What about Windows 10 users ?
I think heterogenous scheduling and Intel Thread Director which is baked in microcode is only working as intended on Windows 11 unfortunately. That not mean that Windows 10 with new Intel hybrid CPUs will not work - its even sometimes work quite good to be honest and even in some occasions faster then Win11 
1 Like
Nice! Did you optimize anything in the BIOS settings for AMD or running default?
How do the Asio/Realtime meters compare inside cubase with both CPUs?
Cause higher CPU usage could also mean, that the CPU is used more and therefore gives lower Asio/peak meter values, which would be a good thing.
No need to let the CPU unused and get worse performance.
And then again we would need to see the process list to sort out any OS relevant processes running in the background. If e.g. windows defender was checking something in the background there are easily 10% added just by that.
@af06fr can you perhaps check the project again showing how much cubase alone is using of the CPU?
Windows 10 will go end of life in 2025, no reason to waste any resources on that.
Everybody who is still on 10 should upgrade anyway asap.
Yeah but E-Cores were introduced back in intel 12th gen in 2021 and there may be users who at that time may have decided to use Windows 10 instead of Windows 11. There are various reasons why a Win 10 user might be hesitant to migrate to Windows 11 such as being unable to create a backup, or the possibility of experiencing an issue to their system during the Win 10 ā Win 11 upgrade process etc.
Window 10 end of life for āfree updatesā is ending in 2025, but Microsoft have announced that they will provide an additional +5 years āpaidā support for around 20 - 30USD per year.
But for anyone who is building a new computer now should choose Windows 11.
CPU Intel 285k - Cubase Pro 14
Audiofuse 16Rig ASIO buffer size : 128.
Cubase Processing Precision : 64 bit float
Average percentage of CPU time when playing this reference project
from bar 1 to bar 27: 11% (peak 13.4%)
from bar 27 to the last bar: 15% (peak 17.8%)
2 Likes
If you look you can see the Cubase meters on my second screen overlaid on the task manager.
Itās important to note that the task manager isnāt a good metric for cubase performance and we should rely on the Cubase performance meter as thatās what will dictate project performance, itās just that in this case TM and cubase ASIO guard were similar (for Once)
M
M
Thanks for the information. But is it overall CPU usage or just Cubase alone?
Just an example, here my CPU usage is 37%, but only 7,4% is used by Cubase (same question to @Norbury_Brook )
whatās important is the Cubase performance meters NOT the task manager.
Also donāt have any other programs open when youāre looking at task manager!!! Firefox with 28 tabsā¦9.7%
Task manager is useful for seeing how core loading is spread etxc and to see if thereās correlation between it and Cubase meterā¦but itās ONLY the Cubase meter that maters at the end of the day as ASIO guard hitting 100% stops you going any further.
M
Just Cubase process
This was just an example. It is not unusual that search index and or defender are running and using a couple of %.
1 Like
sure. Yes there will be background processes running but as I said donāt use the TM as a metric for cubase performance use it as a reference against the Cubase perormance meter, thatās what counts.
I sould have made it more clear in my post, itās just that the Cubase Meter showed the same performance metric as the task manager in this case. This rarely happens
M
For overclocked PCs and games, right? Standard CPUs work fine, but maybe performance improvements will also come. Cubase running on a standard setup should run very well, or has anyone seen any issues?
I havent heard about any issues and Iāve been reading a ton of posts online about this CPU line as I am about to upgrade to it as well. Just waiting for the latest fixes to see how they hold up to the AMD counterparts as I am not 100% decided yet, which one to take.
But most probably it will be an Intel CPU.
1 Like
Same here. Iām looking to replace my pc sometime soon and at this point Iām still leaning towards AMD 9950X. Had a few AMD systems in the past but Iāve been using Intel for the past 20 years or so. So Iād really want to believe that the Intel 285K will still be a good choice and waiting to see if the latest Windows and bios patches will fix things enough to pull me over again? So weāll see what the coming month will bring?
On the other hand I canāt help but feel that this new Intel Core Ultra range is somehow a crippled prototype product that was released too soon! Simply because they had to release āsomethingā to keep competing with AMD? It probably needs more development to become a better product in the next generation?
Iāve also seen testās where it seems to perform way better on new DDR5 CUDIMMās. The problem is that this type of DDR5 is still very expensive and hardly available and none of the motherboard manufacturers have a QVL yet. So itās still impossible to know what brand and type will be compatible with your motherboard?
But the biggest question now is? Will Intel still exist to develop this next generation in the coming 2 year or so? Because sales of the Intel Core Ultra compared to AMD Ryzen CPUās have been dramatically low to say the least!
1 Like
Also the AMD 9950x 3D is due out soon too which āshouldā increase performance with Sample based VIās , which is something the intel 285k does better in benchmarks.
M
The AMD 9950x should well outperform the new Intel Ultra Core 285K in most (but not all) situations according to some of the more recent benchmarks I have seen. The new Intel actually fell a little bit behind the 14th gen cpus but this may get fixed with BIOS updates soon. Iāve heard off and on reports that some of the software related issues with 13th/14th gen have carried over (minus the one where they were literally catching on fire). For the sake of DAW performance (and additionally in my case Lightroom/Photoshop), the AMD 9950x was the clear winner. Iām sure the upcoming 3D version will fly, but Iād be somewhat concerned about motherboard issues handling the 3D procs on the AMD side. Seems there is a long list of compatibility problems there and you really have to vet your RAM. I decided to go 9950x with the MSI x870e Carbon. Got it all on order and just waiting for a couple backorder items to arrive to build it out. Now just hoping I donāt receive a defective motherboard from the factory given that QC with all the motherboard brands seem to be not great at the moment. LOL
1 Like
my 9950x on an ASUS P670 MOBO 64GB DDR5 -windows 11 24H2 -RME UFX III-has been running very nicely now for a few months.
C14 is stable and fast.
what more could you want?
M
2 Likes
Yes, Iām basically waiting for this AMD 9950x 3D to be released to see what it does in the real world and maybe even the price of the regular 9950x will drop a little. So might as well wait for a month or so before buying.
1 Like