View Full Version : Hyperdrive! Full speed ahead!
Nanto Warrior
03-31-2007, 07:04 AM
As many of you are fully aware, 64 bit processing is a highly relevant tool for the media composer. Growing up in a generation surrounded by technology, I know this all too well. My machine is powerful, ooh yes it is.....but it isnt INVINCIBLE. Upon my next purchase I'll be making damn sure that the processor running the whole gig WILL BE
Pentium Dual Core E6600 Vs. AMD Top end....
Which would you choose and why? Which top end spec processor will enable MORE VSTs to be used simultaneously? Im planning to go for Pentium's E6600-it'll cost me an arm and a leg, but I dont plan to buy another PC for at LEAST another 10 years afterwards....
Top end Pentium PCs also come in quad core variety. Better or worse? (They may operate differently) The sole objective here is to write to full potential having an infinate amount of MIDI Vsts running without slowing down or crashing! One day.....PCs may ACTUALLY be better than writing straight onto paper-I dont know, with technology advancing so rapidly it could happen....
Top end Pentium Vs. Top end AMD!! Which is better for this purpose?! Id greatly appreciate feedback!
Regards,
The Nanto Warrior.
nickysnd
03-31-2007, 08:35 AM
Top end Pentium Vs. Top end AMD!! Which is better for this purpose?! Id greatly appreciate feedback!
http://homepage.mac.com/jedimstr_/thelair/files/page0_blog_entry31_1.png
tmhuud
03-31-2007, 02:24 PM
Ah yes- couldnt say it better myself. But then a picture is worth a thousand gigabytes...
-Allan Leung
Assistant to Composer Terry Michael Huud
http://imdb.com/name/nm0404698/
http://www.music4themovies.com
Nanto Warrior
04-03-2007, 03:28 PM
There are cheaper and faster machines than that......
nickysnd
04-03-2007, 05:19 PM
There are cheaper and faster machines than that......
I agree with that, but cheaper and faster is not everything. I need to trust my machine. I am struggling with PCs for 12 years now, last year I got myself a Mac and the feeling is totally different, Mac is friendly and reliable, not only as hardware, but especially as OS. Right now I'm running a combination Mac-PC via midioverlan, which works fine, but I think I'll give up completely the PC-Windows world for a Mac Pro.
I agree with that, but cheaper and faster is not everything. I need to trust my machine. I am struggling with PCs for 12 years now, last year I got myself a Mac and the feeling is totally different, Mac is friendly and reliable, not only as hardware, but especially as OS. Right now I'm running a combination Mac-PC via midioverlan, which works fine, but I think I'll give up completely the PC-Windows world for a Mac Pro.
I agree with you nickysnd.
I have both Mac and PC as well and let me tell you that Mac's are just brilliant to work with. If you are fairly new user (like me) then you need just short time to get use to it. I don’t think to go back to PC unless I want to play games. I am not saying what is better then the other; but I am saying that it is so brilliant to work with Mac’s. The speed is there as well.
:D
Musiguy
04-06-2007, 07:25 PM
As many of you are fully aware, 64 bit processing is a highly relevant tool for the media composer. Growing up in a generation surrounded by technology, I know this all too well. My machine is powerful, ooh yes it is.....but it isnt INVINCIBLE. Upon my next purchase I'll be making damn sure that the processor running the whole gig WILL BE
Pentium Dual Core E6600 Vs. AMD Top end....
Which would you choose and why? Which top end spec processor will enable MORE VSTs to be used simultaneously? Im planning to go for Pentium's E6600-it'll cost me an arm and a leg, but I dont plan to buy another PC for at LEAST another 10 years afterwards....
Top end Pentium PCs also come in quad core variety. Better or worse? (They may operate differently) The sole objective here is to write to full potential having an infinate amount of MIDI Vsts running without slowing down or crashing! One day.....PCs may ACTUALLY be better than writing straight onto paper-I dont know, with technology advancing so rapidly it could happen....
Top end Pentium Vs. Top end AMD!! Which is better for this purpose?! Id greatly appreciate feedback!
Regards,
The Nanto Warrior.
64 bit all the way!
Windows Vista 64 bit Ultimate edition is extremely stable with more (and better) drivers being created everyday. Also, the Pentium Core 2 Duo E6600 is amazingly fast. My DAW is 64 bit and works great with Vista. The draw back is the plug-ins currently available on the market today – I’m waiting until PLAY comes out before I buy anything else. Like I read in a similar post – get the dual core instead of the quad, and use that extra $$ to buy more RAM.
And actually, many are composing straight from the sequencer and bypassing paper altogether. It already has happened…
Nathan Allen Pinard
04-06-2007, 08:47 PM
I don’t think to go back to PC unless I want to play games.
That's the beauty of a Mac Pro. It runs windows natively, you can play whatever PC game you want. I installed Windows Vista natively and can play any of my games just fine.
It's not all about the processors. However, first of all I dont' care what any PC developer says. Macs are fast, way faster than PCs. A 3ghz PC doesn't touch a mac imo.
Macs are first in the list for most digital audio applications for sure. Macs are secure, never get viruses, never get blue screens of death constantly.
Macs are more, but not much more. They are slowly lowering in price compared to newer PC models.
Nanto Warrior
04-07-2007, 01:46 PM
Are you sure about that Nathan? Macs being much faster than PCs? They're really on the same level now, with dual core processing enabling greater speed with PCs. If you had 7 million dollars and were forced to choose either the best PC in the world or a top end mac, how much of a difference in speed would getting that mac be, hmm? Id gladly switch over-but I', hungry only for power (maximization in speed, RAM, EVERYTHING) and so far, the best option is a PC.
NB: I AM NOT ANTI-MAC/PRO PC-I aim only for extreme performance!!!
Musiguy
04-07-2007, 03:45 PM
That's the beauty of a Mac Pro. It runs windows natively, you can play whatever PC game you want. I installed Windows Vista natively and can play any of my games just fine.
It's not all about the processors. However, first of all I dont' care what any PC developer says. Macs are fast, way faster than PCs. A 3ghz PC doesn't touch a mac imo.
Macs are first in the list for most digital audio applications for sure. Macs are secure, never get viruses, never get blue screens of death constantly.
Macs are more, but not much more. They are slowly lowering in price compared to newer PC models.
Actually, now that all Mac processors are Intel based, a 3 GHz Xeon vs. a 2.93GHz Core 2 Duo is similar in performance regardless of the OS installed.
As far as price goes, a $4000 Mac pro (monitor not included – so add an additional $599) is a bit steep, compared to a similarly equipped Dell (with a higher end graphics card and 20” Flat panel Wide screen included) for $3,500.
Also, as far as viruses are concerned, just do a Google search for Mac viruses… enough said on that.
In the end it all boils down to how comfortable you feel with the OS you are using. My Vista PC hasn’t ever crashed, so operator error is definitely a big factor for a lot of users. During music creation, I’ve yet to experience any problems. And also with Vista, the “Blue Screen Of Death” is a thing of the past because all the drivers for the 64 bit version must be digitally signed.
Also your DAW will determine your OS platform choice. I love Sonar 6.2 - Its rock solid - I leave it running for weeks at a time as I work on various projects.
Edit: Actually I misquoted on the price - the $3,500 Dell Box has a Quad Core processor. So a similar Mac Pro Quad system is $4,696 (again without the monitor).
That's the beauty of a Mac Pro. It runs windows natively, you can play whatever PC game you want. I installed Windows Vista natively and can play any of my games just fine.
It's not all about the processors. However, first of all I dont' care what any PC developer says. Macs are fast, way faster than PCs. A 3ghz PC doesn't touch a mac imo.
Macs are first in the list for most digital audio applications for sure. Macs are secure, never get viruses, never get blue screens of death constantly.
Macs are more, but not much more. They are slowly lowering in price compared to newer PC models.
That is the old MAC way of dissing PC's. And it is really untrue.
My 2.2 dual AMD was much faster than My G5 2.7 Dual.
Considering MAC and PC are running the same chips, this whole comment is completely bias'ed and untrue.
It really now comes down the the effiency of the OS and the application programming.
LEX
Musiguy
04-08-2007, 12:09 PM
Amen to that...
satchriani
04-08-2007, 09:24 PM
I have to say (and I'm not saying this because I'm anti-mac...I actually do like it quite a bit).....
We just switched our computers at work to new Mac Pros with 4 gigs of ram. Whatever the top end processor choice is, we have em. (Dual core? Quad core?) We're running them for video production (Final Cut Pro, Photoshop, etc). Now, since FCP is only a Mac application, it's hard to compare speed to a Windows box. BUT, since we do use Photoshop, and After Effects, I had to put it to the test...and the speed winner was...
The PC.
I ran identical renders (batch scripts) in Photoshop, and a video render in After Effects, and they both finished faster on the PC. The PC has 3ghz P4 with 2 gigs of ram. The PC's cost around $800 a piece, and the Mac, probably close to $3500-$4000. To justify spending that much more money for what I noticed wasn't much of a gain, if at all....is just not worth it to me. Both my PC's have motherboards that can accept faster processors when they become available. How much will it cost me to upgrade? $150 maybe?
I've had the Mac crash on me 3 times already using FCP/Motion. It's not crash proof.
I can do all the same things on my PC, for much less. Windows XP is VERY stable, and I've never (yes NEVER) had a BSOD. I run Cubase/Nuendo with all sorts of plugins, and never has it crashed on me. I've also never had a virus (knock on wood).
If you're an educated Windows user, you will have NO problems. Again, I just can't spend $3500 on a computer that I can't upgrade when new technology comes out.
tmhuud
04-08-2007, 11:24 PM
Your saying you ran a speed test using photoshop? Photoshop still runs in ROSETTA on Mac pros. Of course its SLOW. In a few months from now when Photshop Beta for MAc Pro Intel is perfected it will SMOKE the PC. I am surprised that it even came CLOSE to your PC under Rosetta... Rosetta is a real hog and slows EVERYTHING down.
And FWIW an "A" list composer stopped by our studio today and said that many of his PC music software programs running on his top end PC run FASTER on his MAC pro utilizing Parallels software. So really when it comes to speed it is sometimes down to the individual and what he's got to compare with...
(And no - we are not mac worshippers here - we have several MAc Pros and several PCs) The truth be told is in a quote I've seen "PC's and Macs - together - the ONLY way to go". And honestly that certainly has been the case for us.
-Allan Leung
Assistant to Composer Tery Michael Huud
www.Music4TheMovies.com
satchriani
04-08-2007, 11:59 PM
Your saying you ran a speed test using photoshop? Photoshop still runs in ROSETTA on Mac pros. Of course its SLOW. In a few months from now when Photshop Beta for MAc Pro Intel is perfected it will SMOKE the PC. I am surprised that it even came CLOSE to your PC under Rosetta... Rosetta is a real hog and slows EVERYTHING down.
And FWIW an "A" list composer stopped by our studio today and said that many of his PC music software programs running on his top end PC run FASTER on his MAC pro utilizing Parallels software. So really when it comes to speed it is sometimes down to the individual and what he's got to compare with...
(And no - we are not mac worshippers here - we have several MAc Pros and several PCs) The truth be told is in a quote I've seen "PC's and Macs - together - the ONLY way to go". And honestly that certainly has been the case for us.
-Allan Leung
Assistant to Composer Tery Michael Huud
www.Music4TheMovies.com
Good to know about Photoshop. Honestly, there had to be something wrong that the software ran faster on the XP box. Hopefully they upgrade when it comes out! Same with Final Cut Extreme (or whatever it will be called).
Nanto Warrior
04-09-2007, 08:17 AM
Ok guys, lets not go off the main focus here-we're all musicians and it would only be productive to make such comparisons in relation to speed in music software applications!
Furthermore, I recently went to a computer fair and had the choice of selecting a Pentium duo E6600 or a top end AMD. Now. AMD have been the better option in the past, and my favour has swayed towards their direction as I continuosly hear stories of Pentium processors not actually performing at the specified rate on the product! (A reliable source has told me that even my P4 3.2 actually runs at about 2.5GHz) Even though Pentium currently holds the higher speed in the market, Im still inclined to opt for an AMD (AMD's also automatically overclock speeed!
What do you guys think? (Stick to within context of music!)
Ok guys, lets not go off the main focus here-we're all musicians and it would only be productive to make such comparisons in relation to speed in music software applications!
Furthermore, I recently went to a computer fair and had the choice of selecting a Pentium duo E6600 or a top end AMD. Now. AMD have been the better option in the past, and my favour has swayed towards their direction as I continuosly hear stories of Pentium processors not actually performing at the specified rate on the product! (A reliable source has told me that even my P4 3.2 actually runs at about 2.5GHz) Even though Pentium currently holds the higher speed in the market, Im still inclined to opt for an AMD (AMD's also automatically overclock speeed!
What do you guys think? (Stick to within context of music!)
I don't know who your source is, but he is completely wrong.
Download this:
http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php
And see for yourself.
Maybe he was talking about laptops, as with a laptop, many run at a lower CPU speed to save battery power.
The Intel CoreDou chips are outperforming the AMD's currently. AMD is working on their new line of Chips, so they might be better or equal.
AMD's don't automatically over clock. I think what you are trying to say is that they are easily overclocked. But so is the Intels.
Before you jump into overclocking it isn't all that great if you can't get everything working together.
Mobo's vary, certain chip speeds don't like certain multipliers, voltage issues ect.
LEX
Nanto Warrior
04-09-2007, 11:03 AM
I do hope so LEX! I want to invest in a new computer that keeps me going for decades!
With your currently amazing setup, do you think you'll be continuing in the technology rat race? As soon as I can get a powerhouse that allows me to write with the East West Symphonic orchestra in the most literal sense, my search will be over. ALl that will be needed afterwards are HDs to store the Millions......AND MILLIONS of Vst libraries on the computer! (Every instrument, every section playing back simultaneously)
Moreover, how do I become a platrinum/silver/gold/turqoise/green/pink member? Are there any advantages to this?
Cheers.
I do hope so LEX! I want to invest in a new computer that keeps me going for decades!
With your currently amazing setup, do you think you'll be continuing in the technology rat race? As soon as I can get a powerhouse that allows me to write with the East West Symphonic orchestra in the most literal sense, my search will be over. ALl that will be needed afterwards are HDs to store the Millions......AND MILLIONS of Vst libraries on the computer! (Every instrument, every section playing back simultaneously)
Moreover, how do I become a platrinum/silver/gold/turqoise/green/pink member? Are there any advantages to this?
Cheers.
Well even in my setup because of how I run things I run into snags.
Problem is, the more you have the more complex it gets and the more room for error.
So sometimes you can find your self behind a rack trying to figure out why your Eventide isn't working.
Then you realize after a while, you have the wrong cables plugged in. Derp!
Continuing in the tech race? For me, yes! My next host will be a Dual Quad.
Most likely PC, but I was waiting on the MAC Dual's that are now here.
IF I go with a MAC it will be because I dumped Nuendo and went to Logic, but that really may not happen.
What you need in terms of processing depends alot on how you use it. Having a million libraries is one thing, but playing a million at the same time is completely different.
As I would have it, I could probably bring the Dual Quad to it knees pretty fast.
As I use alot of different plugins, and multiple Altiverbs, video, audio ect and ultra low latency.
But that is why I have the slaves.
LEX
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.