  |
 1 Quad-core Vs 2 Quad-core, performance comparison. |
 Mon 17 Nov 2008, 13:34
Post
#1
|
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 17-Nov 08 From: Stratford - US Member No.: 104,829  |
Been using a G5 dual 2.5 for a few years now and I'm about to embark on a big solo project so I want to switch to one of the newest Mac. Given the price and the fact that I'm going to have to buy some new software and PCI cards as well I'm trying to make the most educated decision. The first step is to decide between 1 quad core or 2 quad core system. It seems that bigger isn't always better in this case and the reports can be a bit confusing so I'm turning to the Mac community for help. I use Digital Performer as my main sequencer and Reason 4 as my main sound source. I also use the UAudio sound cards and run most of the usual softwares within DP ( all the Spectrasonics stuff and many NI softs)
Is there a clear advantage to getting the 2 quad core Mac over the single quad core. If you are using similar softwares feel free to suggest some favorite configurations as well. Thanks |
 |
 
|
|
Mon 17 Nov 2008, 17:59
Post
#2
|
|
 Senior Member  Group: Members Posts: 246 Joined: 06-Feb 07 From: Berkeley - US Member No.: 88,124 |
Hi,
i run a dual quad core 2.8 Xeon with 4 gigs of RAM. I use DP 5 as my main sequencer, and frequently use Reason as a Rewired rack. I stepped up from a G5 dual. The performance bump was huge. I routinely run as many as 20 virtual tracks of Kontact, Play, and Reason, along with a hefty complement of Waves plugs at a buffer setting of 128. That's playable, for a keyboard player, and still snappy and responsive. Virsyn's Tera, a modeling synth, can put a hurt on me, if i play big chords, but the sampled stuff runs like a Olympian. We're the ones they make these powerful systems for. |
|
|
|
|
Tue 18 Nov 2008, 02:17
Post
#3
|
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 17-Nov 08 From: Stratford - US Member No.: 104,829 |
QUOTE (houstonmusic @ Mon 17 Nov 2008, 11:59)  Hi, i run a dual quad core 2.8 Xeon with 4 gigs of RAM. I use DP 5 as my main sequencer, and frequently use Reason as a Rewired rack. I stepped up from a G5 dual. The performance bump was huge. I routinely run as many as 20 virtual tracks of Kontact, Play, and Reason, along with a hefty complement of Waves plugs at a buffer setting of 128. That's playable, for a keyboard player, and still snappy and responsive. Virsyn's Tera, a modeling synth, can put a hurt on me, if i play big chords, but the sampled stuff runs like a Olympian. We're the ones they make these powerful systems for. Thanks. I'm not sure what the Xeon part means but the rest speaks directly to my particular situation. So you think the 2 quad core justifies the extra $450 I'm guessing? |
|
|
|
 Tue 18 Nov 2008, 13:34
Post
#4
|
|
 Newbie Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 20-Oct 08 From: Washington - US Member No.: 104,257 |
In music as well as video workstations always benefit from more powerful computers. That said, some of these computers are so powerful it is overkill to some degree.
Ask your processor question on the Digital Performer group http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/motu-mac |
|
|
|
|
Tue 18 Nov 2008, 18:15
Post
#5
|
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 17-Nov 08 From: Stratford - US Member No.: 104,829 |
QUOTE (Johnna @ Tue 18 Nov 2008, 07:34) In music as well as video workstations always benefit from more powerful computers. That said, some of these computers are so powerful it is overkill to some degree. Ask your processor question on the Digital Performer group http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/motu-mac Thanks, I will. I've never been on a forum before so I'm a little green. |
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
