KVR Audio

fedexnman · Post by **fedexnman** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:46 pm

Wow PC cases don't have mounting for optical drives (dvdrw/CD/bluray) anymore lolz .. I guess it's obsolete ? I'm kind of on the fence about a case I was looking at an realized no DVD 5.25 Bay ? Crazy . Apparently no one uses dvd or cd or Blu-ray ?

e-crooner · Post by **e-crooner** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 8:54 pm

I still have a W10 DVD and an ancient Word DVD or CD.

pljones · Post by **pljones** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 9:30 pm

You can still get an external 5.25" SATA to USB3 (or eSATA if you must) housing. Most people stream everything direct to the telly - PC users are reverting to being a minority group again.

e-crooner · Post by **e-crooner** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 9:40 pm

And what about my floppy disks?

As long as there is no genocide, I don't mind belonging to that minority...

fedexnman · Post by **fedexnman** » Fri Nov 15, 2019 10:13 pm

I see you just get those usb-3.0 portable optical drives now . Lolz .

DJ Warmonger · Post by **DJ Warmonger** » Sat Nov 16, 2019 10:04 am

buzz1 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:33 pm
DJ Warmonger wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2019 7:48 am ...but not at 100% load. That's the nature of audio project - longest audio path is the bottleneck for the busiest core, while other cores have nothing left to do.
Fair point but nowadays doesn't that only happen if you have huge plug in overhead on a specific track? So nothing to do with track numbers as such.

Not only. It also happens if you have a long chains on send and master, which adds to overall buffer usage. The master chain is only processed by one core, no matter what kind of synths I use.

During mastering I only have a single chain of CPU-hungry plugins

Wow PC cases don't have mounting for optical drives (dvdrw/CD/bluray) anymore lolz

I even bought DVD drive only to install Windows from disk, but it turned out my humble MOBO shares SATA lines with M.2 disk and I was eventually unable to use all of them at once. So now I have only PCIe x4 M.2 drive for system / libraries and RAID10 for safe data storage.

v1o · Post by **v1o** » Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:24 pm

Is there a benchmark chart somewhere comparing low latency performance versus Intel in a DAW like Reaper or Cubase? I believe most DAWs are still optimised for Intel chips.

fedexnman · Post by **fedexnman** » Sat Nov 16, 2019 2:35 pm

Lolz Intel ? OK

sempondr · Post by **sempondr** » Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:02 pm

v1o wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:24 pm Is there a benchmark chart somewhere comparing...

http://www.scanproaudio.info/

agharta · Post by **agharta** » Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:09 pm

v1o wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:24 pm Is there a benchmark chart somewhere comparing low latency performance versus Intel in a DAW like Reaper or Cubase? I believe most DAWs are still optimised for Intel chips.

A number of review sites publish DAW benchmarks. Scan computers do also in their blog; they also sell PCs optimised for audio.
Intel's platforms generally were the best choice but Zen 2 is a turning point maybe.

v1o · Post by **v1o** » Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:15 pm

sempondr wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:02 pm
v1o wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:24 pm Is there a benchmark chart somewhere comparing...
http://www.scanproaudio.info/

Ok looks like Intel is still on top until they test 3950X and 3980X.

ozonepaul · Post by **ozonepaul** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 8:22 am

v1o wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:15 pm
sempondr wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:02 pm
v1o wrote: ↑Sat Nov 16, 2019 12:24 pm Is there a benchmark chart somewhere comparing...
http://www.scanproaudio.info/
Ok looks like Intel is still on top until they test 3950X and 3980X.

As far as raw performance yes, you are right, intel is still on the top but as soon as you start to factor in the price of the processor (+ motherboard compatibility/upgradability) AMD seems to seriously challenge the crown of intel. Looking at the scan test results:
1. The 2 intel chips (9960x and 9940x) clearly beating AMD's 3900x are pretty much 55-60% more expensive than the 3900x so they are not direct competitors;
2. The intel 9900x chip is a good 10% more expensive than the AMD 3900x and under performs it in pretty much every single test result (+ the 3900x has 2 more cores + it's mother boards are priced more attractively.)

I'm still on an intell i7 6800k computer but when it comes to my future build, I'm seriously considering these new AMD alternatives and I'm also eagerly waiting for the 3950X and the 3980X test results.

fedexnman · Post by **fedexnman** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:53 pm

@ozonepaul exactly everything you just said summed all up . Intel is kind of laughable with what they are charging. And what the test misses on is what amd processor vs what Intel processor are really challenging each other ex. the 3700x was to challenge the 9700k ...... And the 3900x the 9900k not the x or 9940x or 9960x. I haven't built my DAW yet I was thinking 9700k or 3600 or 3700x. I think I'm gonna go with the AMD 3700x still . Intel is laughable with there pricing.

Scotty · Post by **Scotty** » Sun Nov 17, 2019 1:57 pm

Regarding Ryzen , We really do need to see some dawbench scores with high memory frequencies and lower CAS to see if the low latency - CPU performance gap disappears as scanaudio speculated may happen. Then at that point we have to look at total cost including the better and obviously more expensive RAM.

cnt · Post by **cnt** » Mon Nov 18, 2019 1:38 am

Kaine wrote: ↑Thu Aug 01, 2019 3:54 pm Great watch, thanks.

Are you going to make any 3950x benchmarks, maybe even before the release date?

AMD Ryzen 3rd gen. ZEN 2 processors for audio PC