Multi-cores really matters?

[tangerine]

I have a old computer with Core 2 Duo right now and it is crawling on its knees so it is time to buy a new computer.

Does it really matter with multi-core CPU:s? more cores is always better?

I only use Plug-ins (U-he Zebra 2, Kontakt 5, Omnisphere) and never record any audio at all, so does more cores matter in use?

When you play back all tracks then all cores work, but only one core can be used by a plug in synth at a time.

So what is your experience about this?

[filter303]

I would say that the more the merrier. Some synths can use multiple cores (diva, lush101..). The number of multithreaded synths are not great atm but I expect to see more of them in the future. I hope it's going to be a standard feature for instrument plugins.
I have a six core intel cpu and I am really happy with it. Next time I am going to upgrade my computer it's going to be when I can buy a 16 core intel desktop cpu. I suspect it's going to give me such a big smile that I need to go to surgery to get my damaged lips fixed.
There have not been much change in cpu clock speeds in the last years and if you want to do more, well.. more cores will be useful.
Music software is very ideal for making sure those cores see some use. To me more cores is always better as long as there is enough clock speed. I wouldn't want a processor that can't provide enough juice for synths that doesn't support multithreading.

[dune_rave]

The more core the better..
Maybe you will use bazille too and that's another multicore capable synth from uhe.

[hibidy]

The more cores, the more performance you get. The problem is that not all hosts are created equal. Same computer, specs, 5 different hosts give me VERY different performance. (yes, I said 5.....just roll with it )

So I've got an uber CPU (4770) and bitwig can bring it to it's knees quickly.

[Bajista]

Bitwig's nature makes it very heavy on the DSP. However, I feel Bitwig is amazing for multicore processing.

[hibidy]

Not sure I understand. It doesn't have spikey issues like studio one, but if you work around the spikey stuff, even studio one is better at handling mulitcore.

For me, it's like this (same computer specs)

1) reaper. I don't like using reaper, but I can throw WAY more at it w/o issues if needed
2) live. I have never run out of cpu even on my first gen i7.
2b) sonar. It's a bizarre host in cpu handling. It stresses the first core pretty hard but as you add more, it starts spreading things out to other cores
3) studio one. If it wasn't for the weird spikey thing, it would be fine. And when I don't use something that freaks out with it, I can add many instances w/o issues (example, adding a ton of slate VCC and VMR doesn't even break a sweat. It's kontakt, bias desktop, and a couple of others I can't remember)

Bitwig just runs out of room fast in certain situations. For example, a multi out drum part (let's say SSD) with instances of VMR will kill it. No other tracks or instruments, just kills it DEAD (and I have a 4770)

It's a crap-shoot.

[ntom]

A core 2 duo isn't going to get you far - the only heavy load softwares that utilize 2 cores or less typically are video games (due to most of the heavy processing done with the GPU rather than CPU) - however, even they are starting to require more cores.

Any core with 4 or more is just fine, but, keep in mind that Intel products work with Hyper Threads while AMD works in cores. Effectively, in lamens terms, a thread is more like a "simulated" core. Depending on what application it may take advantage of hyperthreading, it may not. Nearly all, modern, mainstream softwares do typically utilze HEAVILY on the hyper threads, but this isn't always the case.

ALSO; bare in mind that faster clock speeds doesn't always mean a faster core. Some Pentium cores you can find clocked up to 4 or 5Ghz, but they are still only dual cores.

What you can do with that Core 2 Duo is set it up to be a private server for VoIP services or an email server - or you can even change it into a router (which is cool)
I currently use my old WinXP Core 2 Duo laptop as a VoIP server, fun stuff, just takes a little time to learn how.

EDIT:
I want to debunk this myth going on in the thread too:
More cores ≠ More power for your DAW.
The programming of the DAW needs to know how to use each core, and certain cores are better at certain tasks (you can see this on Win8/Win7 by opening the task manager, going to the performance tab, selecting the CPU and right clicking the graph to view the "logical processes" graph). If the program you are running has NOT been programmed to utilize more than 4 cores while using a 6 core processor, the remaining 2 cores will sit idle.
This is ideal knowledge to have to when upgrading components if you are on a budget as 6 core Intel parts cost....pretty much an arm and a leg. AMD has 8 core CPUs for considerably less than an Intel 6 core, but AMD typically:

• Runs hotter
  Cost more energy to run
  Not well suited for content creation

On the other hand AMD, it's short comings aside, is usually worth the money for any budget build. But for proper high end builds, Haswell and 2011-3(aka: Haswell-E) CPUs by Intel are a far better choice. Also, bare in mind, once again, Intel uses hyperthreads, and I believe their 6 core CPU is 2 threads per core, effectively making it a 12 core CPU

[metamorphosis]

Correction:

the only heavy load softwares that utilize 2 cores or less typically are video games

Low-budget indie ones perhaps.

Any core with 4 or more is just fine, but, keep in mind that Intel products work with Hyper Threads while AMD works in cores.

Nope. Not all of them.

Effectively, in lamens

laymen.

terms, a thread is more like a "simulated" core.

correct.

Depending on what application it may take advantage of hyperthreading, it may not.

That has nothing to do with reality.

ALSO; bare

Bear.

in mind that faster clock speeds doesn't always mean a faster core. Some Pentium cores you can find clocked up to 4 or 5Ghz, but they are still only dual cores.

and faster at single-core tasks than lower-clocked multicores.

I want to debunk this myth going on in the thread too:

Please go on.

More cores ≠ More power for your DAW.

Nope.

The programming of the DAW needs to know how to use each core

Nope.

and certain cores are better at certain tasks

Double-nope.

If the program you are running has NOT been programmed to utilize more than 4 cores while using a 6 core processor, the remaining 2 cores will sit idle.

Correct but uncommon. OS and HDD access uses the others.

AMD typically:
Runs hotter

yes.

Cost more energy to run

Yes.

Not well suited for content creation

No, no no.

Haswell and 2011-3(aka: Haswell-E) CPUs by Intel are a far better choice. Also, bare in mind

Yes. Bear.

once again, Intel uses hyperthreads, and I believe their 6 core CPU is 2 threads per core, effectively making it a 12 core CPU

You really need to look up hyperthreading and benchmarks and understand it properly bud.

You don't appear to understand the subject very well and probably shouldn't be giving out advice. Having said that, Merry Christmas and god bless.
Thanks,
m@

[hibidy]

Ouch. Maybe one of the more hateful posts I've seen

[MFXxx]

Seasonal cheer to all the core people :•)

[robogone]

More cores = more registers, and the number of registers in combination with clock speed is what determines how fast data can pass through the processor(s).

[DevonB]

Ouch. Maybe one of the more hateful posts I've seen

Thats hateful? Maybe it could have been more polite, but it was full of misinformation that needed to be addressed. I think he did a pretty good job myself.

Devon

[hibidy]

Well, I'm no angel. I just thought it was pretty much swinging it around to show off.

[hibidy]

And wtf anyways? Does this thread really matter? Oh wait....."thread".........hmmmmmmmmm.

[VitaminD]

Skip raw core count and clock speed, look at floating point performance per core instead. You'll want a CPU that performs floating point operations better than just having a ton of cores. Now if you get both then great. But I'd rather have a Quad core processor that handles more Flops than an 8+ core processor that does not (AMD, I'm looking at you).

That said, even current Intel i3 processors are night/day difference in performance to your c2d processor. So you don't have much to concern yourself here... just get an Intel i5 or better imo.