1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

AMD 64 bit technology;DAW question

Discussion in 'Recording' started by Jbon, Dec 3, 2003.

  1. Jbon

    Jbon Guest

    Is AMDs 64 bit processor of any use to a DAW person?, or how much does this apply to the interests of a recordist?
     
  2. mjones4th

    mjones4th Active Member

    64 bit processors are really not a big deal to computer users until we have 64 bit OSes and 64 bit applications.

    Until then our biggest concern is how well do these 64 bit CPUs run 32 bit code?

    The AMD 64 bit offerings are extremely powerful and as good a choice as its 32 bit bretheren.

    But don't choose it just because its 64 bits, because, as of this moment, there is very little software available to take advantage of it.

    But don't 'unchoose' it either, because 64 bits figures to be big in the immediate future of the computing world.

    mitz
     
  3. kinetic

    kinetic Guest

    A hefty cache and very serious floating point calculation capability would push my decision towards the 64bit AMD. Both will result in better performance and floating point capability is very important for DAWs.

    Just my two cents worth
     
  4. mjones4th

    mjones4th Active Member

    true indeed, but at the moment, the bang-for-buck ratio is not high enough for my personal tastes.
     
  5. Jbon

    Jbon Guest

    Thanks, gentlemen; I was wondering about it since the 64 bit ads are quite hard to ignore, by the way some of the latest popups are getting so very sophisticated with full screen overlays,cars driving across the screen, I have got to be infested in some hi-tech undectable way, since I use spy tools religiously. Sorry, almost got off on a tangent, there, but anyway, I have a p4p800 mobo to add a processor&video card to when I am able to afford them (if ever),and it entered my mind that I could e-bay the mobo and switch from Intel to AMD for my DAW, at the "still planning" stage where I am. Having played music all my life,( I am 50), and studying pc's for almost 2years solid now, trying to perfect the "optimum" DAW is not merely a 2 year project! Thanks for comments which are all very helpful.
     
  6. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    some good comments already.
    if you are ready to upgrade now then i would buy an AMD 64 due to
    1) its the fastest single chip
    2) better future upgrade path 64 is begining of life P4 is end of life.
    3) you will be ready for Longhorn(64bit OS)
    when it comes out.

    someone mentioned price point to performance.
    being as the 64 beats a p4 3.2G and is the same price its not too hard a decision.
    however if your looking at a P4 2.8 then yes its 2-300 more. of course the FX51 is a bit more!

    Scott
    ADK
     
  7. suspec57

    suspec57 Guest

    My main concern about the 64bit process is how fast will the Daw makers adapt to it. Even with Longhorn on the way, doesn't mean that the apps will fully take advantage of the os and hardware.
     
  8. bgavin

    bgavin Guest

    64-bit compilers have to first be created/debugged and then available to the apps developers.

    The number of service packs and bug fixes applied to compilers in the past, tells me the 64-bit products will have the same problems.

    No thanks, not interested in one-dot-oh products.
     
  9. SonOfSmawg

    SonOfSmawg Well-Known Member

    Just my quick $.02 ...

    Like any new computing technology, there are going to be a lot of growing pains, and a lot of time spent waiting for various companies to catch-up with the technology. Remember, DAWs are all about COMPATIBILITY.

    As far as Longhorn ... LMAO. If you do a fresh install of XP Pro, then go directly to the Windows Update site, you will find over 70 updates in front of you. So don't be too anxious to use Billy Gate's new toy for a while, it'll have a LOT of room for improvement.

    When Mac released OS10, it took a LONG time for manufacturers to adapt to it, and OS10 users were in a bad way for quite some time. So when "Longhorn" is released, don't be too quick to jump on the bandwagon, as you will be in very sparse company for quite a while.
     
  10. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    i agree with wainting on Longhorn.
    even if it is released in Jan/Feb you still have 6-8 months before its ready for Daw use.
    probably take a few audio card makers a yr to finally get a driver.


    AMD 64/FX and Dual Opterons...
    have tested
    Midiman,Aardvark, Tascam, RME/Nuemdo, Echo, Frontier, Lynx.

    Nuendo2, Sonar 3, Vegas, Samplitude, Halion, Kontakt, ahh too many plugs to name...
    no issues what so ever..
    also have a beta of longhorn.. not to bad but obviously not ready for prime time.
    even without 64bit OS they still kick butt and are a better upgrade path for the future.
    unless you buy a new DAW once a yr, crazy not to go AMD 64/FX.

    Scott
    ADK
     
  11. bgavin

    bgavin Guest

    And almost all of them are security issues totally divorced from using XP as a DAW.

    WinXP/SP1 is remarkably stable, for a Windows operating system. If you can find the DAW software you want for LINUX, go for it. If your package is restricted to PC or MAC, then use what you have. XP is the best best for Windows, now that SP1 is released for XP. The vendors would be foolish to concentrate on Win2000/Win98 which are both end-of-life products.

    A fresh install of XP is the first step. Installing Service Pack 1 is the 2nd step, and finally the Windows update functions. Make a GHOST image of the completed system to your 2nd hard disk, then apply the numerous tweaks to XP to disable irrelevant services that suck machine cycles. If you screw up the machine, restore it from the GHOST image.
     
  12. The biggest pro to getting a 64bit system right now is that the top of the line AMD 64bit chip has 1,024k of L1 cache!!! Not to mention the 1600MHz fsb. I would think even with a 32bit OS and 32bit applications, those two things would make a big difference in performance.
     
  13. suspec57

    suspec57 Guest

    I have to agree with B3Groover as far as the L1 cache and 1600 fsb. It would have an impact on the apps performance but what we're saying is that the apps won't fully take advantage of all capabilities of the new architecture (yet and how long will it take to do so). Plus the price of that new stuff compared to the stuff available right now is still to high.
     
  14. mjones4th

    mjones4th Active Member

    OOoohhhhh.....

    My lust factor just rose exponentially!!! I'll admit, I've been making too much music to spec the 64 bit AMD offerings but 1600 FSB? Wow.

    mitz
     

Share This Page