Cubase 7.5 & dual octocore cpu

Hi there ! My current machine is dying and i start thinking about building a w764/w864 dual xeon machine that will last for the next 7/10 years. Any help/thought appreciated ! (is it worth it, will this work, does cubase can handle 16 cores, etc) :smiley:

julien

No idea ? :cry:

Personally, I’d get a 6 core single cpu for a lot less money and update again in a couple of years.

Thanks, Beatpete ! I have an enourmous bunch of soft, so changing my computer & reinstalling is a kind of pita, and the later the best…

a dual Xeon will be an absolute WASTE of your money.
unless you are buying 2 3.1GHz ($2000) processors
the single 6 core 4930K will outperform
I know very few clients who have anywhere near close to a need for a dual Xeon

and lastly NO system will last 7 yrs unless you

  1. never update your software
  2. never buy newer software
  3. never change your workflow.

average life of a system is 3 yrs, heavy composers even less, guys who only track and add some effects a a bit longer.

Thank you very much for your insight, scott. My system is five years old, but it’s pretty unmanageable with up-to-date softs like c7.5 & co. I’ll look that 6 core 4930K closely ! :slight_smile:

Scott is correct, you do not need to do a dual Xeon system, with the current processors available to you. Dual processor systems have not been at the forefront of audio machines in a while because single core technology has seriously improved.

That said, if you want a machine to last you 7 years, it’s going to come down to the components you use and the way you build it. I have clients who have machines who have lasted that long, but they lock down their systems and produce in specific fashions; if you are the kind of producer that is always upgrading to the latest and greatest in DAWs, plugins, and software, you’ll hit the cap eventually; this is just the nature of the computing world.

You can get plenty out of that 4930k. It falls very high on the benchmark list: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

second only to the 4960x and Xeon processors.

Keep in mind the motherboard and FSB that you plan to pair with this processor, to ensure you get the most out of it.

We have just done this.

A 6-core 3.4GHz i7-4930K is:
a) a quarter of the price of an 8-core 3.4GHz E5-2687W v2
b) half the price of a 6-core 3.6GHz i7-4960X. That’s right, only 200MHz faster!

I noticed that Cubase still tended to favour one core more than the others, so a faster CPU is still more desirable than more cores.

However, we are using an Asus P9X79-E WS motherboard, which allows us to drop in a faster/more-cored 2011pin consumer/Xeon CPU if required. Intel has committed to continuing to develop 2011pin CPUs. This motherboard is designed as a stable workhorse, though it does support overclocking for consumer parts.

a good adres for building monster pc’s is titanus from the US. Very pro and good service and acceptable pricing. Since this is upper end of the market you normally wil have personal contact with them for specific needs.
laptop example:
http://www.titanuscomputers.com/6-to-8-Core-Intel-Xeon-Workstation-Laptop-s/85.htm
desktop example:
http://www.titanuscomputers.com/4-to-12-Core-Intel-Xeon-Workstation-PC-s/69.htm

Cubase will work with every core you serve it, so there are no limitations on that point i suppose.
The tendencies to one core for cubase is only present on specific conditions. There are a lot of performance topics on the forum where these items are being spoken about.

But seperating your resource needs over multiple systems can (as an alternative) be cheaper then a xeon build system when working with dedicated software that can do this, f.e. Vienna Esemble PRO (an example, others do exist). A lot of people who are quite demanding on resources actually prefer this way of working since you can build up your own building blocks with resources that can be loaded. Maybe worth a try with a demo version, because the principle of seperating the resources over multiple engines works actually even on a single system very well.

A lifecycle of 7 years is imho very reasonable when making the option to go for quality, and spend in the same way. But it is only usefull when the entire rig is build at the same quality level. The machines from titanus match these principles, but they come at a price. :slight_smile:

hope you find your perfect solution
kind regards,
R.

kind regards,
R.

they have much to learn yet before I would consider them knowledgeable for audio/video a quick look told me all I needed to know…

Not bad, I was able to build myself a decent DAW using their configurator for just $56,283.00… :mrgreen: