Hardware Config for Cubase SX/Emulator X Studio PC

[pasada]

Hi All,

I'm putting together a new PC DAW and would love to hear feedback on this configuration:

Chassis: Antec Overture Piano Black Quiet Media Case
Processor: Intel P4 3E Ghz, 800 MHz FSB, 1Mb Cache
Motherboard: ASUS P4C800E-DLX Intel 875P, 800MHz FSB, Dual DDR400
RAM: PC3200 DDR400 512MBx2 CAS2.5 (OCZ4001024PDC-K)
Hard Drives: (x2) Hitachi Deskstar 7K250 SATA 80GB 8MB Cache 7200RPM
Video Card: Matrox Millenium G550 Dual-head 4x AGP 32Mb DDR SDRAM
CD/DVD Reader: LG 16X DVD-ROM Black
CD/DVD Writer: Plextor PX-712A 12X DVD+R/W, 8X DVD-W, 48X CDRW Black
Sound Card/Sampler: Emu Emulator X Studio
Sequencer: Cubase SX 2.2

What do you think? Any gotchas in there?

Cheers,
pasada

[Durk]

I don't have really comments. Anyway, I see that the Pentium 4 you've chosen is the one based on the Prescott-core. This version consumes a lot more and performs slightly less than its predecessor, the Northwood-core, also known as Pentium 4C. If you really want to get a Pentium 4, try to get the Pentium 4C.

As always I'm wondering why you've chosen an Intel processor. So, wanna share it with us?

In this it might be interesting to share my system specification, because I'm running Cubase SX 2 as well.

AMD Athlon 64 3000+ running at 2450 MHz
MSI K8N Neo FSR (nForce3 250Gb-based)
TwinMOS 1 GB PC3200 dual channel kit
E-MU 1212M

It runs flawlessly and is bloody fast. Aside that, the processor keeps its head cool, even overclocked!

Anyway, I still can't recommend VIA chipsets. I thought they were quite good on the Athlon 64 platform... but then I saw a guy on KVR (HoTRocK) with an Athlon 64/VIA chipset combination who had regularly crashed in SX2. I think it must be the chipset (or in combination with his audio card), because that's the only major difference with my system.

[pasada]

AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.

Thanks for the feedback, Durk. Regarding the P4C vs P4E issue, check out this comparison for a much nicer summary than I could provide here: http://www.intelforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=2778 (http://www.intelforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=2778)

As to the Intel vs AMD debate, that's a personal philosophy issue. I'm an IT manager in my day job and have a network admin and programming background. I am, therefore, biased towards using technology that has the largest demonstrated base of stable and proven overall up-time instances. (note the carefully selected wording )

From the programming perspective, most code is written for the most popular current reference in that market. In the audio world, that would most likely be the P4 right now. From a hardware selection and operations perspective, it falls to whatever has the largest and most heavily QAed installed base. That would most likely be the P4 again in this market. Let's also not forget the personal knowledge and background issue: I wouldn't know an AMD processor if it bit me on the ass and don't have enough cycles left in the ol' grey space to take on a new learning curve at present.

I'm glad that you've got a fast and stable Athlon environment running, and I'm sure there are many others. It's prompted me enough to at least do some research into AMD-based alternatives.

Cheers,
pasada

[DevonB]

All looks good over here to me.

Devon

[Durk]

Fair enough! I wasn't trying to start a flame war. Actually, we have a different thread dedicated to that.. I'm just a curious guy...

Thanks for the feedback, Durk. Regarding the P4C vs P4E issue, check out this comparison for a much nicer summary than I could provide here: http://www.intelforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=2778

Oh that's a nice link! I like this link as well.

I think I still would go for the P4C.

No further comments! I think you'll like the E-MU stuff.