Which 2009 processor brand is better and why? AMD or INTEL?

It's probably to do with the Pentium's former inability to handle floating point.

These days, AMD are the budget/lower-performance manufacturer and Intel are where to go for speed.

If you want the most compatibility and speed, go Intel. I am using an AMD 64 3600+ X2. It's ok but the equivalent Core2 Duo will smoke it. (I've clocked it over to just 2.1Ghz.)

Bear in mind it's a resounding Intel if you want performance (which you do).

If anyone wants to save money (to get onto the gear ladder) and not be top of the line, AMD is still worthwhile.

Remember, 70% of Steam users (gamers) use Intel.

Steam is to gaming what ProTools is to studios.
Only, free and less hated.

Re: 2009:Which processor brand is better and why? AMD or IN

rainydayglory wrote: Hi. I'm looking at putting together a Windows box. I've heard a rumor that VST's actually *LIKE* AMD processors.

Is this true?

If I were using VST's, would building an AMD box be a good start?

What are other advantages or disadvantages one would consider when constructing a new box for 2009.

for samples the very best is Core i7
next would be an AMD Phenom II preferably with DDR3
after that would be core 2 duo (or quad but quad does not thing for samples) overclocked to 1600 FSB

intel i7 and intel motherboard. this combo smokes anything i've work with in the past. please don't make the mistake of buying a la cheap just to save some $. it is not worth the headaches. i've been down that road before...never again.

C2Duo/Quad isn't necessarily worse - personally an i7 is perhaps too expensive for a benefit you won't get a chance to make use of.

a beneft you wont make use of? how is that exactly?
he asked for low latency.

So you put together a system with SATA HDDs/fast FSB and low latency RAM and what not.

Does it matter whether it's a Core2Quad or a Core i7, really? Sure, the i7 is faster but is it that much faster that you simply gotta have it regardless of the extra cash involved?

There's no point cutting unnecessary corners but there's no reason to put gold leaf and red stripes on everything either.

Core2 Quad 2.5: $209
I7 : $270

cost difference: $61
performance advantage: priceless

I think you would do good with an Intel E5200, a P43 or P45 motherboard, 2 x 2GB RAM, a 320GB HD, and a 640-750GB HD. Bring your multiplier down to 7 or 8, your FSB up to 400, and maybe tweak up your CPU voltage (probably keep it just under 1.3V) and RAM voltage (check the specs on your specific brand; some brands behave better with 2.1V or higher at DDR2 800 speed) a hair. Actually, you should probably just see how it works for you before delving into overclocking. My guess is that you won't run out of CPU or have latency issues anyway.

If $2500 is your budget for your computer, softwares, mics, monitors, etc; then you should really consider skimping a little bit on the computer. As long as you get a decent motherboard, you can always pop in a quad core processor and add more harddrives later.

If you want zero latency without having to put a whole system together, give him a mix from off the Onyx and use DAW software which can delay-compensate the output to align it with the input.

Well, it looks like the Onyx doesn't do the whole zero-latency monitoring thing that alot of interfaces can do, where the inputs are routed directly to the outputs without going through the computer latency. However, your new computer build may be able to handle latency settings around 1.5ms or 1ms, depending on how good the Onyx drivers are.

What!
I was under the impression that the Mackie Onyx is a mixer (a series thereof). Most analog mixers (even with ADCs fitted) will still do zero-latency mixing of inputs to outputs.

Perhaps he actually has a hunk of jet black rock?

Codemonkey wrote: What!
I was under the impression that the Mackie Onyx is a mixer (a series thereof). Most analog mixers (even with ADCs fitted) will still do zero-latency mixing of inputs to outputs.

Perhaps he actually has a hunk of jet black rock?

Oh yeah; duh. I was really overthinking things and forgot that we are dealing with an actual hardware mixer and not just an interface. Don't matter then if it doesn't have ZLM via software mixer. Looks like there is actually a button to assign the firewire return from the computer to the main mix of the board too.