Upgrading my studio PC - Minimum spec?

[Bloke From Barnet]

Here's a couple of useful bits & pieces I learned that might be of some use in this thread. How accurate this info is, I can't say, but from doing a lot of reading on the net about it, this is what I have seen.

Windows 32 bit can use 4GB of RAM, but that also includes RAM used by graphics cards & any other devices so depending on what other devices you have, different levels of RAM will be available to you. This appears to be why many people see only 3-3.5GB.

64 bit can use a lot more RAM, but finding drivers for some devices can be a pain, if not impossible (older sound cards e.t.c.). There seem to be a lot of people experiencing problems with certain plugins when using 64 bit aswell.

[JAYDMF]

Originally Posted by Bloke From Barnet

Here's a couple of useful bits & pieces I learned that might be of some use in this thread. How accurate this info is, I can't say, but from doing a lot of reading on the net about it, this is what I have seen.

Windows 32 bit can use 4GB of RAM, but that also includes RAM used by graphics cards & any other devices so depending on what other devices you have, different levels of RAM will be available to you. This appears to be why many people see only 3-3.5GB.

64 bit can use a lot more RAM, but finding drivers for some devices can be a pain, if not impossible (older sound cards e.t.c.). There seem to be a lot of people experiencing problems with certain plugins when using 64 bit aswell.

You are correct. Theoretically a 64bit OS can support 1TB of ram although vista cant.

[JAYDMF]

Ok so i built a new computer for a guy i know the other day and i have to say it was a solid build for the money.

AMD Athlon X2 7850 (2.8ghz, black edition, actually just a phenom with 2 cores disabled)
4gb Corsair XMS2 6400
Asus M4A78PRO
Sapphire 3450
Samsung spinpoint 320gb HDD
Zalman HPZ 500 (500w supply)
Samsung super writemaster (CD/DVD combo drive)
Coolermaster centurion
PCIE x1 firewire board.

Came to a total of £415

Performs better than a core 2 duo E6600 + 3GB DDR2800 + i975x mobo

In cubase it was capable of 36 stereo tracks of audio with Roomworks on each whilst hitting a stable load of 80%.

For anyone looking this is a great build on a budget

[JAYDMF]

Update to the above post.

New Phenom II X2s are available as of now. most places are only stocking the 550 (3.1GHz) model but there is also a 545 (3.0GHz) and a 540 (2.8GHz) model on the way. the ASUS M3/4 series boards and anything using a AMD 780/790 are compatible as although this CPU is technically an AM3 (ddr3) chip it is backwards compatible to AM2+ and contains both DDR2 and DDR3 memory controllers.

Ive just snapped one up for my games machine to replace my old Athlon X2 5000+ and it absolutley flys. some of the projects ive been working on using this computer (whilst my main machine is down) have gone from using 80% cpu to around 30%

At £78 its a great upgrade path if you own an AM2+ board already and need just a little extra juice

[JAYDMF]

For those interested in performace per £. AMD just released the Phenom II 965BE. Retails at £190 runs at 3.4Ghz is a quad with the usual 8mb total cache and performs near to an Intel Core 2 quad extreme qx9770. some results going either way. this is pretty impressive as the extremes are much much more expensive and the this is a black edition so anyone wanting to dable in OC'ing the chip has been reported to run fairly cool at 3.8ghz on standard air cooling

[EdRyan]

Have you seen the power consumption rating for the updated Phenom chip.

TDP of 140W. It's not a cheap chip to run !

[JAYDMF]

Originally Posted by EdRyan

Have you seen the power consumption rating for the updated Phenom chip.

TDP of 140W. It's not a cheap chip to run !

This is true but the high end core 2 quad extremes arent far behind and the i7s are just as bad with 130w. what you have to remember here thos is that AMD always have their tweaks, much like intel introduced the speed step amd Overdrive utility can have the same effect couple that with Asus EPU engine and you can have a very powerful processor but only pulling the juice when it needs it.

[JAYDMF]

Having said this. The new i7 8 series is finally out in asia so it should only be a few weeks before its here. these have a TDP of 95w.

[EdRyan]

Yeah but the Intel's will be significantly more expensive.

The thing that worries me about the Phenom it its age. Surely, AMD will have a new chip out soon to compete with the i7 8. The phenom keeps up with what Intel have out at the moment, but the i7 8 is going to blow them away again.

Wonder if the i7 8 will make it into the macpro as well? Mac are rumoured to have new pro models due before xmas.

[JAYDMF]

Originally Posted by EdRyan

Yeah but the Intel's will be significantly more expensive.

The thing that worries me about the Phenom it its age. Surely, AMD will have a new chip out soon to compete with the i7 8. The phenom keeps up with what Intel have out at the moment, but the i7 8 is going to blow them away again.

Wonder if the i7 8 will make it into the macpro as well? Mac are rumoured to have new pro models due before xmas.

Well the 8 sits just above the i7 920 from all tests done atm. macs are reportedly going to be getting the next gen of xeons and the i5s but i havent read about the i7s but im sure they'll be put in there somewheres.

As for the replacement for the phenom i doubt we'll see that for a little while yet. theyve reportedly been working on transfering istanbul to standard desktop machine but if that gives much benefits i wouldnt know. 6 cores versus 4 core + HT is a close one.

I think atm AMD have too much going on with their fab spin off and other projects as well as making sure theyre well up in the server market. thats how they managed to pull off the athlon and tripped up intel last time. but theyre gonna need a whole new architecure which is big £££. intel have been relatively lazy in that although the new core series is an overhaul. it really is just a rip of the opteron architecture with their spin on it

[EdRyan]

Originally Posted by JAYDMF

Well the 8 sits just above the i7 920 from all tests done atm. macs are reportedly going to be getting the next gen of xeons and the i5s but i havent read about the i7s but im sure they'll be put in there somewheres.

As for the replacement for the phenom i doubt we'll see that for a little while yet. theyve reportedly been working on transfering istanbul to standard desktop machine but if that gives much benefits i wouldnt know. 6 cores versus 4 core + HT is a close one.

Might go for a Phenom then...

[JAYDMF]

Originally Posted by EdRyan

Might go for a Phenom then...

For the money theyre outstanding processors. the first phenoms were decidely average but the 2 really has some balls to it.

im torn atm my audio system isnt as good as my gaming rig but im torn between a quad phenom and an 8 series i7 purely on the basis that it supports sata 3 and usb 3 and that ddr 3 will eventually be the way forward plus when they shrink to 32nm it will more than likely be the fastest mid range bunch of chips and the board will most likely support it with a bios flash. But its gonna be a hefty ding in the wallet.

It would be nice to see an alternative tho

[EdRyan]

That's where Intel have the upper hand at the moment, a clearer product lifemap and better forwards compatability/futureproofing. That said, for the cost of them, you could confidently buy AMD now....and then again when they update and still probably be in change compared to buying Intel now

[JAYDMF]

Originally Posted by EdRyan

That's where Intel have the upper hand at the moment, a clearer product lifemap and better forwards compatability/futureproofing. That said, for the cost of them, you could confidently buy AMD now....and then again when they update and still probably be in change compared to buying Intel now

well i wouldnt use the word clearer. intels line up isnt set to change dramatically yet so we still have a huge list that i'll post below. however yes the new core range is fresher than AMDs current architecture line up but we are reaching a ceiling where by the extra processing power is going to waste. the real battle for me is being played out in the motherboards as the AMD boards just dont get as many fancies as the intels and thats what im looking for.

Plans atm are to snap up an i7 860 and couple it with 8gb of low latency (by low i mean 7-7-7-20) xms3 and an asus p7p55d deluxe which has more than enough headroom in terms of power and expandability.

ive now got a good collection of hardware and soft synths so im now looking into control surfaces and plugs. just got the liquid mix but the next purchase may have to be a UAD/powercore for effects etc. This, although not on the PCIe bus, is a strain as ive said before on the usb/firewire side of things and can be a pain in the ass. some of these newer boards are offering more controllers tagged on because of the fact that 1156/lynnfield only requires one chip on the board.


Intels current line up of chips
Xeon (nehalem)
Xeon (771)
Core i7 (1366)
Core i7 (1156)
Core i5
Core i3 (desktop and mobile)
Core 2 quad extreme (771/775)
Core 2 quad (both 65nm and 45nm)
Core 2 duo (both 65nm and 45nm)
Core 2 solo (laptop)
Pentium dual core
Celeron

Compare that to AMD:

Opteron 1000
Opteron 2000
Phenom II x4
Phenom II x3
Phenom II x2
Athlon II x4
Athlon II x3
Athlon II x2
Sempron (am3)

You can see that AMD only really have 4 main architectures with mods where as intel have at least 6

[EdRyan]

True, one thing I've noticed whilst looking into a fair few motherboards is the way in which they implement their PCIe.

Its a bit naughty (and cheap). Slots that will support/fit various devices of differing rates(lanes), but basically bottleneck them back to a fixed lane value.
It is a massive problem with PCIe. If you only have one lane, your card is running at a data rate of 250MB/s. Less then USB2, as well as FW400 and FW800 obviously.

And boards with 2 slots, that then decide to share lanes between them. Although I suspect this was done for the benefit of gaming rigs. Faster calculation by coherent and paralell processing is better for performance then faster access to data that hasn't been mangled..

PCIE 3 looks promising though. A data rate of 1GB per lane and zero overhead...