| |
| Author
|
Buying new PC,need help????
|
yashpal
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
143
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 01:43:50
|
ok guys,i am sorry for opening this post,there are millions of them on this theme,but i really need your recommendations...
it`s pretty simple...imagine you are me,and you are buying new PC,what would you buy for your studio..let say something about 600-800 €
thnx a lot...:-P |
|
|
Kaz
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
2268
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 03:31
|
I'm considering a PC upgrade myself, and I've come to the following conclusion:
You do not need more horsepower than a Q9400. Instead of overclocking it - you can undervolt it (it's an extremely good CPU for that). I'd recommend the Gigabyte EP45-DS3L as a motherboard - it's cheap, runs cool and fast, upgrading and adding a load of cards will be no problem, and you won't need more. Also looking for a silent CPU fan is quite worthwhile in this case, as you will not need a lot of cooling if you undervolt the CPU. Passive cooling may be enough in this case, but I haven't heard of anyone who attempted that with a quad-core.
As to a graphics card - I'd recommend any low-profile, passive cooled solution (Asus, Gigabyte and Saphire offer a 3450 that fits this solution). As for RAM, DDR2 800MHz CL4 RAM should offer all the performance you need, 2GB should cover your needs, 4GB to future-proof it.
As for a power supply, I doubt that with this setup you will pass 300W even if you add UAD-2 cards, so a 400W PSU should be enough (FSP have a passive cooled one that fits the bill). With these components, a case with a single 120mm fan should be more than enough airflow to keep your system running without a hitch.
As for the HDD - any 7200RPM one will offer all the performance you need, and 500GB should be overkill for a DAW. I'd recommend not adding a CD/DVD drive (take the one from the old PC to install the OS, and then take it out again), a disk-on-key to bring finished works to the other computer should be more than enough.
This computer will suck at gaming and video editing, BUT, it should be more than enough for all your audio needs. This doesn't include a sound card, speakers or a monitor. Those are the things that you shouldn't cheap out on. Since high end CPUs, motherboards, RAM and graphics cards are beyond overkill for a studio machine, the point of this build is to run at low temperatures and at very low volumes, and should cost around $800 in the US.
SSDs are a tempting storage solution (silent and cool-running), but they're just too expensive to justify, especially since 100GB is basically as low as you can go on a studio PC. That's money better spent on pro gear. http://www.myspace.com/Hooloovoo222 |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 04:17
|
its amazing what u can get for 800 eu today anywayz.. just fo to the cheapest shop around and get the best they have from good brands.
very hard to go with 800eu for desktop and not get a monster
baisicly go for craziest processor , make sure all parts match to its bus speed etc.
and get crazy storage as well , files growing faster each day (for example - the synth omnisphere is more then 40GB) www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 04:31
|
|
Kaz
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
2268
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 18:23
|
I really doubt that the new Core i7 (aka Nehalem) CPUs are needed. They are problematic, because you'll have to spend at least $200 on a motherboard, and you will need DDR3 RAM which while fast is just overkill for audio, but will raise the price by another $100.
The CPU will also heat up a lot more, and will require a case with more fans/ventilation, and a stronger power supply, which will be both more expensive and louder. A louder computer in the studio means you have to raise the volume more in order to hear the details in the sound (a 100db SNR ratio in your audio chain is useless if you have a PC running at 40db and need to play at 140db to enjoy it - ear damage is not recommended for audio production).
Save your money and buy a better sound card or speakers. These will improve your audio production FAR more than a computer too powerful for your needs. Unless you intend to do video editing/gaming on the computer, what I mentioned should be more than enough for any producer for the next 2-3 years at the very least. And in 2-3 years, that money you saved now will buy you MUCH better hardware. http://www.myspace.com/Hooloovoo222 |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 22:12
|
Since the electricity used in the Nehalem is about 30% lower than the previous chips, the chips won't heat up quite as fast as mentioned by Katz, it does indeed lead me to believe it will stay cooler, less energy means less friction ergo less heat. And the power supply is less, ergo weaker. Since there is less heat there might be less noise from the cooling unit as well.
DDR3 ram may be fast, but I doubt strongly it would be overkill for audio, I have never heard of any ram for audio that is too fast, the whole concept sounds weird. You WANT the fastest ram.
And since the software will also be likely more cpu demanding in 2-3 years, I doubt there will be much of a difference in 2 years as far as cpu consumption is concerned.
You know Katz, reading your post I strongly doubt you even read about the new processors.
Upavas - Here And Now (Sangoma Rec.) new EP out Oct.29th, get it here:
http://timecode.bandcamp.com
http://upavas.com
http://soundcloud.com/upavas-1/ |
|
|
|
vegetal
Vegetal/Peacespect
Started Topics :
19
Posts :
1055
Posted : Nov 25, 2008 23:03
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-25 22:12, Upavas wrote:
Since the electricity used in the Nehalem is about 30% lower than the previous chips, the chips won't heat up quite as fast as mentioned by Katz, it does indeed lead me to believe it will stay cooler, less energy means less friction ergo less heat. And the power supply is less, ergo weaker. Since there is less heat there might be less noise from the cooling unit as well.
|
|
It has the memory controller built in to begin with just by doing that increases power consumption. And the TDP on the nehalem is set to 130W so expect more when it comes to intel when your looking at TDP. So you need a more powerful PSU, you probably need more fans and cooling as well so no you probably end up with a more noisy and alot more expensive DAW than if you deceide to go for either the core 2 or a quad AMD with the Deneb core.
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3326&p=8
Quote:
|
DDR3 ram may be fast, but I doubt strongly it would be overkill for audio, I have never heard of any ram for audio that is too fast, the whole concept sounds weird. You WANT the fastest ram. |
|
Performance vs price on DDR3 is hardly defendable at this moment. Your WAY better off with DDR2 at this moment.
Quote:
|
You know Katz, reading your post I strongly doubt you even read about the new processors.
|
|
Sounds like you have some reading up to do as well 
Demand recognition for the Armenian genocide 1915
http://www.devilsmindrecords.org/
http://www.myspace.com/vegetalmusic
http://www.checkpoint-music.com/ |
|
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 00:38
|
Either way, I think anything faster than a Core 2 Duo with 1-2gb ram is enough for working with audio right now..the Nehalem stuff just seems like it wouldn't be worth the effort and cost at the moment. If you want to spend hundreds more to get the best possible system, go for it, but I can wait until it's affordable and stable.
If I we're to buy a new system today, 2.6ghz Core 2 Quad with an XFX mobo and 2gb ram. You can get that with a 500gb hard drive, decent psu, video card, disc drive and case for less than $700 USD.
You believe in the users?
Yeah, sure. If I don't have a user, then who wrote me? |
|
|
|
orange
Fat Data
Started Topics :
154
Posts :
3918
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 01:12
|
well i want get in the cpu talk here..
as far us rams go get the fastest (1066/1150 ddr2 or 1600/1800 ddr3)
but one thing u need to be carefull deciding is hdd get the fastest u can spend money at (wd raptors and ssd (sc) being the fastest and more expensive)
but i think with a wd 500g or 1tb black edition u will be just fine if u havent much to spend.
and pls dont get the cheapest mobo get something over 100e and brands like gigabyte, dfi, foxconn.
asus is nice but not the best for audio (dpclatency issues) exept the very expensive models.
http://www.landmark-recordings.com/
http://soundcloud.com/kymamusic |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 01:25
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-26 01:12, orange wrote:
and pls dont get the cheapest mobo get something over 100e and brands like gigabyte, dfi, foxconn.
asus is nice but not the best for audio
|
|
i used asus motherboards all my life
always was very happy , exept 1 time that it was not compatibile with my soundcard.
what do you do recomend tho , just say no withyout the yes in just more confusing!
www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
Kaz
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
2268
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 05:37
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-26 01:25, Elad wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-26 01:12, orange wrote:
and pls dont get the cheapest mobo get something over 100e and brands like gigabyte, dfi, foxconn.
asus is nice but not the best for audio
|
|
i used asus motherboards all my life
always was very happy , exept 1 time that it was not compatibile with my soundcard.
what do you do recomend tho , just say no withyout the yes in just more confusing!
|
|
Asus have also gotten bad feedback with producers running multiple UAD and other expansion cards in some cases. For most purposes, they're fine. Gigabyte are considered a solid choice by most studios, and in their newer motherboards they also have heat-pipe cooling just to make sure no problems happen. They are also the 2nd biggest manufacturers of motherboards (after Asus), so while smaller companies might fall due to the current financial crisis, Gigabyte won't.
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-25 22:12, Upavas wrote:
Since the electricity used in the Nehalem is about 30% lower than the previous chips, the chips won't heat up quite as fast as mentioned by Katz, it does indeed lead me to believe it will stay cooler, less energy means less friction ergo less heat. And the power supply is less, ergo weaker. Since there is less heat there might be less noise from the cooling unit as well.
DDR3 ram may be fast, but I doubt strongly it would be overkill for audio, I have never heard of any ram for audio that is too fast, the whole concept sounds weird. You WANT the fastest ram.
And since the software will also be likely more cpu demanding in 2-3 years, I doubt there will be much of a difference in 2 years as far as cpu consumption is concerned.
You know Katz, reading your post I strongly doubt you even read about the new processors.
|
|
A1) I thought spelling a 3 letter nickname was hard to get wrong. Are you attempting humor here? 
A2) Stop calling Core i7 chips Nehalem - Q9xxx aren't called Yorkfield. You are mixing up the microarchitecture's name with the CPU name.
B1) The Core i7 does NOT use less electricity. It is currently using a 1st generation process for the chip, as opposed to the Q9400's R0 process, which is the most mature for the C2Q generation - Intel have been perfecting the manufacturing process on the C2Q series for a couple of years now. A new architecture's first process is all about stability / high-yield manufacturing, no performance instabilities, and creating a chip which can beat earlier ones in benchmarks.
B2) The first generation of the Core i7 family is intended for the high end (as is usually the case with a new architecture), and the comparison you're talking about is with the QX9770 (which is a power-guzzler aimed at gaming), not the Q9400, which is slower than the newest CPUs, but uses far less power as well.
B3) What is written in Wikipedia is true - but I have yet to meet a producer that needed more horsepower than a Q6600. The Q9400 at stock speed is enough - and due to the mature process can be undervolted and use less power than the Q6600 while offering approximately a 15% increase in processing capabilities. Or alternatively: underclock it to 2.4GHz (should be about on par with the Q6600) and make it use FAR less power. The R0 stepping is amazing for both over/underclocking and undervolting.
C) Core i7 chips have only ONE chipset at the moment, the X58, and like all X-series chipsets by Intel, these are aimed at the high end / gaming rigs (as opposed to G and P series). Things like 3-way SLI support and Quadfire are cool for gaming and 3d modeling, but useless for audio. The P45 chipset supports more than enough peripherals and offers more than enough flexibility for any audio setup (unless you find 2x PCI, 3xPCI-E and at least one PCI-E 2 slot not enough for your cards) - while drawing less power. And since the X58 is the only Core i7 chipset, you can't get around using it... and probably won't be able to until Intel release the mainstream Core i7 CPUs. Also, anything beyond a ICH9 southbridge on a motherboard is more than any (reasonable) audio rig will need.
D) Show me a computer in which the RAM is a bottleneck for audio production, and I'll show you a faulty memory controller. Just think of the bandwidths needed for audio production - DDR2 667 is fast enough for even the most extravagant productions. You might have a faster boot time and loading times for your sequencer and VSTs with DDR3, but that's about all the performance gain you'll have. While comfortable, this is not even close to critical. Think of it like this - 96,000 (samples per second) x 2 (stereo signal) x 8 (double-precision processing is in 64 bit) x 64 (maximum amount of channels used at a single time) is under 100MBps, which is basically maximum amount of data processed in the CPU. A lot of 7200RPM HDDs can handle that speed. RAM is faster.
There is nothing "too fast", there's just wasting money and using more power for things you don't need. Like high end CPUs, graphics cards and RAM. We are not building a gaming, video editing, or 3d modeling machine here, in which we are talking about FAR greater amounts of data to process.
The performance bottleneck assuming you have a decent 7200RPM HDD is nearly always the CPU, in which the Q9400 is more than enough.
I have built a Core i7 machine (I make a few extra dollars as a PC technician here and there, including jobs for studio machines). I make money by knowing this stuff. And I am one of the contributors to that wiki article you linked to. And no, they didn't even edit my phrasing, let alone information. The rig I suggest should be enough for at least 3-4 years in your studio.
Upavas, the point is that my rig is optimized according to these factors in this order:
1) Estimated maximum performance needed for the next 3-4 years or so.
2) Most power-efficient and cool-running platform (that is: CPU + motherboard + RAM) available that offers that power at the mentioned price range (minimum amount of cooling).
3) Highest quality of stability and support. No one likes driver problems to be the reason their computer keeps crashing.
4) Best reviews from audio producers who really know their stuff.
If you disagree with anything I said, please, explain to me why I'm wrong. http://www.myspace.com/Hooloovoo222 |
|
|
|
vegetal
Vegetal/Peacespect
Started Topics :
19
Posts :
1055
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 09:22
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-26 05:37, Kaz wrote:
A1) I thought spelling a 3 letter nickname was hard to get wrong. Are you attempting humor here?
|
|
w00t aren´t you Bob Katz ;D
Quote:
|
You might have a faster boot time and loading times for your sequencer and VSTs with DDR3, but that's about all the performance gain you'll have.
|
|
Faster boot time? feels more that the HD is the bottleneck there.
But you may add a lower power consumption to that list considering that the Voltage on DDR3 is lower compared to DDR2.
Quote:
|
4) Best reviews from audio producers who really know their stuff.
|
|
Got any reference published online?
Demand recognition for the Armenian genocide 1915
http://www.devilsmindrecords.org/
http://www.myspace.com/vegetalmusic
http://www.checkpoint-music.com/ |
|
|
|
Kaz
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
2268
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 13:06
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-26 09:22, vegetal wrote:
Faster boot time? feels more that the HD is the bottleneck there.
But you may add a lower power consumption to that list considering that the Voltage on DDR3 is lower compared to DDR2.
|
|
I said "slightly better". OS not only loads from HDD, but also does some initializing, and in this case would gain a bit of speed. Naturally, HD performance is the biggest bottleneck.
Lower voltage does not necessarily translate to a lower TDP. Watts are measured in Joule/sec, and a Joule is related not only to the voltage, but is measured (in this case) by the energy gained by electrons passing through a certain voltage - while that does correlate to voltage, the number of electrons is critical in this as well, and as you may guess by DDR3s much higher bandwidths, while the voltage is lower, the amount of electrons passing through is higher.
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/
http://www.silentpcreview.com/ (usually about HTPCs, yet a lot of technical data available).
While not everyone there knows their stuff, you will find some gems here. Cross-referencing with other forums and sites helps, but between these two, eetimes and digitimes (for general updates in technological news), there's more than enough information to get at least a ballpark of your wants. http://www.myspace.com/Hooloovoo222 |
|
|
|
vegetal
Vegetal/Peacespect
Started Topics :
19
Posts :
1055
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 17:10
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-11-26 13:06, Kaz wrote:
Lower voltage does not necessarily translate to a lower TDP. Watts are measured in Joule/sec, and a Joule is related not only to the voltage, but is measured (in this case) by the energy gained by electrons passing through a certain voltage - while that does correlate to voltage, the number of electrons is critical in this as well, and as you may guess by DDR3s much higher bandwidths, while the voltage is lower, the amount of electrons passing through is higher.
|
|
Lower TDP, are we talking intel or amd here
Generally speaking if you lower the voltage on a component you decrease the amount of current used in circuits, why would you otherwise undervolt a lapbook. Demand recognition for the Armenian genocide 1915
http://www.devilsmindrecords.org/
http://www.myspace.com/vegetalmusic
http://www.checkpoint-music.com/ |
|
|
|
vegetal
Vegetal/Peacespect
Started Topics :
19
Posts :
1055
Posted : Nov 26, 2008 17:11
|
|
|
|
