My current system is Intel 10900k on Asus Prime Z-490-A and it works really well - but modern software is asking more.
Was keeping an eye on the latest Intel chips but it appears like they are not benchmarking much over the 14900k. I’m not too interested in AMD as I had issues with that system before. I also want to stay on Windows .
What are we all looking for best options in 2025?
Did you check this one out?
Hi Hendrix. I didnt see this chart no. It has been drowned out by other internet benchmarks that are not being favourable about the new processors. The Ultra 9 looks like its doing well here though. Wondering what Motherboard plays nicely with it that offers plenty of PCIe
From what I researched all the negative articles come from a gaming perspective… so always a little biased.
But yeah… the PCIe slot numbers on mainboards are declining… that frustrates me too.
Absolutely. I need 5 without having to look into expansion chassis which can bring new problems
The average of new intel LGA 1851 mother board is around 3 PCIe port now, maybe i will have to get rid of one of my UAD card as i need USB port extension stably powered with PCIe card extension.
i still waiting to get more bench, intel told about improvement with next BIOS update, but I was already surprised by the first DAWBench showing that intel is still over AMD.
Intel 13e and 14e generation were over heating and needed the top of the top cooler system, so for quiet systeme not sure they are the best option. But the new intel Ultra Serie improve a lot in that regard.
I own intel 9900k, so I’m really looking forward for more experiences and bench from users before to be sure making the move…
Yes the reduction of PCIe is happening but I’m running 3 UAD PCIe cards. (plus RME HDSP and graphics) I will wait a little longer for the dust to settle but interested to hear about those adopting the new Intel chips and also using UAD PCI cards in the system in terms of motherboard choice
You could always use a Sonnet enclosure connected via TB for your UAD cards to free up the slots.
I used a 9900k as my primary DAW workstation for years, and it was great. It’s still running great as a backup media computer for comparatively “light” audio/video work right now. It no longer does primary DAW duties though. Your 9900k still has legs for sure, but I’ll just say that I have several more recent DAWs in the studio, including recent gen Intel and the latest 9000-series AMD machines, and until recently I also ran Apple Silicon (long story), and they ALL blow the 9900k out of the water, with a notable, quantifiable leap in performance.
In other words, you can’t go wrong with any of the three main options in terms of performance – Intel, AMD, and Apple Silicon have all come a long way from the 9900k. It’s a great time to upgrade. Or, just wait until you absolutely have to, and it will be even a bit better… you won’t be disappointed by the leap when you decide to do it. But you have lots of options.
If you do a build (as opposed to buy a Mac), then just pick great components. Don’t skimp on power supply, RAM, etc. Set yourself up for success from the beginning, even if that means spending a little more to get better components. Cheers!
I just built a new PC with these specs:
I’d be happy to run some benchmarks if you tell me which ones. I’m not aware of any that deal specifically with hardware meant to work as a DAW.
I can tell you that having 192 GB of RAM for Cubase/Nuendo is awesome. Last year I made a project in my Mac Studio M1 Ultra with 64 GB of RAM that has over 100 instrument tracks and I just couldn’t play it with all tracks enabled. It’s a Nuendo 13 project. In fact, I had to mix it down to all the tracks as audio files and apply all the FX in that separate project. This project might as well be called “The Kitchen Sink” because I did it in part as a torture test, adding strings from OT, EW, Cinesamples, CSS, VSL, you name it.
Last week I moved the project to the new machine, and even on this fast machine it took several minutes to open, but when it did, I realized why the Mac Studio with 64 GB couldn’t keep up:
The blue part is the used RAM. 168 GB of compressed RAM. 
In fact, my original plan was to put 128 GB, and then I thought that back in 2022 when I bought the Mac Studio, 64 GB seemed more than I could ever need. So I decided to pay the extra 300 bucks and go to 192 GB. Money well spent. If the motherboard supported 256, I would’ve gone for it. But the CPU doesn’t support 256 anyway.
So if you work with a lot of instrument tracks, the first thing you need to look for is RAM. In fact, depending on your motherboard, perhaps you can just add more RAM and it will make a huge difference.
Awesome spec and system. I would definitely go for something like this -inerested to hear from someone with the latest chip system configs and motherboards that are working with lots of PCIe slots
It’s good to have a motherboard like this with so many NVMe slots, 5 in total of which I use 4, because the first one would be for a Gen 5 drive, which are too expensive, and if you use that slot, it shares it with the graphics card or something like that. So it’s better to leave it alone and use the rest.
But the main thing is RAM when it comes to Cubase. Don’t think that because I have this insane CPU that Cubase projects with lots of instrument tracks open instantly, because those projects still take quite a while to open. Same can be said for the NVMe drives, you would think that drives that can read and write close to 7 GBps would load instruments in a snap, but it’s not like that.
Many times these engines and libraries are not programmed to take full advantage of the newest hardware. Is it nice to have? Yes, because many years from now this will still be a fast machine. But if you are looking to upgrade the one thing that will make your life easier, it’s RAM. That seems to me that it’s what Cubase needs the most. Depending on your motherboard, you may go up to 128 GB, I think only the most current motherboards and CPUs can take 192 GB.
That is, if your main usecase is VST Instruments…
A whole different thing mixing for post. I have 32 GB on my oldest mixing machine and almost never use more than 13 or so with Nuendo.
Thank you uarte !
Yes now iam really close to build my new PC but need to finalize all my project before make the big move 
I will stay with intel and go for the intel Ultra 9 285K and all the other components are also been chosen, yes when cycle (upgrading PC) are around 4 to 6 years, spending a little more on better components is the better choice.
Cheers !
Yes it can be the other choice, thank you Strojo.
Actually i find 2 motherboard with 4 to 5 PCIe, but be carfull because some PCIe Expansion Slots and M.2 Socket share the same bandwidth in some configurations.
5 PCIe (in some configuration share with M.2 
)
4 PCIe more expensive but this one have Dimm.2 Slot so you can add extra M.2 SSD without altered the bandwidth in some configuration with the M.2_3 and M.2_4 socket.
Excellent finds and thanks for reporting back on motherboard options. When I looked both up on Amazon there are a lot of very negative reviews and comments on both to do with problems. Any worries about that?
When i go to Amazon for the APEX one, i see that comment are mixed with other MB like “Hero” do you have some example of comment for the APEX model.
I will have a check for deeper read this week, i plan to order all component in about 2 or 3 weeks to be sure that everything will fit my need.
