I'd like to hear your opinions about which one is more preferable for audio production PC and why.
The i7-3820 has 4 cores vs. the FX-8350 has 8. i7-3820 has 10MB of cache vs. the FX-8350 has 8MB.
Thanks in advance,
INTEL Core i7-3820 3.60GHz vs. AMD FX-8350 4.00GHz
-
- KVRian
- 1147 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
-
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
I have 2 x Win PCs for testing. No over-clocking. Both running Intel 520 series SSD. CPUs are:
Intel Xeon E5 Hexacore - 3.20 GHZ
AMD FX 6100 Black Edition Hexacore - 3.10 GHZ
The Intel system makes the AMD look like a toy. Rough benchmarking of audio plugins, the Intel is about 50% faster based on the Cubase CPU metre readings. I realise the clock speed of the AMD systems doesn't match up with the Intel CPUs but I don't think the extra 800 MHz of the AMD you mentioned will help it catch up.
Peace,
Andy.
Intel Xeon E5 Hexacore - 3.20 GHZ
AMD FX 6100 Black Edition Hexacore - 3.10 GHZ
The Intel system makes the AMD look like a toy. Rough benchmarking of audio plugins, the Intel is about 50% faster based on the Cubase CPU metre readings. I realise the clock speed of the AMD systems doesn't match up with the Intel CPUs but I don't think the extra 800 MHz of the AMD you mentioned will help it catch up.
Peace,
Andy.
... space is the place ...
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1147 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
Interesting. Thanks. And what about the 4 cores vs. 8 cores?
Is this the X5660 from intel?
And of course another thing to look at is the price point.
Hungarian street prices with approx USD conversion.
i7-3820 : ~317 USD
fx-8350 : ~214 USD
x5660 : ~1574 USD
Is this the X5660 from intel?
And of course another thing to look at is the price point.
Hungarian street prices with approx USD conversion.
i7-3820 : ~317 USD
fx-8350 : ~214 USD
x5660 : ~1574 USD
-
- KVRAF
- 3511 posts since 27 Dec, 2002 from North East England
Handy little site here which takes a meta-analysis of any chips you throw at it: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-3 ... MD-FX-8350
To be taken with a pinch of salt, obviously.
For what it's worth, I skipped over the i7 entirely and went for an unlocked, Ivy Bridge i5 overclocked to 4.5GHz. Single thread performance is more important to me than Hyperthreading (I use a lot of old, cranky software), and the money I saved went toward an SSD drive. I'm also making music on a general purpose computer, not a 'DAW', so the overclock gets me better performance in most applications over a stock i7.
The only thing you're really going to notice by going with the i7 over the i5 is Hyperthreading, so make sure the software you regularly use supports it.
To be taken with a pinch of salt, obviously.
For what it's worth, I skipped over the i7 entirely and went for an unlocked, Ivy Bridge i5 overclocked to 4.5GHz. Single thread performance is more important to me than Hyperthreading (I use a lot of old, cranky software), and the money I saved went toward an SSD drive. I'm also making music on a general purpose computer, not a 'DAW', so the overclock gets me better performance in most applications over a stock i7.
The only thing you're really going to notice by going with the i7 over the i5 is Hyperthreading, so make sure the software you regularly use supports it.
Last edited by cron on Sat Mar 23, 2013 4:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
The Intel CPU I have is the E5-1650.
More cores is going to allow larger, more CPU intensive projects because the load will be further spread across the cores. Depends on which host you are using, of course, but I think all of the major hosts have multi-core support now.
For number of voices from a single instance of synth - which will normally run on a single core - the clock speed is important. DIVA can multi-thread which certainly helps, but most synths don't have that option.
Yes the Xeon processors are a lot more expensive. I can't comment on the regular i7 as no experience with that, but I think performance should be comparable.
Peace,
Andy.
More cores is going to allow larger, more CPU intensive projects because the load will be further spread across the cores. Depends on which host you are using, of course, but I think all of the major hosts have multi-core support now.
For number of voices from a single instance of synth - which will normally run on a single core - the clock speed is important. DIVA can multi-thread which certainly helps, but most synths don't have that option.
Yes the Xeon processors are a lot more expensive. I can't comment on the regular i7 as no experience with that, but I think performance should be comparable.
Peace,
Andy.
... space is the place ...
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1147 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
Thanks.
DAW: Studio One v2, AudioMulch, Bidule
Yes, DIVA is certanly a question (thats why I cross-posted this to u-he forum), but also D16 LuSH (which can only use single core ATM) and a lot of others...
Currently I have AMD Athlon X2 6000+ 3GHz which is quite nice but since it's getting old (>4yrs) it has its problems whith those synths mentioned above...
Intel Xeon E5-1650 : ~819 USD
There is also the E5-1620 from intel with 4 cores with a street price of ~412 USD.
DAW: Studio One v2, AudioMulch, Bidule
Yes, DIVA is certanly a question (thats why I cross-posted this to u-he forum), but also D16 LuSH (which can only use single core ATM) and a lot of others...
Currently I have AMD Athlon X2 6000+ 3GHz which is quite nice but since it's getting old (>4yrs) it has its problems whith those synths mentioned above...
Intel Xeon E5-1650 : ~819 USD
There is also the E5-1620 from intel with 4 cores with a street price of ~412 USD.
-
- KVRAF
- 1959 posts since 4 Nov, 2004 from Manchester
The i7 3770k will eat anything AMD for breakfast currently, as far as audio performance goes at the moment, so the 3820 should have no issues at all.
It's less about cores and more about general chipset architecture at the moment and that shared cache on the AMD design doesn't seem to be doing it any favours, at least when it comes to audio testing.
It's less about cores and more about general chipset architecture at the moment and that shared cache on the AMD design doesn't seem to be doing it any favours, at least when it comes to audio testing.
Last edited by Kaine on Tue Mar 26, 2013 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- KVRian
- 1176 posts since 25 Dec, 2003 from Kentucky y'all
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1147 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
Interesting read. Thanks.
-
- KVRAF
- 3776 posts since 8 Dec, 2008 from Global Cowboy
eBow elBow will tell you that only a Mac will suffice
I use Xeon 1230 v2 and 1240 CPUs in my main 3 DAWs and they work great...
Powerful,quiet and relatively cheap...
They are so much better than the i7 960's that used to be in their place...
The Coolermaster Hyper 212+ had to work overtime to keep the i7 960's cool and it sounded like a bloody jet engine
The noise drove me nuts...
In comparison,the Xeons are like church mice
I use Xeon 1230 v2 and 1240 CPUs in my main 3 DAWs and they work great...
Powerful,quiet and relatively cheap...
They are so much better than the i7 960's that used to be in their place...
The Coolermaster Hyper 212+ had to work overtime to keep the i7 960's cool and it sounded like a bloody jet engine
The noise drove me nuts...
In comparison,the Xeons are like church mice
Last edited by digitalboytn on Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
No auto tune...
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1147 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
Yes, but since its also intel, its of no interest for me ... motorola rulez ... 
motorola rulez ... -
- KVRian
- 580 posts since 6 Jun, 2009
i7 960 is two CPU generations ago (three if you count Haswell)
The Xeons you're currently using don't run any cooler than current i7s of the same clock speed.
And Motorola *ruled*. Past tense. Then they got outrun, and now they are slow, and Motorola stopped making CPUs years ago.
The Xeons you're currently using don't run any cooler than current i7s of the same clock speed.
And Motorola *ruled*. Past tense. Then they got outrun, and now they are slow, and Motorola stopped making CPUs years ago.
-
- KVRAF
- 3511 posts since 27 Dec, 2002 from North East England
Just wanted to add that an overclocked system doesn't have to be noisy. I've got the Alpenföhn K2 Mount Doom cooler attached to my i5 at 4.5 GHz. Just about silent during everyday operation, raises to a gentle murmur when under load. Was a bugger to fit though...
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1147 posts since 6 Jul, 2009
Sure. Past tense. But they were good, at their time...