Old 09-14-2014, 10:29 AM   #1
Norm
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 2
Default AMD 8350 8 core CPU upgrade

Has anybody out in REAPERLAND done the AMD 4 to 8 core CPU upgrade and if so,
I would like to know if you noticed any improved performance or major changes to the overall recording experience.

We use a custom Win-7/64 machine, built specifically for recording,editing, and archiving. We have been considering the AMD 8350 8 core cpu upgrade since the mobo is already for the upgrade, plug and play, and Reaper can handle the multicore cpu.

Any information is appreciated !

Norm
Norm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 12:11 PM   #2
Sunaj
Human being with feelings
 
Sunaj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 517
Default

i've an amd 8 core machine, with 8 gigs of ram..

a fast and power machine this is. never have a problem with reaper under performing at all
Sunaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 12:19 PM   #3
unique
Human being with feelings
 
unique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 231
Default

Hi, sorry I can't say I have any experience with and AMD CPU processors.I remember I looked into many forum discussions between Intel and AMD it seems to me that most people agree that Intel is much more powerful than AMD chips for some reason. So I myself ended up getting an Intel i7and I have been pretty happy with it it's a quad core processor with unlocked capabilities so I overclock the little thing and it's pretty pretty powerful. Now if I was going to upgrade my computer in today's market I would go for the i7 59 60 X from Intel. As far as I can tell that thing is a beast and if you get 5960 x you would not have to upgrade your computer after that for quite sometime. good luck in finding your upgrade.
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 12:50 PM   #4
Mink99
Human being with feelings
 
Mink99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Zürich
Posts: 1,001
Default

It is in fact nowhere definitely stated that 4 cores behaving like 8 (Intel) would perform better than 8 real cores (AMD) in a multithreaded daw streaming environment.

The logic and my (of course limited) experience says that the context switching of the Intel CPU would cost some performance, especially on the low latency requirements of dpc / isr / CPU waitstates.

But no one is asking these questions, no one is checking / testing .

Of course, the system builders that create dedicated pcs for daw use the most expensive parts...
Mink99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 01:23 PM   #5
ELP
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 943
Default

Quote:
between Intel and AMD it seems to me that most people agree that Intel is much more powerful than AMD chips for some reason
Muahhh
Sry.

And that´s the reason why both state of the art gaming consolen,
Sony Ps4 and Microsofts XBox One, now build on AMD CPUs and AMD grafic architecture?

Perhaps Intel / NV, had too much programming support for example, program code optimization for Intel and NV chips>>

and false speed tests , but maybe this will change now....
Xbox, Visual C++ compiler > WinOS > all microsoft
and of course to much support from media and Co KG.
Intel /NV is by nature (basically) nothing better.
The really difference is only the prize.

I myself can the AMD 8350 or AMD usually recommended without restriction

And no, I do not work for AMD

Last edited by ELP; 09-14-2014 at 01:56 PM.
ELP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 01:58 PM   #6
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,929
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ELP View Post
the reason why both state of the art gaming consolen,
Sony Ps4 and Microsofts XBox One, now build on AMD CPUs and AMD grafic architecture?
AMD graphics are fine. (The stuff is probably mostly based on ATI's past product development anyway. So a different thing from the clearly struggling CPU division of AMD.)

The CPUs are below average, very disappointing things. The reason device manufacturers may want to use AMD is that they are cheap CPUs.

If you can make a choice between AMD and Intel (money is not an objection), just choose Intel. And no, I don't work for Intel. I am in fact royally pissed off I will have to pay them a premium price for a new CPU soon, because AMD can no longer compete with Intel.
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 02:11 PM   #7
unique
Human being with feelings
 
unique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mink99 View Post
It is in fact nowhere definitely stated that 4 cores behaving like 8 (Intel) would perform better than 8 real cores (AMD) in a multithreaded daw streaming environment.

The logic and my (of course limited) experience says that the context switching of the Intel CPU would cost some performance, especially on the low latency requirements of dpc / isr / CPU waitstates.

But no one is asking these questions, no one is checking / testing .

Of course, the system builders that create dedicated pcs for daw use the most expensive parts...
That's cool. My comment is referring to core vs core basis, If you do a test between 4core amd vs a 4core intel with same clock speeds on both tested cpus, more then likely intel is going to win in performance. If you do a test with 8core amd vs a 8core intel, intel again is likely going to win in terms of audio processing performance. To be clear please leave graphics and visual capability's out of this, I am strictly talking about processing power for audio related performance.

UPDATE: here is a link with some comparisons, unfortunately for this thread there is not a lot of AMD comparisons in the list

http://www.adkproaudio.com/benchmarks.cfm


Quote:
Originally Posted by ELP
Muahhh
Sry.

And that´s the reason why both state of the art gaming consolen,
Sony Ps4 and Microsofts XBox One, now build on AMD CPUs and AMD grafic architecture?

Perhaps Intel / NV, had too much programming support for example, program code optimization for Intel and NV chips>>

and false speed tests , but maybe this will change now....
Xbox, Visual C++ compiler > WinOS > all microsoft
and of course to much support from media and Co KG.
Intel /NV is by nature (basically) nothing better.
The really difference is only the prize.

I myself can the AMD 8350 or AMD usually recommended without restriction

And no, I do not work for AMD
Read Xenakios comment. That pretty much sums it up.


These are just my findings and my perception in this area, if you guys can give me some links to something with some pretty good believable proof to open my AMD vs INTEL outlook, then im all for it and would like to learn different if it is valid.

Last edited by unique; 09-14-2014 at 02:25 PM. Reason: Comparison Examples
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 02:38 PM   #8
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

I am still happily using a 6 core Phenom II machine which I built about 3 years ago.

Works for me and I use a lot of VSTis.

But despite the price differential I will likely go Intel for the next build. The performance gap is widening or so it would seem and frankly the current price differential does not justify going MD gain for me. YMMV

FWIW I have switched between Intel and AMD all along. Current lappy is a i5 2.5 based machine - I am less than impressed to be honest.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 03:47 PM   #9
Mink99
Human being with feelings
 
Mink99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Zürich
Posts: 1,001
Default

@unique

The well known intel Core i 7 CPUs are in fact 4 core. In comparison to an amd 4 core these are in fact no match.

But I am still not convinced that in a daw scenario (!) the AMD 8 core might not deliver acceptable results too...

A lot of the requirements we do have are more dependent on the chipset, on the drivers etc.
Mink99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 06:12 PM   #10
edkilp
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 1,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
I am still happily using a 6 core Phenom II machine which I built about 3 years ago.

Works for me and I use a lot of VSTis.

But despite the price differential I will likely go Intel for the next build. The performance gap is widening or so it would seem and frankly the current price differential does not justify going MD gain for me. YMMV

FWIW I have switched between Intel and AMD all along. Current lappy is a i5 2.5 based machine - I am less than impressed to be honest.
I'm using the same thing. I didn't build it myself, though. Mine is a Dell Studio XPS 7100, with the AMD Phenom II 6-core processor, and 8GB of RAM. I have pretty much no problems doing what I need to do. Unless I'm trying to use that damn TXw16 or whatever sampler. That thing kills my computer, and I've yet to figure out why.

Quite frequently, I get static or clicking noises when I move my mouse. I don't know if that's a processor thing, a mouse thing, or maybe a graphics thing.
edkilp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 07:55 PM   #11
OpIvy
Human being with feelings
 
OpIvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Between the reef and the rainforest
Posts: 1,309
Default

I did this upgrade and it was great!
Went from a PhenomII x4 to an 8350 and it's heaps smoother for me.
Of course it could also be that my 8GB of RAM is now also running at full speed. But my cpu no longer maxes out and I'm not getting the glitches I did in big projects.

I say given the price, go for it...
__________________
https://soundcloud.com/opivy
OpIvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 09:43 PM   #12
ATX
Human being with feelings
 
ATX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Austin TEXAS, where you from?
Posts: 26
Default AMD vs. Intel... DEBATE OVER!

I just built a dedicated DAW system myself... I did a lot of research into it before building it as well. When it came down to selecting a chip it was a no brainer... AMD all the way. The reason why AMD won out over Intel in MY book is in the comparison of "Price vs. Performance". In comparison, AMD kicked Intel's ass all over the map in that context. Yes Intel's are fast, however... They are also outrageously expensive, un-beneficial, and un-economical, for a "working man's" home studio.

In my comparison of AMD vs. Intel, I have found that the benefits of Intel's faster processor's do not necessarily outweigh the performance value of AMD's CONSUMER FRIENDLY processor's; As the ability of both processors can equally perform the same operation, the results of which processor can perform which operation faster are nominal at best, and are therefore redundant in a "home studio" setting. In short, it matters not what processor you use for your DAW, so long as it is a multicore. How many cores? Well that depends on what you are doing and what you intend on doing in the future.

I'm not gonna get into a pissing contest about processors so let me end the debate here. It's no secret that for the price of an i7 you can buy an AMD multicore processor and have money left over to buy your motherboard and RAM, a hard drive, a PSU, and a CPU cooler as well that would run REAPER or any other DAW @1080P with little to no problemo! Debate over!! But, if you can afford the high price tag of an Intel i7, good for you, pat yourself on the back. However, if you are frugal and wise, take a good look at AMD's CONSUMER FRIENDLY offerings... I think you'll like what you find.
ATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2014, 10:06 PM   #13
OpIvy
Human being with feelings
 
OpIvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Between the reef and the rainforest
Posts: 1,309
Default

Agree with above.... performance difference is very minimal, irrelevant really for a DAW.

Also, I assume you have at least 8gb ram? If not, this makes one of the biggest differences overall.
__________________
https://soundcloud.com/opivy
OpIvy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2014, 12:45 PM   #14
ATX
Human being with feelings
 
ATX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Austin TEXAS, where you from?
Posts: 26
Default One more thing...

I forgot to add my response to the original query. :P

My advice is this. If your mobo is set up to receive the 8350K, yes, by all means up grade that sucker if your able to do so. Performance wise you will see some improvement, everything should appear to run smoother and a bit faster. I would also recommend you get a "QUALITY" CPU cooler like a 212evo if you don't already, 8350's are power hawgs and they can run hot, especially overclocked.

Have fun.
ATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 12:42 PM   #15
Norm
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Diego County
Posts: 2
Default 8 Core upgrade

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATX View Post
I forgot to add my response to the original query. :P

My advice is this. If your mobo is set up to receive the 8350K, yes, by all means up grade that sucker if your able to do so. Performance wise you will see some improvement, everything should appear to run smoother and a bit faster. I would also recommend you get a "QUALITY" CPU cooler like a 212evo if you don't already, 8350's are power hawgs and they can run hot, especially overclocked.

Have fun.
Thank you all for your sage advice, in our situation the AMD seems to provide what we need at an affordable price point. The change out would run under two hundred dollars and could be done in an hour or so. Once we make the upgrade, I will let y'all know how its working. Reaper Rocks !
Norm
Norm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 01:02 PM   #16
brainwreck
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATX View Post
It's no secret that for the price of an i7 you can buy an AMD multicore processor and have money left over to buy your motherboard and RAM, a hard drive, a PSU, and a CPU cooler as well
I'm not trying to convince anyone either way, but with a price difference of say, $150 between an AMD and Intel cpu, you will not get much in other hardware for that money. And the Intel will very likely run cooler and therefore quieter (home studio consideration).
__________________
It's time to take a stand against the synthesizer.
brainwreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 01:29 PM   #17
Mr. Data
Human being with feelings
 
Mr. Data's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Location
Posts: 5,329
Default

To say anything about Intel vs. AMD, I haven't enough knowledge to compare them, but the noise argument isn't quite one - at least in my case. I've gut an AMD 8150, which is probably not too different from the 8350, but my machine is quite quiet. My external HDs are noisier than the computer itself. Only when rendering videos and the CPUs are occupied by about 90 to 95 % the fan gets a bit faster/louder.


-Data
__________________
German Language Pack for REAPER? Get it here! ... Donate? Yeah!! | Are you nuts? | Maybe
Deutsche Sprachdatei für REAPER? Hier zu haben! ... Spenden? Klar! | Spinnst wohl!? | Vielleicht
Mr. Data is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 01:39 PM   #18
novaburst
Human being with feelings
 
novaburst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 337
Default

AMDs are pretty fast and I reluctantly say probably faster than the intels,

But I am not sure about AMDs stability I think is a bit on the weak side.

intels stability on the other hand is probably the best there is and has found there way into Apple computers.

I have a PC that does not crash never, a good part of that reason is the intel chip inside.

They are high priced but worth the investment stability is key
novaburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 01:51 PM   #19
vanhaze
Human being with feelings
 
vanhaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,772
Default

"Stability"... Yup, that's quite important for me .. .

So Intel versus AMD: 1-0, regarding this ?! :0)
vanhaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 02:02 PM   #20
Bristol Posse
Human being with feelings
 
Bristol Posse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southern California
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm View Post
Has anybody out in REAPERLAND done the AMD 4 to 8 core CPU upgrade and if so,
I would like to know if you noticed any improved performance or major changes to the overall recording experience.
If you have been experiencing problems where CPU is the weak link ie high plug in instances causing glitches in recording or playback or CPU intensive VSTi having problems in conjunction with lots of VST processing and on the fly resampling at the same time then a more power CPU would help clear that up and the overall recording experience will likely improve

If you haven't had problems where CPU power is the bottleneck, then the overall recording experience will be no different at all except that you'll have a nice new AMD sticker to put on the front of your computer
Bristol Posse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2014, 11:43 PM   #21
ATX
Human being with feelings
 
ATX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Austin TEXAS, where you from?
Posts: 26
Default Pissing in the wind. :P

In the instance of CPU power, any quad core AMD/Intel Pentium/Athlon grade notebook with 4GB 1600Mhz CL11 RAM can record a full band on multiple tracks with a decent interface. In comparison... I'm running an A-10 7850K with 16GB 2400MHz AMP/RAM on an A88X G1 Killer chipset with dual 2TB WD Black HDD's powered by an 850w EVGA Supernova Gold... This monster can do anything my friends Intel i5 notebook can do and chew bubble gum while doing it all while playing Battlefield 4 @ 1080p/45fps!... And that's without a video card.

This is why I didn't want to get into a pissing contest...

It is difficult to compare the A10-7850K APU to an Intel CPU because it's designed on an entirely different heterogeneous architecture (HSA). Therefore any true accurate comparison is redundant because the current bench testing methods were designed to compare established AMD/Intel CPU architectures, with the introduction of Kaveri APU's, those are now outdated and due for an overhaul. If they want to catch the stats on AMD's Kaveri, new bench testing software and algorithms must be written and constructed for an accurate comparison. So basically your pissing in the wind trying to compare your CPU to my APU. :P

The fact of the matter is, is that they just don't know what this chip is capable of just yet. However the tests that were done with this processor varies as it tested nominally against Intel's i5-4570K and i7-4770K on the old tests! Overclocked, it met them neck and neck, and blew them out of the water on the GPU test! This performance was adequately sufficient and cost effective in my personal preference when selecting a processor for my "home studio" computer. My search for a processor was not focused on speed, but instead cache memory, clock speed, and audio quality! Though Intel kicked AMD's ass in the speed and hyper-threading departments, both Intel's lagged behind in clock speed, GPU clock speed, and fell way behind in L2 Cache when compared to the modest A-10 and neither offered any audio benefit.

But where AMD's 7850K really shines is on the APU itself, see there's this little thing embedded on it's 28nm framework called a DSP, ya'll know what that is right? AMD is the first chip manufacturer EVER to answer the dream of audiophiles everywhere and install a dedicated True Audio DSP core! So when my 7850K funnels 1's and 0's into my onboard AMP-UP Realtek 898 Codec which has been tested to have the comparable sound quality of a $2000 DAC, I am most certain it has no problem funneling multiple tracks of audio in and out of my $60 DAW as well.

The debate between Intel and AMD reminds me of the story of the Tortoise and the Hare. That's my logic when I say faster is not always better, if you run to far ahead you can easily get left behind as well.
ATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 12:25 AM   #22
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

Does this mean you are NOT using a dedicated Audio-MIDI interface for DAW use on your AMD box?

I had been planning on going Intel as I said earlier but the reviews I have seen are making me wonder if I would be better off saving money and going AMD again.

With the whole FM2+ APU thing being relatively new, there doesnt seem to be much out there in the way of reviews or even comments on the suitability of the combination you have for DAW use.

I currently use an RME HDSP9652 with a pair of Focusrite Octopres hooked up via ADAT lightpipe, so I would not need any of the onboard sound capability, plus I have never had a game on any of my studio machines and won't.
Would you say your setup would still be wholly relevant to MY needs?
Thanks
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 06:41 AM   #23
ATX
Human being with feelings
 
ATX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Austin TEXAS, where you from?
Posts: 26
Default About my review and advice...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
Does this mean you are NOT using a dedicated Audio-MIDI interface for DAW use on your AMD box?

I had been planning on going Intel as I said earlier but the reviews I have seen are making me wonder if I would be better off saving money and going AMD again.

With the whole FM2+ APU thing being relatively new, there doesnt seem to be much out there in the way of reviews or even comments on the suitability of the combination you have for DAW use.

I currently use an RME HDSP9652 with a pair of Focusrite Octopres hooked up via ADAT lightpipe, so I would not need any of the onboard sound capability, plus I have never had a game on any of my studio machines and won't.
Would you say your setup would still be wholly relevant to MY needs?
Thanks
Well it depends on what you want to do bro? Like I said, if you can update what you got, do that and stick with it. My whole game is "price vs. performance", if all you have to do is a simple upgrade to your CPU or RAM why start from scratch and spend a grand on building a new system? That doesn't make any sense. Not everyone can do, or should do, what I did. I am not advocating that.

It sounds like you have a doable setup that works. Just because I rant off on my shit as being just as effective, does not mean I'm saying it is superior in anyway, but just as effective to suit the modest needs of my home studio for basic home recording, mixing and more. For instance, I got 4TB of WD Black, partitioned, Battlefield 4 hardly taxes my system and it dwarfs REAPER ten fold. This is more a HTPC/DAW set up, one drive for OS, fun and games, and the other for the DAW, VST's, audio files etc. etc. Not to mention this is a full size ATX tower with lots of room for SSD's and all the HDD's you could ever want! Not that I'll ever fill them all, but it's a nice to have.

The Hammerfall card is a quality audio card, and running with light pipe out of a couple of Octo-pres is a bitch'n sound solution. I to thought I would need an audio interface card like the Hammerfall, but apparently that's an expenditure I didn't have to make with research. My Gigabyte mobo already comes with a bitch'n on board sound card, so according to Gigabyte it's "plug and play"! For an AI I'm using a ROLAND OCTA CAPTURE, to my system I can run light pipe, USB, and standard plugs, to run MIDI the in/out for that is directly on the OCTA CAPTURE itself, and it feeds in to the PC via USB.

As for choosing Intel or AMD, like I said before it doesn't matter as long as it's a multicore processor, how many cores depends on what you can afford and what you want to do? If your recording professionally for a living, and by professionally I mean in a working band or studio, go with Intel because like ProTools, that's the studio standard. But if your a starving artist like me and most of us, or sit'n at home jamming on guitar, or occasionally with your friends or band, you could save yourself some money and headaches by looking at AMD's offerings.

The FM2+ chips are new, yes, not a lot of favorable reviews are out there because, well, there's no real performance test currently available for FM2+'s. Thus Kaveri got a lot of hate when it came out... So you could say that this is experimental. I would say the experiment is going fine thus far.

So why did I choose Kaveri?... Good question.

The thing you have to wrap your head around with the HSA architecture that I referred to earlier is that the 4 cores that make up the CPU part of the processor are infused with the HSA core so they can utilize the 8 cores of GPU GCN/R9 "Hawaii" based cores that have been geared down to R7 graphics. What's that mean in layman's terms? Well, HSA is specifically designed to take the load off the CPU by sharing it with the GPU. If you do the math that's 12 working cores with 4MB of L2 cache and a dedicated DSP core at their disposal. True it's not a thorough bred ready to run circles around an Intel i7, but it does appear to be a Clydesdale work horse in the audio and graphic's circles, so this Bud's for YOU!

Now to reiterate my advice; if your going to upgrade your system, just be sure you buy or build one that will receive your Hammerfall card, as long as that is compatible you can pretty much go with any multicore system you want, and your good to go!
ATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 07:15 AM   #24
Serenitynow
Human being with feelings
 
Serenitynow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 595
Default

I went with an AMD FX-8320 unlocked Black Edition. I've gone from 3.5 > 4.4GHz and it just rocks. Some have OC'd more...close to 5, but even with a cooler I went for OC but with full stability.

Once you're up in the higher end of processors it probably doesn't matter that much. They all should make music, but everyone's needs are different.

Since you already have the motherboard just plop that chip in there and rock out!
__________________
John
Serenitynow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 09:28 AM   #25
ATX
Human being with feelings
 
ATX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Austin TEXAS, where you from?
Posts: 26
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Serenitynow View Post
I went with an AMD FX-8320 unlocked Black Edition. I've gone from 3.5 > 4.4GHz and it just rocks. Some have OC'd more...close to 5, but even with a cooler I went for OC but with full stability.

Once you're up in the higher end of processors it probably doesn't matter that much. They all should make music, but everyone's needs are different.

Since you already have the motherboard just plop that chip in there and rock out!
That's the smart move. AMD chips are best when OC'd, but watch your temps closely, running a chip hard can shorten it's life over time, so proceed with caution. I'm gonna over clock the 7850K, but I want to wait and get a water cooler, currently I got a Scythe Ashura, bout as good as a 212evo, but I want something better for overclocking like a Corsair Hydro or CM Seidon. For now stock speed works fine.

That's the other thing about AMD's, compared to Intels their more affordable to replace if you have a major fail or burn out. :P
ATX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 09:47 AM   #26
Xenakios
Human being with feelings
 
Xenakios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oulu, Finland
Posts: 7,929
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATX View Post
It is difficult to compare the A10-7850K APU to an Intel CPU because it's designed on an entirely different heterogeneous architecture (HSA). Therefore any true accurate comparison is redundant because the current bench testing methods were designed to -compare established AMD/Intel CPU architectures, with the introduction of Kaveri APU's,
Do you have any evidence this Kaveri/APU bullshit does any good at all for softwares like Reaper and VST plugins?

Who cares about some theoretical benefits AMD spins up in their marketing materials? I only care about what my normal softwares will be able to do right away, not what *might* be possible if the software vendor decides to support some special hardware architecture in the future.
__________________
For info on SWS Reaper extension plugin (including Xenakios' previous extension/actions) :
http://www.sws-extension.org/
https://github.com/Jeff0S/sws
--
Xenakios blog (about HourGlass, Paul(X)Stretch and λ) :
http://xenakios.wordpress.com/
Xenakios is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 11:13 AM   #27
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

(let the AMD bashing continue as usual....)

*sigh*

FWIW I currently "only " have an AMD AM3 slot mobo, so I would have to replace the mobo regardless.

And I have to say despite all the fanfares about Intel i series performance, I am still leaning in the direction of yet another AMD build.

For the outlay, which I seem to do once every four or five years, I am planning on "investing" the difference in my wife's nose-bleedingly expensive new kitchen. Bless her!
Apparently we will be doing the bathroom once my blood pressure gets back to normal.

ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 01:50 PM   #28
vanhaze
Human being with feelings
 
vanhaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 4,772
Default

LOL !!
vanhaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 02:55 PM   #29
unique
Human being with feelings
 
unique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
(let the AMD bashing continue as usual....)

*sigh*

FWIW I currently "only " have an AMD AM3 slot mobo, so I would have to replace the mobo regardless.

And I have to say despite all the fanfares about Intel i series performance, I am still leaning in the direction of yet another AMD build.

For the outlay, which I seem to do once every four or five years, I am planning on "investing" the difference in my wife's nose-bleedingly expensive new kitchen. Bless her!
Apparently we will be doing the bathroom once my blood pressure gets back to normal.

Lol I don't know that anyone here is bashing AMD. I just see informative posts.
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2014, 11:06 PM   #30
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

Right up until this we were doing great.

QUOTE: Do you have any evidence this Kaveri/APU bullshit does any good at all for softwares like Reaper and VST plugins?

Who cares about some theoretical benefits AMD spins up in their marketing materials?

You missed this?

Another question for those in the Intel camp.

Based on what is out there in the way of information on the most recent AMD processors, what would be the cheapest point in the Intel range where I would be getting at least as good but preferably better performance than say the FM2+ cpu we have been discussing here?

Would top end i5 Haswell be "good enough" and if so, at a difference of a relatively reasonable £40 UKPounds more for the i5?

I am not at all partisan, just looking for the best bang for my somewhat modest buck.

Last edited by ivansc; 09-18-2014 at 12:28 AM.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 12:56 AM   #31
unique
Human being with feelings
 
unique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 231
Default

Lol no I didn't miss it, I can see what you mean, I don't think the guys bashing. It would just be enlightening to see some good evidence on what ATX was saying. All good.

Hey ivansc you should probably take that question to http://www.overclock.net/f/ ...well... that's what I would do anyways.

Last edited by unique; 09-18-2014 at 01:02 AM. Reason: ivansc update
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 02:04 AM   #32
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

Will do. Not sure what they know bout DAW builds though....

Damn that is a complicated board. Joined but have no idea where to post a question about bang for buck Intel Music production setup. Since you suggested that site, any ideas where I could post a question without pissing anyone off?


Tried searching on everything I could think of to no avail.

Last edited by ivansc; 09-18-2014 at 02:18 AM.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 09:15 AM   #33
unique
Human being with feelings
 
unique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 231
Default

in regards to the CPU try the intel CPU section and just let them know your situation and how you are new to this and just looking for help and they will probably give you the best advice they can, also try the specialty mods / silent computing section for building a quiet computer.

Feel free to explore that forum a lot before you actually post things. I'll comeback later today into this thread and post some links for you that might help you.
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 10:31 AM   #34
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

What a guy! Thanks.

It has been so long since I bothered looking & I am really rusty on PC builds - been repairing laptops mostly of late....
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 04:20 PM   #35
cyrano
Human being with feelings
 
cyrano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Belgium
Posts: 4,602
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by novaburst View Post
AMDs are pretty fast and I reluctantly say probably faster than the intels,

But I am not sure about AMDs stability I think is a bit on the weak side.

intels stability on the other hand is probably the best there is and has found there way into Apple computers.

I have a PC that does not crash never, a good part of that reason is the intel chip inside.

They are high priced but worth the investment stability is key
That's not counting the bugs in Haswell?

Apple has been bitten hard. Not by the CPU's performance, but by the amount of work that was needed to keep USB audio interfaces working, amongst other things. Logic needed several updates to work with Haswell machines. Performance was lousy and stability was even worse. Worst of all: it depended on your config. What worked on one machine didn't work on other Macs.

I have a number of very old interfaces. USB 1.1. Most of these became unusable after Snow Leopard on modern machines. Some even needed hacks to work on Snow. It has taken Apple 3 major upgrades (Lion and Mountain Lion in between) and 4 minor (from 10.9 tot 10.9.4) before these worked properly again.

Note: these are USB Class compliant devices that need NO driver. They should be real plug and play with Core Audio. And they all worked with an older system on USB 1.1 or USB 2.

Besides, even when Mavericks' installer wiped external drives (with some help from shoddy programming by the drives' manufacturer), this problem traced back to the Intel supplied SATA bus chipset.

And I believe a lot of these problems surfaced under Windows and Linux too.

Intel's action? It made it's customers sign a statement they wouldn't sue Intel. We can only hope these bugs will be ironed out in the next generation.

Problem 1: TSX
http://www.pcworld.com/article/24648...well-cpus.html
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar.../haswell-tsx/1
If you rerun some benchmarks with TSX disabled, you 'll get a completely different picture.
And the problem is present in currently shipping Broadwell CPU's too.
TSX accelerates database benchmarks by a factor 5 in some cases. It should be useful to users of large sample libraries, but I'm not sure by how much it could accelerate audio in general. I don't think audio devs have even begun considering TSX, but who knows? Maybe one of the Reaper devs could comment?
Anyhow, for those wanting to explore TSX, here's a good article:
http://arstechnica.com/business/2012...intel-haswell/

Problem 2: Cougar Point degrades SATA in Sandy Bridge
http://www.pcworld.com/article/21825...tion_tech.html
Fixed in production starting july 2014. You can still buy these today.

Problem 3: USB3 not functioning as it should
rightsideofnews.com/2013/04/05/intel-confirms-haswell-chipset-bug/
This was back when Haswell launched and has been fixed. The poor souls who happen to have bought a computer with an early Haswell are just out of luck.

Apple delayed hardware updates because of this bug. And some Macs contain SATA chips capable of 6 Gb/sec that only do 3 Gb/sec because of these bugs. Fortunately for Apple, they never advertise numbers...

None of the other brands I know of, seem to bother informing their customers or replacing the computers, except for Wortmann in Germany, who delayed production.

Problem 4: The cold boot bug
Since Haswell, lots of computers behave differently after a reset, vs. a cold boot. This will show for instance with RAID cards that start up with a different speed after a reset, but behave normally when starting up from zero. There is not much fun reading about this, but it's mentioned on several storage fora. So, just a glimpse:
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=384993

Also, when planning an upgrade, take into account that DDR3 ram went up about 50% in price in the last six months.

Last edited by cyrano; 09-18-2014 at 04:38 PM.
cyrano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 09:01 PM   #36
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vanhaze View Post
"Stability"... Yup, that's quite important for me .. .

So Intel versus AMD: 1-0, regarding this ?! :0)
Sorry but this is wrong and provably so.

I have a long history with AMD machines and almost as long on Intel.
The machines I HAVE had stability problems with oddly enough have always been Intel powered!

But there again I dont agree that the AMD chips are faster - not sure where the OP got that idea from.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-2014, 10:43 PM   #37
unique
Human being with feelings
 
unique's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
Sorry but this is wrong and provably so.

I have a long history with AMD machines and almost as long on Intel.
The machines I HAVE had stability problems with oddly enough have always been Intel powered!

But there again I dont agree that the AMD chips are faster - not sure where the OP got that idea from.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/ <-- not 100% accurate graphs because there are variables in the tests but the best thing I could find at the moment, it is a software benchmark <------ look at the high end graph, the highest kaveri a10 7850 but is not that high on list, check in the lower section of that graph.

According to what I could find Most i5's will be on par or a little above the Kaveri's. But after reviewing some of the prices as well I have noticed that AMD does have prices very low compared to intel. So in regards to other posts above AMD has quite an appeal in terms of price to performance, intel of course is more expensive but may have more computing power depending on which on the i5 , i7 , xeon model. Then theres overclocking capability's which is another subject...

http://www.overclock.net/newsearch?a...&Search=SEARCH

http://www.overclock.net/newsearch?a...&Search=SEARCH

Remember take all aspects into consideration. (checklist - cpu, motherboard ram, hard drive, cpu cooler, cpu fans and case fans DB levels if your pc is not isolated or if it is close to you....etc)
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2014, 11:04 AM   #38
AnalogPackrat
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Cali-Forn-I-A
Posts: 19
Default

The Intel vs AMD thing is getting a bit off-topic, but I can't resist posting. I recently upgraded (replaced) an ancient system that I originally used with Reaper 2.x waaaay back. I built it in 2004 and used AMD. At that point AMD really did jump ahead of Intel with better 64-bit architecture (recall the Itanium fiasco?) and the killer Opteron series. They were the underdog and were kicking the big dog's ass. I hope they do it again because I really believe that got Intel on the right track.

But here we are a decade or more later and Intel is back in front. AMD has always lagged on process which hurts them, especially when it comes to TDP or, more importantly, performance per watt. At this point I could care less about high performance GPU for a DAW. It's wasted watts and wasted silicon. I'm much more excited about AVX, AVX2, FMA, etc. which are much more likely to be used by developers to improve performance.

What is needed for our purposes is processing power, memory bandwidth, efficient caching (especially true given Intel's ongoing lack of registers), and thermal efficiency. I'm just a hobby dude with a one room "studio" in my home. I need the computer to be quiet so I can track in close proximity to it. I don't want screaming fans when I'm mixing, either.

I ended up with a Haswell CPU, i7-4790S at 65W, 8G of low voltage DDR3 RAM, a fanless CPU cooler, fanless PSU, and dual SSDs for system and recording (with a quiet 5400RPM spinner for long term storage/backup). My case came with two quiet fans and I run them at low RPM. The thing is very quiet. I've been messing around with a few small projects and I haven't cracked 10% CPU usage or even 25W on the CPU. The built-in GPU is fine for a DAW and will do three monitors.

Do yourself a favor and get a CPU with a big cache, good performance per watt, and go from there. You can save money on RAM and drives which can be upgraded later, but don't skimp on the CPU, MOBO, case, and PSU.

AP

p.s. The i7-4790S benchmarks at almost double the Kaveri thing with lower TDP, bigger cache, and only $120 more...
AnalogPackrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2014, 07:11 AM   #39
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 18,947
Default

Fastest of the new AMD chips runs 126 UK pounds. That Intel i7 chip costs way more than double that here in the UK.
Factor in a mobo that appears to cost roughly double as well and you begin to see why an i7 is not nearly such an attractive proposition in the UK.
As I have kept saying over and over even the most expensive, most powerful AMD CPU is half the price of even this Intel i7.
And the performance cost is definitely less than 50%.
Now factor in a more expensive mobo etc and you begin to see how the Intel is only the best option if money is no object.
In the USA it may be a no-brainer but it sure doesnt appear to be in the UK.
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2014, 09:12 AM   #40
msmucr
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Praha, Czech republic
Posts: 590
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivansc View Post
Fastest of the new AMD chips runs 126 UK pounds. That Intel i7 chip costs way more than double that here in the UK.
Factor in a mobo that appears to cost roughly double as well and you begin to see why an i7 is not nearly such an attractive proposition in the UK.
As I have kept saying over and over even the most expensive, most powerful AMD CPU is half the price of even this Intel i7.
And the performance cost is definitely less than 50%.
Now factor in a more expensive mobo etc and you begin to see how the Intel is only the best option if money is no object.
In the USA it may be a no-brainer but it sure doesnt appear to be in the UK.
Problem is, that most powerful current AMD is somewhere at i5 level.
(at stock clocks.. doesn't count overclocking here - this is for kids

Comparable CPU to FX-8350 is probably i5-4690.
Motherboard with AMD970 vs Intel H97 from Gigabyte cost almost same here.

Total difference between prices is something like 40EUR.
In my opinion, it doesn't make any sense to think about such small price differences. Computer is usually investment for 4 years or so.
Intel setup advantage is cca 40W less of TDP under load and in most cases higher speed for single threaded applications.

Michal
__________________
FRs: Better FX bypass
msmucr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.