2 xeon CPU or 1 i7?
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1181 posts since 27 May, 2008
Playing all types of vst2-3 plugins from different companies. Which way should I go to keep things in check? Do I wait on pcie4 or just go pcie3? Not tons of tracks
-
- KVRian
- 1052 posts since 17 Nov, 2010 from UK
Specs on the Xeons and the i7 you are interested in?
Xeons are more expensive than non-Xeons - they support ECC ram, multi-cpu configurations and are designed to run 24x7. They are no more powerful than a non-Xeon version. Frankly, to me a Xeon is not worth the expense.
Xeons are more expensive than non-Xeons - they support ECC ram, multi-cpu configurations and are designed to run 24x7. They are no more powerful than a non-Xeon version. Frankly, to me a Xeon is not worth the expense.
A bit fried in the higher freqs
-
- KVRian
- 1104 posts since 31 Aug, 2004
the higher clock per core the better. number of cores is at second place. higher clock and 8 core is better than much lower clock and 16 coreacousticglue wrote:Playing all types of vst2-3 plugins from different companies. Which way should I go to keep things in check? Do I wait on pcie4 or just go pcie3? Not tons of tracks
-
- Banned
- 2238 posts since 19 Dec, 2014
can you go into a little detail as to why this is your preference ? thanks ... also keeping in mind i9 cpus ...BBFG# wrote:Have had i5, i7 and Xeon. After the Xeon experience, I don't think I could ever go back to the i series.
Faced with the choice and ability, Xeon, every time and hands down.
-
- KVRian
- 652 posts since 2 Mar, 2015 from UK
i9 or the AMD Threadripper is what you should be looking at if you have the budget.
-
- KVRAF
- 6244 posts since 25 May, 2002 from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH
-
- KVRAF
- 6244 posts since 25 May, 2002 from Bobo-dioulasso\BF__Geneva/CH
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1181 posts since 27 May, 2008
yeah sorry for posting here but the reason for it is there is argument about UAD and saving CPU and I have been using large array of plugins. Well freezing tracks is one option but I really just wanted to know what folks might consider for say 8 tracks and using at least 12-15 FX. Some FX don't seem to use nearly as much CPU and some are robbing from GPU now. Moving forward to purchase new machine in coming year I read i7 to be only one processor can't use two but money is an object and I figure the folks reading here would have lots of experience on this
-
- KVRist
- 104 posts since 27 Jun, 2012
Hi,
Are there any instruction extension differences between the Xeon and i series which would impact VST / DSP performance?
I am considering building / purchasing a Xeon system but was not sure of the pros and cons of it - if any.
Would those who have stable Xeon systems post their builds and if not custom the company and model number machines they bought?
Thanks to those who respond and to the OP.
Are there any instruction extension differences between the Xeon and i series which would impact VST / DSP performance?
I am considering building / purchasing a Xeon system but was not sure of the pros and cons of it - if any.
Would those who have stable Xeon systems post their builds and if not custom the company and model number machines they bought?
Thanks to those who respond and to the OP.
-
- KVRAF
- 3319 posts since 16 Jan, 2005 from Ottawa, Ontario
I was also looking into this. There is a bit of a problem; the cpu specs do not scale in linear fashion - meaning it's not strictly speaking going to behave like having twice the CPU. Here's why: http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2852078
In short; there's a bottlenecking effect where cpus addressing memory that is physically distant when they need to, takes time. This cannot be mitigated, so the overall loss in scaling is ,IIRC, something like 20% downward. So if you do buy a dual system, you need to spend that much more to make up for this difference in way more powerful processors. If money doesn't matter then go ahead.
In spite of that I'm still keen, for now maybe try a Threadripper or i9 as suggested.
In short; there's a bottlenecking effect where cpus addressing memory that is physically distant when they need to, takes time. This cannot be mitigated, so the overall loss in scaling is ,IIRC, something like 20% downward. So if you do buy a dual system, you need to spend that much more to make up for this difference in way more powerful processors. If money doesn't matter then go ahead.
In spite of that I'm still keen, for now maybe try a Threadripper or i9 as suggested.
-
- KVRist
- 121 posts since 31 Aug, 2015
Yeah. As i recall from animation school days the speed will be the same as I7. If the DAW is set up to use the cores you will see a difference. The only time i had seen the cores were during rendering of animation. Stability is what you should see. Altho math stress levels on a pc are earlier than on a mac. As in a mac would slow down to a crawl to figure it out where the Xeon would stress out and crash out on a render farm.
Times are different these days. I got an I7 laptop which is a clevo shell. Based on the no name brands after years of thinkpads... Definitely a huge upgrade. Not to mention i can go up to 64gb RAM. Only a 1070 gpu. The top blazes with the new m-pcie sdd.
As long as you're running samples and what you can on another sdd drive... Ive seen from cpu stress drop 50%... Last laptop was a 2007 lenovo w530.
Times are different these days. I got an I7 laptop which is a clevo shell. Based on the no name brands after years of thinkpads... Definitely a huge upgrade. Not to mention i can go up to 64gb RAM. Only a 1070 gpu. The top blazes with the new m-pcie sdd.
As long as you're running samples and what you can on another sdd drive... Ive seen from cpu stress drop 50%... Last laptop was a 2007 lenovo w530.
-
- KVRAF
- 1929 posts since 4 Nov, 2004 from Manchester
In complete agreement with Debutante's post. When you place chip against chip in the ranges the Xeon's cost more and clock slower and otherwise the underlying tech is largely the same with the extra QPI paths to allow the interlinking of more than 1 CPU and support for some more esoteric hardware like the ECC memory as already noted.
The boards cost more, as does that memory, so essentially your paying more for less and the performance hit from NUMA adds up too. I figured this out on the last generation and it cost something like £3500 in Xeons to match a £1800 I7 system performance levels at the time. Whilst I've not gone back and reviewed this recently, given the i9's launch since then and the price realignments in the more consumer range I'm not convinced much is going to have changed in this regard.
The boards cost more, as does that memory, so essentially your paying more for less and the performance hit from NUMA adds up too. I figured this out on the last generation and it cost something like £3500 in Xeons to match a £1800 I7 system performance levels at the time. Whilst I've not gone back and reviewed this recently, given the i9's launch since then and the price realignments in the more consumer range I'm not convinced much is going to have changed in this regard.
-
- KVRist
- 172 posts since 15 Apr, 2016 from Germany
Here's my experience on the matter with 1133pin Xeons:
https://shoestringxeon.wordpress.com/
Note the following
* Not long after this machine became a server for me and was replaced with an s5520sc board with 2 x5670 CPUs - ie. more server hardware closely imitating a ~2010 Mac Pro.
* The newer system is now running Sierra and continues to perform well - never have I hit the limits of the CPU from normal use - and I use the usual NI Komplete, Omnisphere2, AIR instruments, Ableton, T-Racks plugins et al.
* Consider the case size is likely to be bigger to fit a board that supports 2 CPUs.
* Consider power draw, and that the PSU needs the correct connections to support the server board in question.
* Don't skimp on cooling - don't expect to overclock either. In other words - you need some experience in building PCs.
* This setup continues to work for me and at the time and I got lucky to get some rather exotic hardware for a good price. Core i7 CPUs have come leaps and bounds even at the time I was building it - so unless you can get all the hardware for a stupid price - I can't say I recommend this route any longer- go the i7 route.
https://shoestringxeon.wordpress.com/
Note the following
* Not long after this machine became a server for me and was replaced with an s5520sc board with 2 x5670 CPUs - ie. more server hardware closely imitating a ~2010 Mac Pro.
* The newer system is now running Sierra and continues to perform well - never have I hit the limits of the CPU from normal use - and I use the usual NI Komplete, Omnisphere2, AIR instruments, Ableton, T-Racks plugins et al.
* Consider the case size is likely to be bigger to fit a board that supports 2 CPUs.
* Consider power draw, and that the PSU needs the correct connections to support the server board in question.
* Don't skimp on cooling - don't expect to overclock either. In other words - you need some experience in building PCs.
* This setup continues to work for me and at the time and I got lucky to get some rather exotic hardware for a good price. Core i7 CPUs have come leaps and bounds even at the time I was building it - so unless you can get all the hardware for a stupid price - I can't say I recommend this route any longer- go the i7 route.
