & Windows were able to more effectively process the work load with the 3900X.

Abelton is still going through growing pains when it comes to multi-core operation & varies by user/system case. One reason I gave up on Abelton. Another would be audio driver & plugin compatabilty issues.

 

Remember... CPU's are GPU's in the future.

 

The second important issue would be chipsets and motherboards. Can AMD offer the same stability, OCing and options as the best intel boards?
I always had problems with AMD chipsets and mobos in the long run. (past cpus not ryzen)
As we all know its the sum of all these components that have made intel the nr. 1 choice for pro studios.
Have gone trough the web today in comparison charts and tests and while i seriously applaud AMD i am still not 100% convinced.
Call me a party pooper idk, lol.
The other aspect would be the resale value of older components, AMD loses more value in resale compared to Intel.

 

Yes I understand well.

I have just 32Gb of ram far from recommendation, 12 core so normally I would have 96Gb of ram ?! This is very fat =)

I've just see what is the Ryzen, this is not a cpu, this is a sputnik for me

 

to be perfectly honest here, seeing all those X570 motherboards needing a FAN to cool down mobo itself...oh come on, we're not in 2004 anymore, just no, and definitely NO for silent audio workstation, there is no valid point to need such bad design mobo it needs own cooling fan in 2019/2020 !

 

same for me, I am to reduce the number of fans with each build.

 

Last edited: Nov 19, 2019

Ok first for the fan noise on x570. Gigabyte, Asus, MSI, AsRock have all released silent fan curve with their latest bios. If going for one of these boards pay attention where exactly is the chipset +fan placed physically on the mobo. After carefully inspecting the x570 Taichi for instance, you can see that if you are using a large graphics card you will block a part of the fan intake. Still, this shouldn't pose a problem if you have adequate airflow within your case. Low profile gpus will not have an impact on the chipset's airflow.
For the Hyperthreading part. On or Off. I believe the default on value is the optimum.
Let's take Steinberg for starters. Every Cubase Pro user is advised to upgrade to Cub Pro 10 minimum. Because (from Steinberg): "Cubase 10 is automatically adapting the amount of real-time threads to the system". All other versions prior to Cubase10 do not.
So, no reason to huff and puff mate @Von_Steyr . Upgrade your soft to Cub.10 or if you want to use a Cubase version prior to Pro10 with Windows 10 (any version is the same for this) you have to: Either downgrade to Win 8.1 or even 7, or limit your cores to maximum 7 with HT on to compensate for the MMCSS Win10 limit of 28 maximum usable threads. Going backwards in Os seems quite more sane if you want to use Cubase 9 than using less cores. Of course there is always the option to run a secondary DAW or VST host via Rewire x64 to split the load of the cpu.
Same goes for the rest of DAW users. Use the latest please. That is regardless if the cpu/chipset you are using is Intel or AMD. I will post more on this, once i get my mate down to instruct on how to process/edit (if possible since it's a registry value) the System Responsiveness value which is responsible for this limit and is located here:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Multimedia\SystemProfile
Cheers atm.
PS: I tried to edit this value but i couldn't change the processor affinity value. I must be smoking too many spliffs , something wrong i must be doing, sigh. If anyone knows how to do this lemme know.

 

Last edited: Nov 20, 2019