Diva on Ryzen

[SOKRVT]

Would love to know the system specs and maybe more comparisons with a i7700k system build.

Mostly real world comparisons and not just benchmarks.

However, the one thing that kinda stops me from going Ryzen is the lack of thunderbolt 3 support with AMD boards.

[mcnoone]

Would love to know the system specs and maybe more comparisons with a i7700k system build.

Mostly real world comparisons and not just benchmarks.

However, the one thing that kinda stops me from going Ryzen is the lack of thunderbolt 3 support with AMD boards.

The i7-7700k is better.
It is more comparable to an i7-6900k, from the comparison I've read.
Another issue is the graphics card. It doesn't come with a built in one, and it looks as though one might need to buy one if used for gaming and graphics programs.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/amd-ryzen ... ing-page-2

What’s immediately clear from the single-core test is that neither the 6900K nor the 1800X is close to being the fastest. The 7700K runs away with that record, which is hardly surprising given it's clocked to a much higher 4.6GHz.

[goleat]

Repro-1 on Ryzen?

[SOKRVT]

Would love to know the system specs and maybe more comparisons with a i7700k system build.

Mostly real world comparisons and not just benchmarks.

However, the one thing that kinda stops me from going Ryzen is the lack of thunderbolt 3 support with AMD boards.

The i7-7700k is better.
It is more comparable to an i7-6900k, from the comparison I've read.
Another issue is the graphics card. It doesn't come with a built in one, and it looks as though one might need to buy one if used for gaming and graphics programs.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/amd-ryzen ... ing-page-2

What’s immediately clear from the single-core test is that neither the 6900K nor the 1800X is close to being the fastest. The 7700K runs away with that record, which is hardly surprising given it's clocked to a much higher 4.6GHz.

I honestly don't care about the on board graphics, that's not a factor to me.
CPU performance is.
Can you share some info on how and where is the 7700k better than the 8 core ryzen 1800x regarding audio performance?

Can you get real world examples?

[DPhil]

Well, this was 1 test from 1 company with 1 special plugin I wouldn't overreact because of that.

[blandopazzo]

Would love to know the system specs and maybe more comparisons with a i7700k system build.

Mostly real world comparisons and not just benchmarks.

However, the one thing that kinda stops me from going Ryzen is the lack of thunderbolt 3 support with AMD boards.

The i7-7700k is better.
It is more comparable to an i7-6900k, from the comparison I've read.
Another issue is the graphics card. It doesn't come with a built in one, and it looks as though one might need to buy one if used for gaming and graphics programs.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/amd-ryzen ... ing-page-2

What’s immediately clear from the single-core test is that neither the 6900K nor the 1800X is close to being the fastest. The 7700K runs away with that record, which is hardly surprising given it's clocked to a much higher 4.6GHz.

I honestly don't care about the on board graphics, that's not a factor to me.
CPU performance is.
Can you share some info on how and where is the 7700k better than the 8 core ryzen 1800x regarding audio performance?

Can you get real world examples?

it's a matter of multicore vs single core performance......i7 7700k single core performance is better than ryzen cos each i7 core have 20% more power of each ryzen....but the overall power of ryzen is better than the overall power of 7700k cos it's 8 core ......8 core at 80% vs 4 core at 100%....if i have 6 vst that use 6 core at 100% on ryzen the same project on a 7700k it probably crackle cos it lacks 2 core......if i have another chain that use 100% of a single core of 7700k the same chain on a ryzen it crackle cos one ryzen core power is 80% of a i7 core......the problem is that most of the audio application use a single core to process an audio chain (vst routed to a mix channel with plugin ecc) so i7 perform better for pure power but it lacks in multicore power......

sorry for bad english

[diaper@ky]

The reason I am stoked is I am running out of juice on an i7 4790k @ 4.4GHz.
What I see is better pre fetch and smart caching, as well as excellent IPS and DPC.
Below is my Project Window for DSP. Uses 18 x SHARCs like you see in UAD only many more.
It's 64 samples/@ 96k/ 1.2 msec. Duplexxed, it is fine, no problems with crackles ever on that beast.
But I am using a lean host. Bidule is in need of more Cores.
Not pictured is Omnisphere 2.1 and PLAY Instruments.
I can run 16 voices of Diva on the i7 no problem, but it MUST be Multicore, which I'd prefer not to use.
Ryzen is the CPU for me. 6 Cores with built in GFX.
By the time it comes around those CPUs will be tweaked even better.
Count me in.

host images
upload photos

[poonna]

I think it might has something to do with Ryzen's outstanding SSE performance that I read somewhere. I don't remember where I originally read about it, but here's some of the test results showing the SSE performance difference:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/ha ... iew-7.html

[EvilDragon]

I can run 16 voices of Diva on the i7 no problem, but it MUST be Multicore, which I'd prefer not to use.

Why not, if it gives you better performance? Kinda daft.

Ryzen is the CPU for me. 6 Cores with built in GFX.

Err... Ryzen does NOT have integrated graphics, at least not the currently released models.

[SOKRVT]

Would love to know the system specs and maybe more comparisons with a i7700k system build.

Mostly real world comparisons and not just benchmarks.

However, the one thing that kinda stops me from going Ryzen is the lack of thunderbolt 3 support with AMD boards.

The i7-7700k is better.
It is more comparable to an i7-6900k, from the comparison I've read.
Another issue is the graphics card. It doesn't come with a built in one, and it looks as though one might need to buy one if used for gaming and graphics programs.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/amd-ryzen ... ing-page-2

What’s immediately clear from the single-core test is that neither the 6900K nor the 1800X is close to being the fastest. The 7700K runs away with that record, which is hardly surprising given it's clocked to a much higher 4.6GHz.

I honestly don't care about the on board graphics, that's not a factor to me.
CPU performance is.
Can you share some info on how and where is the 7700k better than the 8 core ryzen 1800x regarding audio performance?

Can you get real world examples?

it's a matter of multicore vs single core performance......i7 7700k single core performance is better than ryzen cos each i7 core have 20% more power of each ryzen....but the overall power of ryzen is better than the overall power of 7700k cos it's 8 core ......8 core at 80% vs 4 core at 100%....if i have 6 vst that use 6 core at 100% on ryzen the same project on a 7700k it probably crackle cos it lacks 2 core......if i have another chain that use 100% of a single core of 7700k the same chain on a ryzen it crackle cos one ryzen core power is 80% of a i7 core......the problem is that most of the audio application use a single core to process an audio chain (vst routed to a mix channel with plugin ecc) so i7 perform better for pure power but it lacks in multicore power......

sorry for bad english

That's the thing i would love to see. Most of us are missing the point of these CPU's.
We never really use single core performance and that's about it.
Intel is faster than Ryzen, but in a big project with multiple vst's per channel x 15-20 channels, many sends, multiple instances of vsts such as diva or serum etc which cpu would benefit the user most?

This is what we need.

If someone can provide with legit results i'd be more than happy to support either brand.

[EvilDragon]

We use single core performance all the time, that's what most plugins will use by default (apart from the few that have multicore support). So, the better single core performance your CPU has, the more FX you can cram on one track, the later will Reaktor start crackling, etc. etc.

[diaper@ky]

Which is why I keep synths on 1 Core.
The only crackling I want to hear is from sizzling hot Tubes.

Zen has APUs in the works ED.
They can add to the Ryzen 1 CPUs and call them Ryzen 2.
They were bragging about that at CES.

Modular CPUs.....awesomeness.

[ulph]

Ryzen has worse single core performance, but 8 cores (16 threads), so most likely a setup with many vst instances or with multicore supported vst (like Diva*) would benefit.

A setup relying on single thread performance (i suspect a complex Reaktor patch? *) would not benefit from more threads.

I'd also hazard guessing which DAW matters as well to some degree when comparing many instances / tracks.

* i have not measured this and i am typing from bed on my phone, so take it with a pinch of salt

[Urs]

The interesting bit is that Diva works very well on just 1 core on this machine. I think maybe that may be related to SSE performance.

I saw benchmarks where Ryzen smokes Intels in SIMD performance, but I have no idea how legit those were.

[EvilDragon]

Ryzen for audio - from a DAW configuration maker:

http://www.scanproaudio.info/2017/03/02 ... for-audio/


Looks like it's not THAT great with 64 samples buffer compared to 7700. So, live guys like diaper@ky should stick with Intel