i5 or i7 for Cubase 6/Win 7 system?

WaveLab
#1

I am building a system that will be mainly, but not exclusively, for recording (several live instrument tracks, several plug-ins and a few virtual instruments), and also for some small scale home video editing, basic Microsoft Office tasks, and general web stuff. I don’t want to break the bank, but I want a powerful and snappy system that will get the job done for several years to come, before needing to be upgraded.

I’m considering the i5 2500 and the i7 2600. Is it worth the extra $100 for an i7 2600 over an i5 2500 for a Cubase 6/Win 7 recording system? I see the i5 doesn’t support multithreading, is that a major consideration, or might it be in the near future?

Are the Sandy Bridge issues still a consideration, or have they been worked out?

Opinions?

Thanks,
Chris

#2

drastic difference between the 2 yes the 2600 is well worth it.

the fixed boards started shipping last week…

#3

Sorry to be so lame but, I just want to know.
i7 2600?
What does that mean?
Is that the GHz~~ 2.60GHZ?

What is Sandy Bridge?


Thanks for your time. :sunglasses:

#4

google

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS363US363&q=sandy+bridge

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS363US363&q=i7+2600

#5

thoughts inside my head -
(hmm… Searching Google for information… What a radical concept!.. )

#6

Scott,

Is this the hyperthreading difference? I’ve just read the Computer Shopper (UK mag) review of i5 2500 and i7 2600, and this suggests that bang per buck the 2500 is a beast; but if I understand correctly this doesn’t have hyperthreading whereas the i7 2600 does. Does this make the definitive difference for Cubase?

Thanks for any information/opinion you can offer.

Steve.

#7

first lets get past the fact that any new system (well not so much i3) but most i5/i7 and AMD 6 core are more than plenty for most.

with that said the price difference from a 2500 vs 2600 from an audio/video POV
there is no comparison.
the 2500 is just below a 950, right there with an 870.
the 2600 is right there with a 970 and hangs with the 980x

reasons:

  1. hyperthreading. The new sandy bridge’s do HT better than the older processors
  2. higher turbo and with SB you can leave turbo on where with older it had to be turned off.

and lastly a bigger cache 6 vs 8meg…

#8

Thanks, that’s very helpful.

Steve.

#9

I have an i7 I would highly recommend it for music applications such as Cubase 6.

Its the most solid and stable CPU I’ve ever put into a system.

Hope all the comments persuade you into this fine processor! :wink:

#10

Thanks for the replies, everyone. I actually forgot I posted this here, and was just looking through the forum for similar threads, when I saw the one _I_started… DUH! :smiley:

OK, I’ve decided on the i7 2600, and now I’m trying to settle on a motherboard. Based on stellar personal experience, I’m going with an ASUS board.

Scott, you mentioned, in another thread, that you’d recommend a P67 over the H67. What advantages does the “P” have over the “H” for a recording PC (and for someone who doesn’t overclock)?

Thanks

#11

Beam me up Scotty: My Cubase 5.5.3 performs better ASIO with hyperthreading off on my i7 920, ia the HT os SB that much better on Win 7 64 and Cubase 5/6?

#12

something is wrong with your system… HT on Cubase performs better, P67 or X58 or P55.
guessing you dont have the cstates off?

#13

Correct, the C-states allow speedstep eh? Might as well turn that off too then…

Aye Capt’n! :smiley:

#14

turn off all cstates and turbo… turbo sucks on X58 and it can cause issues for audio

oddly the 2600 is 100% the other way…

and turn back on the HT…

#15

might a i7 970 worth against a i7 2600 for Cubase and video use?
actually i have a 950 but the cpu performance is not smooth with big projects…
that´s the reason i want to upgrade.

#16

I’ve got a 950 and run very smoothly up to 200 tracks (combination of recordings and sample-based instruments). The type of CPU spikes your talking about are probably a bad driver or other hardware resource that’s causing the problem. I’m running a UAD1 and RME 9632.

Perhaps your Powercore or Lynx card might be the issue? Ever tried removing one from the setup and then measuring CPU performance?

#17

they are pretty much neck and neck. since you already have an X58 system the smart thing is to just drop the 970 in there and preferably over clock it… it will hit 3.8GHz no prob.

with the price drop on the 970 it might be worth it. had you tried to OC you 950 yet? it will also hit 3.8GHz.

#18

And how much do you think a i7 2600K with good air cooling (Noctua U12P SE2) can reach without pushing too much in a Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD3-B3?

Other thing: for samples, is it worth overclocking Corsair Dominators 1600MHz?

#19

4.5GHz should be easy
never oc the ram. you want the ram to come as close to 1600 as possible
anything past 1600 can be an issue without raising voltage in a big way (looking for unstable at that point)

we have even seen issues @ 1604

OCing on the SB systems is a tad different as its all having to do with Turbo

#20

Ok, no RAM OC, so 1600Mhz is enough for good samples stream? I’ll be using 4x4 GB. And let me try to understand one thing: the Turbo feature is an auto overclock, right?, so if I want to overclock, should I increase both multipliers the same amount, normal and turbo, or set them both to the same speed?

Thanks