KVR Audio

Jim Roseberry · Post by **Jim Roseberry** » Sun Dec 22, 2019 1:59 pm

i9-9900k CPU Mark

Threadripper 3970x CPU Mark

dermage · Post by **dermage** » Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:43 pm

Jim Roseberry wrote: Sun Dec 22, 2019 1:59 pm i9-9900k CPU Mark

Threadripper 3970x CPU Mark

Synthetic benchmarks are a bit misleading sometimes. Are you sure that single core is on par with 9900k, I can't believe it actually.

Additionally one must be aware that audio DSP often uses SSE and or AVX processing which is, afaik not measured by some benchmarks. Eg Ryzen's first editions had bad AVX performance. Any more info what's measured here in detail?

Jim Roseberry · Post by **Jim Roseberry** » Sun Dec 22, 2019 5:24 pm

I'm well aware that general-purpose benchmarks aren't fully indicative of DAW performance.

Providing the figures... so folks can factor them into the whole.

Amelia70 · Post by **Amelia70** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 4:59 pm

I must admit I have done plenty of reflection since I started this topic. As a lifelong mac user, of course I "looked" at the new mac pro (and was mortified by the price), and then happened to come across a topic dedicated to the new mac pro at another audio forum called "Gear Slutz".
There is some member in their posting that the mac pro only being able to sustain barely 3GHZ under load in logic is a huge problem for DAW use and that right now they are basically overpriced lemons until the power limit has been removed or something like that, and it seems half the topic jumped on him/her to say they were crazy basically and that it's not an issue.
However, I finally realised there are some AAX instruments I can not play at 64 buffer on my mac pro, and on further investigation this seems because of poor "single core" performance. So I am understanding more of the cpu speed requirement now. I was going to join there but I think I will stick here where people who actually build these machines for a living are bothering to humble me with their time and help. Thank you.

That said, the review at andatech went well above 4 ghz on overclocking the 3970X. IF I was able to get the 3970X at a stable, non fluctuating 4.0 gigahertz on all 32 cores, wouldn't that give me a great overall "balanced" performance?

I was reading that someone has the 14 core intel processor overclocked to a stable 4.5 on all 14 cores, using only noctua air cooling. Surely 14 cores at 4.5 is better than 8 cores at 5? If even that is not the case then I will be the first to admit that although I am moving along to better understand the situation, I still don't fully get it.

The interesting part is that I have decided to stick with pro tools however on windows instead of mac os. It's the DAW I know and have loved since before it even had midi LOL and I know it backwards. Because my computer is very long in the tooth, I can justify paying a premium for pro tools and saving a lot of money on the new computer itself vs if I was to buy a new macintosh. The good news is that pro tools multithreads very well on windows and is not subject to any of the problems that Cubase is. I do realise it's still behind Reaper in performance but apparently it's one of the better performing DAWs on windows and second really only to Reaper, so that sounds great to me. Because I really appreciate what the developers of Reaper are doing and the price structure, I will buy a non commercial license of that to learn the program in my spare time and have a backup in case Avid are no more some day, and if I ever decide to use it for commercial work I will just upgrade to the commercial license. I am sure with time I can learn to love it.

I am sorry if any of my replies seemed ungrateful because on the contrary, I am very grateful for the help, and was unfortunately just a little frustrated at the time.

So my thoughts now are.. how about something of a compromise.. for example, the 10980XE at 4ghz on all 18 cores? That would provide me with both decent single core performance as well as excellent multi core, yes? I would rather deal with someone who I can buy a pre built system off of, already overclocked and turnkey.
I will no longer be using HDX cause of the noise, so my idea is to go to what is called native HD thunderbolt, so I would need a PC with thunderbolt compatibility. This will allow me to choose from a plethora of NON actively cooled but pro tools HD compatible interfaces and basically eliminate all the noise from the PRO tools interfaces & the HDX cards. Antelope seems to sell an all in one interface that is HD compatible that could carry all my inputs in one pass, and is passively cooled. This combined with a new quiet yet powerful computer, and the silence of the native HD interface, would be a huge step up from what we have dealt with the last 2 decades +.

stamp · Post by **stamp** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:40 pm

I don't want to add to your confusion. Just to let you know, if you need thunderbolt new x570 boards are allready on the market with thunderbolt.
You can spend less money going with the 3950x. 16 cores instead of 18 but faster clock speed and less heat to dissipate with only 105W tdp vs Intel's 165W.

Amelia70 · Post by **Amelia70** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:23 pm

stamp wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 5:40 pm I don't want to add to your confusion. Just to let you know, if you need thunderbolt new x570 boards are allready on the market with thunderbolt.
You can spend less money going with the 3950x. 16 cores instead of 18 but faster clock speed and less heat to dissipate with only 105W tdp vs Intel's 165W.

Thanks.

I don't think it works out cheaper as the thunderbolt X570 motherboard is over 1,000 dollars here vs a decent LGA 2066 board for $500. The 9960X is currently at sale prices, 16 cores with a 3.1 ghz base but apparently it's quite easy to overclock them all to 4ghz,, so I think 16 cores at 4ghz might be the sweet spot? Surely better than the 10 cores of ivy bridge 3GHZ i have now, which can only turbo on all cores to 3.3! (3.6 for one or two cores lol). The 9960x is only slightly more expensive than the 3950x here but the difference is much less than the difference between the motherboards, so believe it or not, intel 16 core is cheaper right now in my country. I think for the sake of just knowing that Avid are qualified to work on intel thunderbolt but not on AMD is enough to sway the decision as I do need proper Avid support and them not using an excuse when i have an issue.
They used to make a PCIE card for HD native but sadly it's only the thunderbolt now. Perhaps I could find one second hand and it would have greater board compatibility. HD native is 64 inputs maximum so I'll have to make do and re arrange some things, but it could be a real workable solution for me to replace the noisy HDX. I could get two of those orion HD interfaces with 32 analog in on each for example. No fans no noise and apparently they have DSP effects on board of their own, that you can use whilst working in Pro Tools. Antelope say there is a time align system to keep it all in sync although I'd need to study that more. The focus rite interfaces look fantastic but have noisy fans.

stamp · Post by **stamp** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:38 pm

I was sure there was an x570 board with thunderbolt for 500 dollars but don't remember which. Personally I'm against overclocking since it can bring instability, higher temps and shorter life of the component (I undervolt my cpu for less heat, go figure).
That's just my personal opinion of course.
Anyway, better go with something you know will work for you.

stamp · Post by **stamp** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Here it is:
https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570%20Creator/index.asp

Amelia70 · Post by **Amelia70** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:51 pm

stamp wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:38 pm I was sure there was an x570 board with thunderbolt for 500 dollars but don't remember which. Personally I'm against overclocking since it can bring instability, higher temps and shorter life of the component (I undervolt my cpu for less heat, go figure).
That's just my personal opinion of course.
Anyway, better go with something you know will work for you.

I am only talking about permanently putting the cpu at a static frequency of what the rated all core turbo is.. which is technically not really overclocking.. they are designed to work at that frequency with adequate cooling and power, which of course I will have. One thing I remember was with the Mac G5, apple allowed us to eliminate all throttling (the one and only time I remember having this option on a mac). Sure it made it hot and noisy but it stayed at one clock speed, 4 cores at 2.5ghz and at the time was an absolute beast and a marked improvement vs if I allowed cpu frequency fluctuation (which of course saves power and energy dollars). I was always taught that one static frequency is and always will be the best for DAW use as you always know your precise overhead and limits, as well as having reliable repeatable performance.

I truly appreciate your help and the motherboard link in your next post which I will check out right now. I have to ask Avid however, if they will provide support for an AMD thunderbolt solution, as it can't possibly be an option if they won't. I will update on that when I hear back from them, but being the holiday period I doubt it will be soon.

Amelia70 · Post by **Amelia70** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:54 pm

There you go, they only support Intel on windows so if I stick with pro tools I don't have the option.
http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/comp ... quirements
It doesn't mean AMD won't work, it just means they will use that as the reason for any problem I have if I contact support and say "your system is not supported for pro tools". Avid are very strict about all that and to a degree I do understand, as it allows them to retain some level of conformity on windows that is mostly automatic in between macs. They also only support Nvidia graphics cards on windows so I am glad I saw that!

Amelia70 · Post by **Amelia70** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 7:04 pm

stamp wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:41 pm Here it is:
https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X570%20Creator/index.asp

$900 here
https://computers.scorptec.com.au/computer/X570-Creator

stamp · Post by **stamp** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 8:50 pm

Amelia70 wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:54 pm There you go, they only support Intel on windows so if I stick with pro tools I don't have the option.
http://avid.force.com/pkb/articles/comp ... quirements
It doesn't mean AMD won't work, it just means they will use that as the reason for any problem I have if I contact support and say "your system is not supported for pro tools". Avid are very strict about all that and to a degree I do understand, as it allows them to retain some level of conformity on windows that is mostly automatic in between macs. They also only support Nvidia graphics cards on windows so I am glad I saw that!

Really? With the money they are asking it should be compatible with my fridge.

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 8:56 pm

"The interesting part is that I have decided to stick with pro tools". Probably wise. The grass is not always greener. Familiarity breeds contempt. I'm sure I could dig out a few more, but...

jonljacobi · Post by **jonljacobi** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 9:09 pm

"Are you sure that single core is on par with 9900k, I can't believe it actually." The general consensus from all the reviews I've seen seems to be "not quite on par, but close enough that it's no longer a real issue".

Amelia70 · Post by **Amelia70** » Mon Dec 23, 2019 9:35 pm

jonljacobi wrote: Mon Dec 23, 2019 9:09 pm "Are you sure that single core is on par with 9900k, I can't believe it actually." The general consensus from all the reviews I've seen seems to be "not quite on par, but close enough that it's no longer a real issue".

Is there any host sequencer on Windows that can effectively use 32 cores/64 logical cores?