what's more important: processor speed or cache?

T

twangbuck

New member
ok so now I"m looking at an i5. what's more important with the processor: faster processor speed or cache? I'm seeing i5's with a processor speed of 3.1 ghz and with processor cache of 6mb, while I'm also seeing i3's with slightly higher processer speeds of 3.3 but only 3 or 4 mb of cache.
I"m recording audio with minimal added plug ins and effects by the way. not doing much midi stuff. most projects will have 20 or 25 tracks. this pc will only be used for recording, so they'll be minimal other programs on here.
Would the i5's be a better bet despite the slower processor speed?
 
twangbuck said:
Would the i5's be a better bet despite the slower processor speed?
Click to expand...

Yes.



There's my straightforward response everybody. :)



As to why, yes, because of higher cache but mostly because i5 supports Turbo Boost while i3 does not. The Turbo Boost allows the i5 to dynamically change it's processing speed whenever needed to I think it's 3.6Ghz, though I'm not too sure. This means that it could outrun any i3.


They're all good for what you need though.
 
Also, most i5's utilize hyper-threading, so you're getting theoretically 4-cores out of a 2-core processor.
i3's don't have that.
I'm rockin' an i7-2700K, though... If you can afford it, I suggest that one. xD
 
MrWrenchey said:
Also, most i5's utilize hyper-threading, so you're getting theoretically 4-cores out of a 2-core processor.
i3's don't have that.
I'm rockin' an i7-2700K, though... If you can afford it, I suggest that one. xD
Click to expand...

Huh? I didn't know that the i5 utilized hyper-threading. I thought that was only i7. Well, if any i5 processor were to have hyper-threading, I would imagine it's only 2 core and no 4 core.
 
When I was shopping for my desktop, I believe I heard there was only one i5 version that did that. The i7 was on sale, so I went that route. Way glad I did. :)
 
jimmys69 said:
When I was shopping for my desktop, I believe I heard there was only one i5 version that did that. The i7 was on sale, so I went that route. Way glad I did. :)
Click to expand...

You have an i7?!



I have an old Celeron......
computer-smash.gif







I HAD an old Celeron. :)
 
I'm a retired IT guy. Cache is used in applications as a 'read-ahead' buffer. Predictive programming fills the cache with what the computer thinks will be the next bit of data that it's going to need to save time from accessing the hard drive. The larger the cache the more chance the predictive programming is right. It's aimed at database business applications, not audio processing. Ignore it.
 
My bad, I misread the Steinberg.net website. It mentions cache in terms of the hard drive, not the processor.
So basically, the pc I'm looking at has the i5-2400 with four cores, four threads, clock speed of 3.1 ghz with a max turbo frequency of 3.4 ghz, 6MB of cache (for whatever that's worth). No hyperthreading, but since it has 4 cores, I'm thinking that doesn't matter?
So basically, given my budgetary constraints, the best I can do is this or an i3. Again, I've seen i3's with clock speeds of 3.3 but only 2 cores (though it has hyperthreading). Only 3MB of cache.
I think this thread is leading me toward the i5. Am I reading everybody correctly? If I get the i5 and it runs a lot while engaging the max turbo frequency, is that going to cause a problem down the road? Will there be any overheating issues, or excessive noise issues from a loud pc or a loud cooling fan?
 
Dude, I think either one will work nicely for you. I think a nice Core2Duo would work well so you should have no problem with an i3 or i5.
 
You can run a P4 and do 20-25 tracks no problem.

In general, you can expect these limitations:

Cpu -Plugs, Latency
Ram - Plugs and Sample-based Libraries
Hard drive cache and spin speed - Number of tracks.
 
wheelema said:
I'm a retired IT guy. Cache is used in applications as a 'read-ahead' buffer. Predictive programming fills the cache with what the computer thinks will be the next bit of data that it's going to need to save time from accessing the hard drive. The larger the cache the more chance the predictive programming is right. It's aimed at database business applications, not audio processing. Ignore it.
Click to expand...

Caching is very important for all applications. However, all CPUs you see on the market will have adequate cache for your purposes. As stated somewhere above, I thought that i5s don't have hyper-threading and i7s do.
 
wheelema said:
Understanding CPU caching and performance | Ars Technica

Note the points raised concerning the initial cacheless Celeron, especially the one on why it was such a poor performer with business applications.
Click to expand...

I don't got time to read all that, I'll have to assume you have. If a cache-less CPU performs well in less data-centric applications, then so be it (perhaps I don't recall my shooling as well as I ought). In terms of audio applications, however, I would guess that caching would be useful as the principle of locality will come into play - the next bit of data required will be that next bit of wav file sitting in memory - though I'm thinking you'd need a lot of tracks to max out modern CPU and RAM capabitilies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top