I'm buying a new system, dedicated to music. I'll be running all kinds of hardware but I'm getting back into VST instruments. I'll probably only be using high-powered ones tha eat lots of resources so please, can anyone compare the following specs for me (either through personal experience or otherwise).

I'm considering getting either one of these two systems:

Intel P4 2.4Ghz 800bus Hyperthreading with 1.0 GB DDR 333

AMD Athlon XP 2500+ 333bus with 1.5 GB DDR 400

The reason I'd get more memory in the AMD system is coz the chip I'd get is a little cheaper.
I understand that there are faster chips out there, by both companies, but I'm taking into account my budget here.

I'm guessing the P4 would perform better in Cubase SX 2, although the fact that there is less memory in it might mean it would perform a little less in instruments that use a lot of samples (or when using audio tracks from external instruments).

I could be wrong about that though. Would the extra 512MB DDR drastically improve performance in these areas or am I just better off sticking with Intel and relying on the raw power of the 'real' 2.4Ghz speed, fast bus and increased cache.

I guess the reason I'm asking this is because I'm not sure if Cubase SX 2 is optimized for AMD chips or not. I've been told that the Intel chips are ideal for use in recording applications.

Right now, for music, I'm using a P3-933 with half a gig of ram. It's pretty good but I think I'd like to have at least 1 gig and a half of memory in my new system.

Let me know what you think, I'm eager to get on this right away!

cathos wrote:

I guess the reason I'm asking this is because I'm not sure if Cubase SX 2 is optimized for AMD chips or not. I've been told that the Intel chips are ideal for use in recording applications.

Athlon XP chips are great for audio workstations, I would personally choose the Athlon XP sytem from the two systems you specify. You may even occasionally get denormal problems with Intel PIVs when using certain plugins. (do a search on the forum for more info)

Have a look a this link for "real-world" SX performance results http://www.fivetowers.moar.net/cubasetest_results.php?order=performanc e

I think that Steinberg have stated somewhere that the added features of SX2 will result in increased CPU usage, which is just more obvious with older processors (Older means pre-AthlonXP ).

One GB of RAM is plenty, but more is always nice, especially if you use many large sample sets.

I'd bump up the proc speed before I'd bump up the memory to 1.5 gigs. I have 1 gig, and haven't run out of memory yet, and I'm using Atmosphere and Trilogy too, which are memory intensive. Got a 2800+ for $40 more or so instead. I personally still prefer Intel's. Also, I'd try to comapre to others who use the same VSTi's and their load on Intel's vs AMD's, as different VSTi's do better or worse on different chips. Fivetowers is nice but considering there is no checks and bounds, I'm not entirely sure I trust the results. Start looking through there, and some seem a bit far fetched. You'll have to take it for what it's worth, and just go for it. Ultimatelly, you'll NEVER have enough CPU power, but that's what bouncing down is for anyway.

Devon

me presonally, xp anything vs. pent's

one word why :denormalization

I've got an 2400+ and love it to death.

Mighty_Hero wrote:

me presonally, xp anything vs. pent's one word why :denormalization

Which for the most part is a dead issue, if the VSTi programmer gives two shits. Not to mention, AMD's can have the issue, it's just not as prevalent.

Devon

what about delaying for a month or so (do the check) and get a box with new PIV EE (sort of xeon-like)? Read some tests at tom's hardware first if interested.

I really can't believe that we're actually having this "discussion" again.


7XL

go with an athlon no doubt.

get a 2500 barton chip.
these chips are like 80 bucks.
and can be overclocked to an athlon 3200 speed very easyly.
ive got mine runnin at 2.5 ghz equivelent to
an athlon xp 3800...which doesnt exist.
and it is rock stable. tested for 24 hours using
prime95.
http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm

more info on overclocking here

http://forum.abit-usa.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=37

http://forums.extremeoverclocking.com/forumdisplay.php?s=b8cef852bf13f 5508cf4f137068cc8ea&forumid=66

7XL wrote:

I really can't believe that we're actually having this "discussion" again. 7XL

Pfft, just wait, another mastering thread will pop up in less than 6 hours. Things come in cycles around here... like every 24 hour cycles.

Devon

I know.

Isn't it sad.

7XL wrote:

I know. Isn't it sad.

Nah, keeps my post counts up. This is one of the few places that I see that don't bitch if you didn't search the archives as much as I see other boards bitch though. It's cool. If I'm tired of answering the same question, I'll just ignore it or give some short, curt answer.

Devon

7XL wrote:

I know. Isn't it sad.

at least this discussion is civil. and informative, as I'm doing research on the path to upgrading myself.
and I just wrote this to keep pace with DevonBs' posting.

Athlon + High Clock speed. 2Ghz minimum nowadays.

[quote="bluedad"]

7XL wrote:

and I just wrote this to keep pace with DevonBs' posting.

Good luck.

Devon

Athlon = better FPU performance = more simultaneous plugs.

cathos wrote:

I'm buying a new system, dedicated to music. I'll be running all kinds of hardware but I'm getting back into VST instruments. I'll probably only be using high-powered ones tha eat lots of resources so please, can anyone compare the following specs for me (either through personal experience or otherwise). I'm considering getting either one of these two systems: Intel P4 2.4Ghz 800bus Hyperthreading with 1.0 GB DDR 333 AMD Athlon XP 2500+ 333bus with 1.5 GB DDR 400 The reason I'd get more memory in the AMD system is coz the chip I'd get is a little cheaper. I understand that there are faster chips out there, by both companies, but I'm taking into account my budget here. I'm guessing the P4 would perform better in Cubase SX 2, although the fact that there is less memory in it might mean it would perform a little less in instruments that use a lot of samples (or when using audio tracks from external instruments). I could be wrong about that though. Would the extra 512MB DDR drastically improve performance in these areas or am I just better off sticking with Intel and relying on the raw power of the 'real' 2.4Ghz speed, fast bus and increased cache. I guess the reason I'm asking this is because I'm not sure if Cubase SX 2 is optimized for AMD chips or not. I've been told that the Intel chips are ideal for use in recording applications. Right now, for music, I'm using a P3-933 with half a gig of ram. It's pretty good but I think I'd like to have at least 1 gig and a half of memory in my new system. Let me know what you think, I'm eager to get on this right away!

you've got a serious flaw there, ddr 333 for the P4...make sure you get ddr 400 if you get a P4 800fsb, so memory and cpu clock are synchronius, and of course, better overall performance. i'd still get an athlon though

Buy one of each and use FXTeleport.

If you can afford it,get a dual Optern system as Opteron prices are dropping(maybe for the FX-53)and floor the pedal to the floor,otherwise get the fastest Barton or T-Bred B you can get your hands on and put it on a board based on NForce 2 or Sis 746-48 chipset.Vrooom....Vroom..........

Info on AMD and Opteron price cuts http://theregister.com/content/3/33627.html Yummm!

Alan wrote:

If you can afford it,get a dual Optern system as Opteron prices are dropping(maybe for the FX-53)and floor the pedal to the floor,otherwise get the fastest Barton or T-Bred B you can get your hands on and put it on a board based on NForce 2 or Sis 746-48 chipset.Vrooom....Vroom..........

I want one of these systems with each CPU running at at least 3Ghz.

electro wrote:

The only current dual Opteron board is the Tyan Thunder KS8 http://www.tyan.com/products/html/thunderk8w.html (around $300.00)and 2 Operon 244's will cost $450 a piece on pricewatch http://www.pricewatch.com/menus/m3.htm

Alan wrote:

The only current dual Opteron board is the Tyan Thunder KS8

There are also a few more here (not all listed are released) http://www.amdboard.com/opteron_boards.html
scroll down and look for boards labeled "2P".