UA Releases Updated Apollo

Discussion in 'Converters / Interfaces' started by kmetal, Sep 12, 2018.

  • AT5047

    The New AT5047 Premier Studio Microphone Purity Transformed

  1. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, Massachusetts
    Home Page:
    D, you too kind, to this thing is gonna be sweet. Your current PC is an AMD, and the new ryzen line has shown to be as good or better than Intel counterparts and as much as 50% cheaper. Amd is even making server chips now so they have certainly become a true no compromise alternative to Intel. They even cram 32 cores / 64 threads into a chip for the same price as a 16c/32t Intel i9.

    IMHO TB is the only reason to decide against AMD for your build or any current daw, aside from the need to run Mac OS, which is only Intel compatible.

    For server computers, Intel has an edge, as they are scalable to 4 processors on a single Mobo! Amd tops at 2.

    @Makzimia I think AMD got a bad wrap since they are usually bought in low budget, off the shelf PC's. There's no reason to believe that the current line of AMD is any less of a processor than a comparable Intel. Benchmark scores are on par with each other. Considering for $1800 you can have a 16c Intel or a 32 core ryzen, Intel is tough to defend on that one. For servers I still think Intel Xeon is the way to go as they are trued tested and true, with amd being too new in the game to tell. I think when comparing apples to apples, AMD is a viable if not favorable option.
     
  2. Makzimia

    Makzimia The Minstrel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2014
    Location:
    Hyde, England
    @kmetal We'll agree to disagree :). Not ever going to sell me an AMD, LOL. I built my own with high end components always, it was a thing, I won't get over it.
     
  3. DonnyThompson

    DonnyThompson Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Location:
    Akron/Cleveland, OH
    Home Page:
    I have nothing against AMD; the PC that I have been using for 6 years has served me well. And I totally understand why Kyle is sticking with AMD... he knows what he needs, and TB isn’t in that picture for him.
    The only reason I’ve decided to go with Intel for the new PC, is for the potential scenario where a Thunderbolt connection is required. There may be other advantages to Intel that I’m not yet aware of, (I’m happy to learn about them if anyone wants to share) but TB is the deciding factor for me. And, TB for audio offers latency measurements that were previously only obtainable with PCIe cards.
    I didn’t know about the potential for switching to a Mac OS, but it’s not something I ever see on my radar; if for no other reason than that Mac doesn’t support Samplitude (at least as of this writing). Samp Pro X has been my main DAW for several years ( thanks to Chris (@audiokid), and while I’ve occasionally worked with other DAW’s that I have found value in (Logic, Presonus S1, MixBus), Samp is my main DAW, and I have no plans to change that.
    I recognize that Thunderbolt may not be an important feature to others, and in that case, AMD seems to be the way to go, in terms of pricing and bang for the buck.
    I’m just trying to anticipate what may be on the horizon for me, and for what I might be doing/needing in the next few years.
    At some point, I may end up looking at an Apollo for myself, but I’m also seeing other manufacturers who are now making TB devices as well: Apogee, Antelope, Presonus, Focusrite...
    I also like that I can chain up to 6 TB devices together - audio, displays, external drives, video capfure, etc.
    I know the Intel is more money, and I know I’m sacrificing cores - the AMD we were looking at was 16 cores, the Intel is 12.
    So at this point, my only concern is the drop in the number of cores for the CPU, and how that will affect me.
    (Keeping in mind that for the last 6 years, I’ve been using an AMD Athlon 2.6ghz QUAD core, with 16 gig of RAM, the specs on the Intel 12 core seem to be pretty great to me...
    I’m still happy to hear any thoughts on how I might be sacrificing a noticeable drop in performance by going with 12 instead of 16.
    Lol... this would all be so much easier if only AMD supported Thunderbolt.
    :)
    -d.
     
  4. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    I use AMD and Intel and both are solid. My mastering DAW is AMD. If I was building another DAW I would look at what PCAudioLabs uses and clone what they do best I could. Since I've been at this game I look far ahead, look at what interfacing I want and base my DAW around that and go from there.

    If you choose a DAW platform that leans towards Apple, then that's where you go, I f you choose a platform around PC, then that's where you go. If you like where UAD is going but you choose PC, then you build a PC that supports TB 3 and a box that is quiet that has PCIe ports where you can install cards.
    I wouldn't choose a laptop for my main DAW. You simply don't have the ports and they get too hot. I would without question always have a desktop built to last, that was quiet.

    If you are still into cutting edge after 5 or 10 more years, you toss most of it in the garbage and repeat the process all over again.
     
    kmetal and DonnyThompson like this.
  5. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
  6. DonnyThompson

    DonnyThompson Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Location:
    Akron/Cleveland, OH
    Home Page:
    It’s the “where you want to go” part that is difficult for me to determine. ;)
    I wouldn’t want a laptop for my main production PC, either... they run hot, the power supplies are generally a lot lower in voltage, and future expansion is limited. That said, I wouldn’t mind getting a laptop at some point for remote tracking; I like the idea of being able to go to my friend’s places to collaborate, and using my Apogee I-O with the LT would be very convenient, because both are so light and easy to transport. And, the LT would be used solely for on site capturing; I wouldn’t be mixing on it, so I wouldn’t need a powerhouse to do that. But that’s not something I absolutely need right now.

    I have no interest in Mac - because they don’t support Samplitude, and that’s a real deal-breaker for me.
    But the possibility of moving into UAD at some point does interest me; and obviously I need an Intel system with TB compatibility to be able to do that... and other device manufacturers seem to be moving in the direction of TB as well: Apogee, Antelope, Presonus, and Focusrite all currently have interfaces that are using TB as the connection.
    The only concern I have left, is in the potential difference in performance between an AMD 16 Core, and an Intel 12 Core. Other than that, both boards allow for expansion with slots for more RAM, as well as providing open PCIe slots for future use.
    So, it really all comes down to the performance between the two... how much am I sacrificing by choosing one board that allows for TB but that has fewer cores, versus the other that has more cores, but doesn’t allow for the addition of TB?
    Lol.. that’s not a rhetorical question, BTW. That really is my dilemma.
    ;)
     
  7. audiokid

    audiokid Chris Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2000
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    Home Page:
    I use my LT for remote and daily online stuff. I've had the same LT for 10 yeas now. I can't believe its still going. Touch wood. Its a PCAudioLab Intel LT on Windows 10 now.

    Same for me.

    If I can continue working on music this next decade I am preparing to go with the new Apollo X now. The past Apollo's didn't do it for me but I can see they have addressed the setbacks and exceeded in other sections now. However, if you looked at the new Grace M908, that unit with Samplitude on a really well build PC, wow.. That looks very pro to me.

    AMD is solid but if it doesn't support TB then I would likely not go there. TB is here to stay.

    I know what you are saying.

    I'd go with Intel I think.
     
    DonnyThompson likes this.
  8. kmetal

    kmetal Kyle P. Gushue Distinguished Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Location:
    Boston, Massachusetts
    Home Page:
    Good thing I ain't selling anything. Lol. I'll let you know how my ryzen PC's do if I end up going that wsy, which is likely, especially for my slave machines. I think previously amd was a noticeable difference, but seemingly not anymore.

    @DonnyThompson

    Macs can run Windows, so a Mac isnt out of the question from a technical standpoint. It doesn't require any hacking or anything, it's a standard thing people do. You run Windows via a thing called boot camp. My buddy ran windows on his MacBook back in '06.


    Considering the motherboards we are looking at for Intel support up to 512gb of ram, I think you can make up for the 4 core difference, albeit at the cost of more expensive, registered memory. It's slightly slower than unregistered memory as well, but it does have error correction for more reliable performance.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice