Hi can anyone help.I need to rebuild my pc. I use Protools M powered 7.3,plus plug ins with Reason3 and Guitar Rig2 with a M audio Project-mix i/o.
I ve done some research & i need new cpu,m/board,ram for recording music
I'm between the Intel Quad-Core Q6600 (2.4ghz) or Core Duo E6850 (3ghz).
But as both are running in at nearly the same price which would do the better job for recording & mixing in the long run!(well i dont want 2 have to rebuild my pc again for at least a few years!) I've got £550 for new componants and looking at www.scan.co.uk
My current pc is Amd Sempron3400 with 1.5 gb ram,2 ide hdds (250gb& 32o gb's)
It kills this setup at the moment, tons of digital distortion and crashes!!
i would gratefully like to hear from music minded people.Cheers
@rickster7 Dunno much about music requirements but with £550 to spend check out this http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?t=95401 and you could get yourself a nice little rig with either an up to date E6850 (1333 FSB) or one of the older Q6600's on the 1066 FSB, 2GB of say OCZ RAM and an Abit IP35 for less than £350.
I would have to say since I checked Protools capabilities and it supports dual/multicore that you may consider the Q6600 over the E6850.
If you are mixing a heavy number of tracks it sounds (pun intended) like the quad would be of better use to you. Also from what I have read the above posters are correct in that you should go with at least 2gb of ram.
I do not have specific bench results to back up my statement above. I do however know that if you google for CakeWalk and dual vs quad core you will see a substantial increase in speed with the quad in cakewalk. If even a fraction of that speed increase would apply to Protools (and it does say it supports both dual and multicore procs) then I would definitely go with the quad.
I tend to agree with Maziar... if the prices are within $20 or $30 of each other, it makes a lot of sense to get a Quad. That will be a few bucks well spent to future-proof your build a ton. If you do not rebuild often, then you should definitely go with the Quad.
Yes, the E6850 probably is an awesome choice today. But like I've said before...that's for today....the Quad is for tomorrow. I was going to buy an E6600, but when I heard about the huge price drop for the Quads, it got me thinkin. As was mentioned above and from what I've read, you can easily OC a Quad to 3.0 or 3.2 today.
If anybody thinks that software and game developers aren't desiging their upcoming products to utilize 4 cores and 8 cores or more, then your burying your head in the sand. Intel is throwing CPUs with huge horsepower on the market. Just think about the marketing people, sales people and executives at all these companies that sell software? They are drooling;...they will be a major force in pushing utilization of this untapped potential. They'll be kicking the designers to put support for 4 or 8 or 12 cores into their software, because it is sexy stuff and it will sell product! It's all about the benjamins man! Don't anybody tell you differently. Marketing and sales drive a lot of this stuff; I hate to admit it (I'm an engineer). There are very few pieces of software that are taking advantage of them now, but it is just a matter of time before products hit the street that will. Some new games are coming out just this fall that will take advantage of a Quad with more to follow.
What's wrong with having a little extra horsepower under the hood?
Yeah, go quad. I messed up when I voted for E6850, didn't realize your software was ready for quads already. Sorry, I should have checked.
If you are using Vista 64-bit or XP 64-bit then you may see benefits from having 8 GB of RAM instead of 4, but only if your files are enormous (several hours, for example). If you are using a 32-bit operating system then 4 GB is plenty and you will only see about 3.2 GB anyway. I'd get 4 GB for now, regardless of Windows type. Get two 2GB sticks (not four 1 GB sticks) so you will have the option to upgrade to 8 GB later if necessary. I'm assuming here that you'll have a decent motherboard that allows this (I like GA-P35-DS3R, for example).
Just to give you an idea: a 1-hour CD when ripped to WAV takes about 600 MB. I'm guessing that a PC with 4 GB of RAM and Vista can hold 2 or 3 hours in RAM. One with XP will probably do a bit better.
I had a similar question that I decided was not worth its own thread.
What about other applications? Namely, playing an online game, running Ventrilo, and running Bluetooth drivers for a headset? Right now trying to run these three things at once absolutely kills my old Pentium 4. I'm looking at a new build within the next several months and I keep going back and forth on dual-core or quad-core.
Of course in 5 months both the E6850 and the Q6600 are gonna be old technology but I can see myself still having to make this kind of decision.
You need a quad. We keep talking about applications not being ready for quads, but we overlook the fact that some of us are running lots of applications at the same time. It's probably not healthy but we do it anyway.