Cubase 10, Windows 10 and multi-core (14+ cores)

I just tested the performance behavior with 4 deactivated cores…

… and It had no effect what so ever. The same project had the exact same workload by just using 14 cores.

Whatever is causing a performance-boost once HyperThreading is deactivated (in my system) will remain a mystery. I can not investigate this issue further.

Any results that can be shared from Steinberg yet?

At 256 samples latency, according to ScanProAudio in SGA/DSP benchmarks, Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX is winning by far!
But they don’t say anything about which version of Cubase they are using - and not whether HT is enabled and/or other settings…

To the person who keeps losing audio in their project when they turn off hyperthreading - I’d be willing to bet this is a plugin authorisation issue (using any plugin alliance plugs by any chance?). If you have no audio at all, then one of those de-authorised plugins is probably on the master bus, and it won’t let you know until you open the plugin gui.

what is the perpous of using this type of high cpu can any one guide me about this

With what Motherboard, Graphics Card, and RAM?

Would like to know too …
And what cooling used ?
I understood 9900K has not that good thermal figures.

FYI – 9900K still works beautifully, still better than my 10 core. Still better than my colleague’s 12-core. Still better than my other colleague’s 16-core. Still better than any Mac I ever owned, by far. That’s real-world, no synthetic benchmarks. Still the most enjoyable DAW hardware I’ve ever used. And I’m still surprised. The core count vs clock speed vs multithread profile of DAWs in general plus the cost factor, make this the current perfect sweet spot IMO. I think spending more money on a better CPU is counterproductive based on my experience and my unscientific tests so far, for very little gain, if any. And that applies to other DAW apps I use as well. And even for video editing, if you go look up real-world performance ratings, the 9900K is really only beat by spending significantly more money for very little gain. But what matters is your own usage profile, so I can’t speak to your specific needs. For me and my projects, it honestly beats anything else I’ve used. It’s been very surprising to me. Then you can spend the extra money on microphones and other goodies for your studio.

Anyway, to answer your question, motherboard is the Gigabyte Z390 Designare (I thought it had a great balance of features for a DAW and good price, plus Thunderbolt 3 in case I want to try it, which I haven’t), graphics card is currently GTX1080, 64GB RAM, all-SSD (6+TB of SSD total), and RME. No overclocking so far, no need, no desire to overclock. But good to know I can later if needed. I keep the OS clean, simple and optimized just for DAW use, didn’t need much tweaking. One of the easiest builds I’ve done in recent years, been nothing but surprised at how smooth things have been working so far. Who knows, maybe I got lucky, but this is a little golden machine IMO. Running Windows 10 Pro 1809. I was skeptical to go with Z390 chipset since I’ve been on Xeons for a while now, but this runs my DAW software better than any system I have ever owned or of people I know with far more expensive rigs, and it cost 1/2 or 1/3 of my last build. Hope that helps.

Thermals are absolutely fine in my situation. I stopped monitoring them after the first week of heavy use and crushing burn-in, so IMO issues with thermal figures are grossly exaggerated out there, or they must be excessively overclocking. My numbers were well within safe margins under heaviest burn-in load. Seriously, for stable DAW use, I see absolutely NO reason to overclock – it’s plenty fast as-is. I’m interested in 100% stability, so I’m not overclocking at all. (But good to know I can if I ever want a little more horsepower.)

I don’t like water cooling systems any more TBH, the last build I did was actually too noisy for me and the numbers weren’t that great… so this time I went with the NOCTUA NH-D15S air cooling. So far I’m happy with it. Note that this Noctua model is designed for high-compatibility with motherboards – the other version of this cooler, the NH-D15, doesn’t fit on some motherboards, but the NH-D15S has an interesting shift in the design that clears more space. Works great with the Gigabyte Z390 Designare.

I’m testing a 9900k, it runs fine @ 5ghz on all cores, using a Corsair water cooler.
But LOUD, the constant ramping up and down is really distracting.
@ 4.6ghz it stays at a more constant fan speed.
It is a hot cookie, temps @5ghz around 85c up to 98c under full load is normal.
For daw use the temps are a lot lower, and less noisy.

Hello guys,

I’m new here as well as to Steinberg. For some time I was using Logic Pro X, but my friends suggested to try Steinberg. I’m was wondering about the configuration of the computer to easily work with Cubase 10. Thanks for the help!

Hi All!
I am planning on upgrading my Master PC. I have an i7 6950x with 64gb ram and AsRock x99 fatality mobo.
I am over clocking my cpu to 4.3 ghz now and have a pretty steady system. I have a huge orchestral templates (1800 midi instruments coming from a slave be pro server) and about 30-40 audio channel for live instruments, and i can run a project like this at 512 sample buffer without any dropouts or clicks.
And I would love to drop the sample buffer to 128, do I am looking into getting a new cpu + mobo combo. I am trying to choose betwee i9 9980xe or 9960xe (for better overclocking) or the new amd 2990 threadripper. Does anyone here have the above cpus overclocked to 4.6ghz or 4.7 and running smoothly with Cubase 10?

I have i9 7940X overclocked to 4.6 on all cores running Cubase 10. Noctua NH-D15 fans and Asus X299 Designare EX MB.

What is the most ideal approach to retreat the past fix?

So, with the i9 9900k tending to run so hot, are users of the i7 9700k pleased with performance and cooling for Cubase?
I’m looking at air cooling via Noctua and most likely a Gigabyte Designare motherboard.

A good air cooler will give less noise and better cooling than most AIO water coolers.
Also with considering is the lifespan of the pump for water is only 3 years, if using an AIO you would have to replace the whole AIO every 3 years. An air cooler has a fan or two that can easily be replaced .

There’s more in life then just air or AIO watercoolers :slight_smile:

For example, I’ve had a dual AMD Opteron system running for around 8 years.
Watercooled, with large “old school” passive radiators and the same Laing DDC pump. No issues.

Am now using the same passive radiators on an overclocked i9 9900K system.
The DDC pump was still working, but got replaced out of precaution by a Phobya DC12-400 PWM.

For DAW use, this pump rarely runs at more then 50% RPM, most of the time even less so you hardly hear it.
And when using an over-dimmensioned PSU (Thermaltake Toughpower 750W), you hardly hear that either.

The performance of this 9900K system with Cubase or Studio One is amazing. Much better actually then the expensive Opteron setup it replaced. Don’t believe all you read at various places about the need for expensive motherboards etc. A relatively low-cost Asrock Z390 extreme-4 runs great here and has no problem overclocking both memory and CPU, while driving 3 monitors without the need for a graphic card (via DisplayPort, HDMI and D-sub). Oh, and using Asio4all, it’s onboard audio is also fine.

Wanna thank everyone for posting their experiences in here. Still trying to figure out - I wanna invest in a new processor & mobo - is there an ideal number of cores for using Cubase 10 at the moment? Is there a number after which there’s no benefit?

Steinberg should make a comment about that really. How many cores can Cubase / Windows 10 handle as of the Windows May update and Cubase 10?

Personally I will be holding on for another month, until 7th of July, when AMD releases their new 3000-series of Ryzen CPU’s.
I will probably go for the Ryzen 9 3900X. Faster, cheaper and lower cower consumption (which means quiter) than Intels 9900.

Ryzen 9 3900X—12C/24T, 3.8GHz to 4.6GHz, 70MB cache, 105W TDP, $499
Ryzen 7 3800X—8C/16T, 3.9GHz to 4.5GHz, 36MB cache, 105W TDP, $399
Ryzen 7 3700X—8C/16T, 3.6GHz to 4.4GHz, 36MB cache, 65W TDP, $329

:question: :nerd:

Right I also want to know that same

Swell, appreciate the advice