V
Vectron
New member
Are there any advantages, or problems using this processor to run Home Studio
or Sonar, compared to a Pentium 4?
or Sonar, compared to a Pentium 4?
MrBoogie
Member
No problems at all. My music system is an Athlon64 3200+ on an MSI motherboard. When I say no problems, I mean no problems - rock solid, fast, no compatibility issues, etc. And there seems to be no problems with Windows XP SP2 and running my Fireface with the onboard Firewire 400, either. I actually expected to have problems from what I read, but i guess it's more of an issue if you use FW800.
The Athlon64 cpu+motherboard will almost always be cheaper than the comparable P4+motherboard. So, I guess that's one advantage. One thing I don't know is if Sonar takes advantage of Intel's Hyperthreading. If it does, that would be an advantage for Intel(even if it's only a small one).
Before another AMD vs Intel war starts, let me say you can't go wrong with either setup. The important thing is you get a QUALITY motherboard and ram and power supply and good cooling. This is absolutely critical!! Unless you want to gamble with your music.
Oh, I wanted to add one more thing. There's a few people around saying you need to get rid of internet, and antivirus, and other stuff to make your daw run smoothly. While it wouldn't hurt to do that, it is a load of crap to say that it's necessary. I use my music system for everything (internet, games, apps, etc...) and I also leave my anti-virus running all the time. Maybe if I was really pushing things and needed that little extra bit of resources to finish a project, I would disable a few things, but it would take quite a few tracks and plugins to do that. (If you're running that close to your limit, you probably need a faster cpu anyway)
The Athlon64 cpu+motherboard will almost always be cheaper than the comparable P4+motherboard. So, I guess that's one advantage. One thing I don't know is if Sonar takes advantage of Intel's Hyperthreading. If it does, that would be an advantage for Intel(even if it's only a small one).
Before another AMD vs Intel war starts, let me say you can't go wrong with either setup. The important thing is you get a QUALITY motherboard and ram and power supply and good cooling. This is absolutely critical!! Unless you want to gamble with your music.
Oh, I wanted to add one more thing. There's a few people around saying you need to get rid of internet, and antivirus, and other stuff to make your daw run smoothly. While it wouldn't hurt to do that, it is a load of crap to say that it's necessary. I use my music system for everything (internet, games, apps, etc...) and I also leave my anti-virus running all the time. Maybe if I was really pushing things and needed that little extra bit of resources to finish a project, I would disable a few things, but it would take quite a few tracks and plugins to do that. (If you're running that close to your limit, you probably need a faster cpu anyway)
punkin
Univalve & Avatar Speaks
You can build a good stable DAW with either platform using modern components. As for the hyperthreading...yes...SONAR does take advantage.
moskus
The Creator of Æ, Ø and Å
I'm using an Athlon64 3000+ and it's absolutely rock stable. 
*knock on wood*
I'm planning to upgrade my soundcard because I want to try WinXP 64bit with the new 64bit version of Sonar. But money is short (I just bought a house!).
*knock on wood*I'm planning to upgrade my soundcard because I want to try WinXP 64bit with the new 64bit version of Sonar. But money is short (I just bought a house!).
K
K-dub
Well-known member
I run a dual opteron 64 bit rig, and Sonar 4 absolutely does respond better with the dual processors mode. Hyperthreading is Intel's way of getting dual processing-like behavior out of one processor. Therefore, Sonar will respond better to such.
Still, 64 bit is reputed, by Cakewalk itself, to increase processing efficiencies significantly ... so the mere fact that they're writing code for it says something.
Still, full blown 64 bit device driver support for all the components of a 64 bit system seems still a bit far away...so be careful if you convert.
Kev.
Still, 64 bit is reputed, by Cakewalk itself, to increase processing efficiencies significantly ... so the mere fact that they're writing code for it says something.
Still, full blown 64 bit device driver support for all the components of a 64 bit system seems still a bit far away...so be careful if you convert.
Kev.
V
Vectron
New member
Thanks for all the input.
L
lopie
New member
hypertreading is not really useful
this was one of the main reasons for my upgrade to 3.0 but when you read the fine print its just a sales pitch- can't remenber exactly what the bullshit was about it -go to sonar for details. and also what good is 64bit if you have to abandon all your old effects
this was one of the main reasons for my upgrade to 3.0 but when you read the fine print its just a sales pitch- can't remenber exactly what the bullshit was about it -go to sonar for details. and also what good is 64bit if you have to abandon all your old effects
MrBoogie
Member
lopie said:
You probably should have done some research first. (Before you read the fine print, it's good to read the regular print, too.)
http://www.cakewalk.com/support/kb/kb2003181.asp
According to the Cakewalk website, Sonar 3 does NOT take advantage of hyperthreading. That is why you didn't get any performance boost.
Hyperthreading is NOT just a sales pitch. It does provide a noticeable performance boost in certain situations, and more importantly, when the software is written to take advantage of it. I just don't think it's a huge boost, necessarily.
(By the way, I'm not even an Intel guy. I am AMD all the way. I just hate "net-fact" that gets spread around too much these days. There's really no excuse for not spending just a couple of minutes researching it when you're gonna spend hundreds of $$s.)