System Resources for EWQLSO Platinum

[Composer Guy]

Hey, I'm planning on buying the CCC and I'm curious as to what you guys consider an ideal set up (within reason) for running such large libraries.

I was planning to build a computer, 2.8ghz quadcore (intel i5 760), 12gb ram, and a 1tb harddrive. I realise this is more powerful than the recommended specs but I'd hate more than everything to have the computer struggling to play back the samples. Would this be enough to play back entire symphonies, etc.?

Also, would there be an advantage in Platinum Plus (which includes 24 bit and 16 bit samples) or should I just go with Platinum which lacks the 16 bit?

[Composer Guy]

Sorry to bump but I need a quick answer for the last question.

Will 16 bit really save a computer that much struggle, when compared to 24 bit? I realise it would on a lot of computers but on one which is as powerful as above, would it really make life easier?

[cyrod18]

My old PC was a Q6600 with 3GB of RAM running Windows XP 32-bit. I could run 30 tracks or so of EWQLSO Platinum Plus at 16-bit with minimum noise. It was a little harder on the system to run 24-bit samples. I think your planned system should run either 16-bit or 24-bit just fine as long as you have a decent sound interface.

[Composer Guy]

Thanks for the reply. My worry was if I got Platinum (only 24-bit samples) it wouldn't be able to handle the samples when I got into the large ensembles. I'd like to avoid the extra $40 for Platinum Plus as I'm already stretching the budget. However I would like to be sure that the computer can handle anything I throw at it.

[noldar12]

From your build comments, it is not clear if you are using a separate hard drive for your samples. If not, doing so would be highly suggested, and your performance will greatly improve by keeping samples on a different drive from your o/s and programs.

[Composer Guy]

Well the CCC comes on a hard drive, and I'd just install it as is, so yes, I would have a separate hard drive for my samples. Am I likely to get any clicks and pops or should this run smoothly?

[nikolas]

I would imagine that the cheaper options of i7 are much more effective than the i5 you mention. Also, a single drive for everything in, will have a bit of trouble, so it's better to spread it accross different hard drives.

*I think*

[Composer Guy]

The cheaper options? A dual core i7 as opposed to quad i5?

And I thought it is better to spread PLAY instances, so it can utilise the full power of your computer. This is the first I've heard that it's best to spread samples over different hard drives. You could very well be correct though, if someone could confirm.. I'm pretty backwards when it comes to the hardware stuff, I have a friend helping me out with it.

[nikolas]

i7 is not a dual core, is it?!?!?!? :S Even the cheapest i7s. That is what I was saying.

About PLAY instances you may be right as well, but the matter of fact is that once you start streaming data from a hard disk it can get too much at some point, so if you have more than 1 hard drive you may benefit from having both of them streaming, thus streaming faster (which is something you need in music).

Do wait for confirmation though, because I'm not the best person to give advice on hardware as well!

[Composer Guy]

Just looked, appears there isn't a single dual core i7. Thing is though, I can get 2.8ghz quad i5 for 2/3 the price of 2.8ghz quad i7. What makes the i7 that much better? I asked my friend and he doesn't think there's much difference.

And hopefully someone can confirm the hard drive thing.