Useful insights.
Many Thanks
excellent.
Thank you
Thank you all for you time.
I’d say lets wait for the fix Intel said they will provide and then lets retest.
If Intel can catch up on the bus processing then it will be the superior choice for DAW work.
Right now its a toss up as you say, depending on your situation either AMD or Intel is the better choice.
What is this “fix”? Or rather, what is the “problem” the “fix” is supposed to solve?
1 Like
Intel aknowledged that quite a few benchmarks and real world test results are not what they were experiencing when testing their units (even if thats kinda not plausible to me, 'cause how do they test then if everybody else gets similar results?).
So they said there is something off and they are already working on a “fix” which will be released end of november, beginning of december.
AFAIK it will be a microcode/BIOS update.
Full video of the interview with the Intel guy is here:
Intel exec says Arrow Lake launch ‘just didn’t go as planned’ - The Verge
2 Likes
@af06fr could you post a screen shot of your cubase project and the task manager showing how the cores are loaded?
How much performance boost did you get over your last machine?
cheers
M
So that everyone can use a reference project, I loaded the “Austin Hull Cubase 13 demo project” into Cubase Pro 14.
Below is a screenshot of the Task Manager taken 1 minute and 10 seconds after launching the project.
8 P-Core first, followed by 16 E-Core
Here are the screenshots of the “Audio System” window and the VSTi and VST FX loaded in this project (instances > 0)
How much performance boost did you get over your last machine?
Hard to say. Perhaps a performance multiplied by 2 or 3.
Because everything has changed : the CPU, the RAM, the SSD disks, …
Only the audio interface (Arturia Audiofuse 16Rig) remained
3 Likes
What was your old CPU?
Arrow Lake 285K have different P/E core layout. 8P followed 16E was on Raptor Lake 13900K/14900K. 285k has 2P + 8E +4P +8E +2P and its as I saw are showed similarly in Task Manager. Just for info. 
1 Like
Old CPU : Intel I9 10850K
1 Like
Wow .The 10850k multiplied by 2 or 3 woud be insane. The 10850k was an awesome cpu for DAW use back then.
For reference heres the project Playing on my 9950x.
I’m only seeing 8% system use compared to the 285k 20%
Interesting comparison.
9950x-64GB DDR5-Windows 11 24H2-RME UFX III
M
1 Like
You have both?
Since the load is lower I’m curious to hear what you have in that project in terms of plugins and VSTi… (?)
no the 285K results are posted further up this thread from @af06fr
we’re both playing the same project. It’s the Austin Hull Cubase project available to everyone.
M
1 Like
Ah, got it!
Garcia’s!
Hi Gurus,
Can we conclude , based on the above tests , that the gap might come from E cores performances in favour of AMD vs Intel ?
I think that’s a good place to start. Also look at the CPU speed though as well.
The AMD is based at 4.3 GHZ and showing a 5.37 GHZ boost on this project.
The intel is showing a base of 3.7 GHZ and boosting to 4.6 on this project.
that’s bound to have an impact IMHO
M
This article explains how Steinberg has no control over what gets assigned to the E-Cores or the P-Cores and they recommend to disable the E-Cores entirely lol. Not a great look for intel. Cubase users should probably consider this when building a new computer.
This is old thread and not relevant any more. The scheduling issues were fixed/optimized in 2022/2023 period with Windows 11 updates and Intel microcode/BIOS updates… Starting from Cubase 13 Steinberg officially states that its fully supports hybrid heterogenous CPUs. So Cubase 13 and 14 have all optimizations for audio engine inside. Even Cubase 11 and 12 nowadays works much better on 12/13/14/ gen CPUs on Windows 11 if we compare to what in was in early days - around December 2021 and start of 2022 - those was pretty bad times for new hybrid CPUs and almost any software… But now it is improved a lot tbh.
2 Likes