- 1 on the Gigabyte Designare Z390 MB. I only have 6 cores and all is good. SSDs, 32G of DDR4 and this MB solved a lot of speed problems and CPU concerns I had. As to noise, I bought a rather huge Gamer case (Define RS USB-C) made by a Swedish company, Fractal Designs. I added two fans and the Master Cooler fan chip cooler and all of it is controlled by the Fractal case circuitry, 5 case fans total. Super quiet.
This very long posting is getting very confusing…
Agreed, but then again in 3 years I expect the whole computer will be outdated before the water and the cooler.
hi guys
i want buying a new system for mix & mastering with cubase 10 pro
i’m going to cpuboss website and compare two cpu’s — > i5 6400 & xeon w3680
if cubase 10 pro is a multi core program i choice xeon w3680 socket 1366 and
if cubase 10 pro is a single core program i choice i5 6400 socket 1151
please help me…tank you so much
AMD Ryzen 3900x is looking extremely good in multithread testing. It is way faster than Intels 9900…and draws less power?! Even the 3700x is looking very good. I hope it will show the same for real DAW usage.
does that mean the 3900x would likely be the better pick over an i9 for a cubase build? watched the video and i figure “compute performance” is the relevant measurement there yeah?
Depends how 3900x handles low latency, wait for some DAW benchmarks.
ok will do. what resources do you like for daw benchmarks?
cool thank you! seems like an i9 is still the best option for a spaceship budget but at ~$500 the 3900X is the best value yeah?
Yes, the 3900x is almost as fast as i9 9960X (a $2200 CPU!) and faster than 9940X. And of course faster than the popular i9 9900K.
Atleast when doing DSP/plugin count. If you are doing low latency work (@64 buffers) with large Kontakt libs etc it is also the same speed as Intels CPU’s. But not at 128 and above. Which is quite strange…
Ryzen 3950x ($750) will be released in september and will hopefully be even faster at DSP work with its 16 cores/32 threads. How it compares in the Kontakt lib polyphony we can only guess though. Leaked benchmarks show it kicks Intels 9980XE (a $2500 CPU!) at multicore usage.
Good times. 
huh interesting. i tend to work above 128ms buffer at the moment and i do use a lot of large kontakt libraries, but setting the buffer that high is of course also partially due to needing more processing power.
will likely wait on the 3950x to see how this plays out. i’d like to use the $300 of RAM i bought last year for as long as possible before having to replace it with the new chip smh
Hello Guys, I’m so sorry if I’m about to post something that was already posted here before, but since I noticed some changes in main subject of this thread I’ll ask anyway.
I’ve build the scanproaudio i9-9900k machine, with a designare z390 mobo and install the my cubase 10 on Windows 10 1903 build. My interface is UFX+ via thunderbolt.
I already did this sugestion https://helpcenter.steinberg.de/hc/en-us/articles/115000535804-Windows-10-audio-dropouts-on-multi-core-CPU-setups
installing the “audioengine.properties” into the proper folder and checked with mmcss test with 32 result.
I’m a ran 96hz test with the lower possible lattency 64ms (it’s almost like 44.1hz in 32ms)
My CPU is running with just 35% and I getting some REAL TIME SPIKES and dropouts, crashs, clicks, pops on Cubase.
That said my questions are:
- Do I need to use ASIO GUARD ( low Normal or high) any longer?
- Do I need to take “audioengine.properties” off the and reverse this process?
- Do I need to do anything else to sync my CPU usage with My Cubase CPU real time usage?
Thank you guys!
AFAIK C10 does not need the audioengine thing. Asioguard, dramaticly improves performance here, I keep it on hi. 64 @ 96khz is very very low and maybe unrealistic. I run my machine at 128@44k. So if thing work ok at 128 or 256 @96k don’t push it to much on the low latency. Depending on what plugins you use not all plugins work very nicely at very low latencies. There are even Kontakt scripted libraries that will not work under 256 without crackles. SO what you could try is if disabling certain plugins improves the issue. Could be just one plugin or one vendor that is causing spikes at ultra low latencies.
Nice,
So, to reverse that process, all I have to do is just to delete the “audioengine.properties” file from the folder I copied, so the things will get back where it was? Or do I need to do anything else to reverse/unfix the “audioengine” thing?
And, course, use the Asioguard.
I just upgraded to an i9-9960x, which has 16 cores; if there’s anything I need to know about using this with Cubase, or if there’s anything you would like me to benchmark for you Fabio, please let me know.
I realized that if I select in BIOS just 7 cores (which will make 14 logical cores) instead of 8, my system run so much fast and with no CPU spikes.
I lost 2 logical cores but increase performance
My CPU is an i9-9900k
Interesting… I only have 6 cores 12 log. so Maybe It won’t make an impact but very interesting.
The 3900x goes as fast as i9 9960x at lower buffer (32) but do not gain performance above (128 >) as intel I9 does.
This shows that:
- 3900x is a little less powerful than i9 9960x
- i9 9960x is less optimised than 3900x for lower latencies. It looses performance when your reduce buffer where 3900x stay constant.
This is a really good new concerning new Ryzen CPUs, showing that they have a very good behaviour for memory management and inter core connexions. Means we can expect good scalability with higher core/threads numbers, even with low buffer sizes.
Conclusion: The 3950x with 16cores /32 threads should put i9 out of the ring: Same or about same power at higher latencies/ buffer size but more performance with lower latencies/lower buffer. I’m really waiting first tests, end of this month…
Conclusion2: If new gen Threadripper show same realtime behaviour then we will have plenty of power usable for our DAWs, at very low latency.
I’m 1st in line for the next threadrippa! lol