Anyone using a dual processor system for a DAW ???

  • Thread starter Thread starter Torpid-x
  • Start date Start date
Torpid-x

Torpid-x

Member
O.K. I've found out the cons (and pros) of using an Athlon System. It turns out that Intel seems like the way to go for a DAW. I was wondering if anyone's using a Dual Celeron system, I guess if one's good, two's gotta be great.

Any advice
Rich
 
Dual chips would do you little good as there is only one software package for recording that has multi-processor capability (ProTools I am told - $2000). Unless the software application is specifically written to hop to another processor you get no speed advantage either for graphics or sound.

Windows, Linux, BeOS, OS/2 - none of these have inherent mulitple processor support at the OS level. It all come from the application software.

So...

Save your money and buy a faster Chip or a Bios-controlled overclocking motherboard. Better yet an external mixer or top end soundcard.
 
I've been looking into the same thing.

The Abit BP6 Motherboard is favored by many Geeks, but I have not seen any comments on it from "Audio Geeks".

It seems to have a problem with its onboard DMA66 controller chip, a lot of incompatiblities with various drives and WIN2000.

I assume you are going to use WIN2000, since WIN95/98 can only use one CPU...

Bill P
 
Absolutely not true.

Windows NT4, 2000, and the current Linux kernal (regardless of the distributer) all support multiple processors at the OS level. And the application need only be multithreaded...the OS takes care of divying up the load.

You're thinking of the old days (pre 1995).

Most software engineers today are well aware of the benefits of a well thought out threading model, regardless of the number of processors. You will see benefits all over the place.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Vegas Pro advertises that their code is multi-threaded also.
 
Yeah, I went overboard on that OS issue. The idea I was trying to convey was that unless the app has multithreading there will be little audio advantage.

Slack is right the OS has to have initial support for the chips.

Another issue not covered is the Motherboard implementation. I have a dual system and the 2nd CPU chokes periodically and slows things down to a crawl. You can watch the chip sputter with the System Moniter. 2-500MHz Intels and I might as well have 1.

This experience has tainted my view of using a dual system.
 
I Am! Well, not yet, but in 3 or 4 days hopefully. (dual Celeron 533 bp6 mobo.... lots of other stuff...)

I'm gonna be so lost.... :D

-jhe
 
Yes, never underestimate the importance of the motherboard!!

Slackmaster 2000
 
Ok thanks for the input. Now I'm more confused. I'll be Using Windows 98 SE, W2k will put me over budget. I still have to get a bass before doing anything so there is plenty of time for me to make up my mind....
So it looks like a single celeron 566 pre tested to overclock to 850 and an ABIT BE6 v.2 mobo will be the best way to go. thats about $300.00 to upgade, and about the same (ABOUT, I forgot, may round to $400) cost of a dual celeron upgrade with 500's, not including W2k.

James HE: Let me know how that works out for you

Eddie N: Whats your new DAW?

Need more input, feed me!!!!!!
Rich
 
Yeah its the Data path to everything...
the thing that links everything up...IMHO
The most important item

Tony
 
James HE - I'm aiming for that same setup. Let me know how it goes.

/Ola
 
ola... james is actually buying my old system , the one i put together recently..

- eddie -
 
why is everyone so bent on overclocking? is it difficult to understand that overclocking is BAD for the processor and less stable of an envirnment for the computer all together? would you drive 100mph down the highway in a car certified to only go 50mph ?

go with a legit pentium III .. even a pIII 733 will only set you back $240 .. and if you bog that down i give you credit..

my new system isnt currently built yet , buts it going to based around the tyan tiger motherboard with dual pIII 733's..

- eddie -
 
Eddie eddie eddie....lemme splain somethin...

1) Not every processor rolling off the line is tested for reliabilty. Intel will take a sample of the run, and determine safest Mhz rating from there. Therefore many CPU's produced can run faster than thier rating, whereas others may not.

2) Once a company gets good at producing a chip, they continue to make lower Mhz rated chips to sell in low-end, cheaper machines. But do you think they set their machine to "crappy" to make a slower processor? Nope, they lock the clock multiplier and stamp whatever speed they want on there. That brand new 400Mhz Celeron might be just as good as a brand new 533Mhz Celeron.

3) Now consider that the Celeron has a PII core. What's that mean? Two things:
a) The PII runs at a 100Mhz FSB where the Celeron runs at a 66Mhz FSB. But is it a design or physical limitation???? No. Intel creates them this way, and sells one cheaper than the other. It's not really cheaper for Intel to make a Celeron than a PII, aside from the extra cache. The cores are the same.
b) The PIII is basically a fast PII. That means that intel is very good at making these processors, which means that:

When you buy a new Celeron, you are in most cases buying a chip that is capable of much more than its Mhz rating. In fact the Celeron is the best chip to have ever come out when it comes to overclocking, even though Intel locked the onchip multiplier to prevent overclocking.

If your CPU is operating within temperature and votage requirements, then it is operating safely....even if it's "overclocked". You'll typically know within a couple days whether your overclocking experiment was safe by 1) Monitoring the temperature 2) Making sure not to screw with the core voltage too much and 3) Running the piss out of it and waiting for errors.

If no errors occur, and the CPU is operating within its heat/voltage specs, then you can breath a sigh of relief and not worry too much about it.

I've never seen ANY processor die from old age before its time. And every processor I own (that's running) now is overclocked. My Celeron is at 500Mhz from 400...my K6-2 is at 400Mhz from 350...and my old P100 is at 133Mhz (oh yippee).

Don't think of it as driving a car faster than its rating from the manufacturer. Think of it as simply driving your car faster than the speed limit.

Slackmaster 2000

P.S. I must say that if you do overclock you are taking a risk. I am not implying otherwise. If you break something it's your own damn fault.
 
I'd drive any car wide open at least once. but what's that got to do with squeezin' your processor till it screams. as long as you provide proper cooling (i.e. heat sink w/ fan and some jel and as many case fans as you can get in your case) and your mobo is capable, any processor that wasn't intentionally limited to its stamped speed should be able to overclock a little, lucky ones almost double.

Sounds like a hell of a system Eddie, clock that sucker to two gigs :mad: mad scientist!!
still hungry, feed me
Rich
 
thanks for the enlightenment slack.. although what i dont understand is :

if the clock multiplier is locked , and you do the math and up it , then raise the bus speed , why does the processor begin to run hotter?

ps..im not disagreeing or trying to disprove you , im seriously asking..

- eddie -
 
Because the CPU speed changes of course...

The CPU is set to run at some multiple of the bus speed.

Say you have a 600Mhz PIII processor. Its clock multiplier is locked at 6, and it runs on a bus speed of 100Mhz.

The math is simple, 100 * 6 = 600Mhz.

If you were to overclock this system by raising the bus speed to 133Mhz, you'd end up with

133 * 6 = 800Mhz.

One thing I forgot to mention is that if you use non standard bus speeds, you are also overclocking your PCI and AGP buses. Your motherboard will typically allow you to select AGP and PCI speed as some fraction of the bus speed. AGP is usually 2/3 or 1/1 and wants to run at 66Mhz. PCI is usually 1/3 or 1/2 and likes to run at 33Mhz.

So, lets say you up your system bus speed to 83Mhz (where mine is at)....

I want my PCI bus to be running AT LEAST 33Mhz.

So 83Mhz * 1/3 = 28Mhz...that's too slow. But 83Mhz * 1/2 = 42Mhz...and that's over 33, so we'll use it. But that means that my PCI bus is clocking in at 42Mhz, which is higher than it's rating of 33Mhz...and everything connected to this bus is now at risk. Luckily in my case everything works just fine.

Now let's say I had overclocked to a standard bus speed like 100Mhz (from 66Mhz which is what a Celeron likes). 100Mhz * 1/3 = 33Mhz. Perfect. Now the PCI bus is running at the speed it wants to run, and the only thing running hot is the CPU.

Just some stuff to consider. This is why I recommend that company mentioned in Roll Your Own 2000...since they sell pre-configured overclocked systems. They do all the hard work. I think S8-N was thinking of buying from them.

Slackmaster 2000
 
Very well done Slackmaster.

The only problem I have experienced when clocking my 566 Celeron up to 850Mhz is that the PCI sound cards could not deal with the speed. They locked at 850 so I backed down the speed to 800 and now all is smooth.

Wish there was a fine tuning control on the PCI bus.
 
Nevermind. I found the old thread with answers to my questions.

[This message has been edited by ola (edited 07-04-2000).]
 
Back
Top