Have been building my own for years but I am not clear on what the advantages of the new Intel chips are in the 1-200 dollar price categories - I am not gaming, but do digital audio and soft-synth based real time performance with MIDI controller for film scores and classical stuff.
At the slowest I have a Pentium D at 3.oo Ghz on oldest system, a Pentium E6600, and an E5200 in the middle, and wondering where to go from here.
Will any of these 4,5,6,7 core processors make a noticable difference on the latency issues of very large sample sets being asked to play in real time (with me at a midi controller, not sequencing).
Am using a program called Hauptwerk, as well as MOTU Symphonic Instrument, and GigaStudio among other sample based music production sample/soft-synths, where if you load a piano and play very fast (like classical complicated music), you really do notice the latency and it makes it really suck!
Would overclocking improve that issue, I have never experimented with that after trying it once many years ago and burning up a chip in an instant didn't know about non OEM cooling fans back then.
Or is this just planned obsolescence with Intel making sure people spend more and more money and cant use their older systems without serious upgrading?
It depends on what programs and versions you're running. I use an older version of nuendo and wavelab and a load of VSTs for recording, editing and mastering, and a P4 does the job, dual core will do you as far as I'm aware as Nuendo doesnt take advantage of hyperthreading (core i processors). To be honest a core 2 duo or core 2 quad will do ya. The fastest one I've got is a Quad Q6600 and it's absolutely fantastic, I can edit video and audio and render as fast as you like. Newer versions of Photoshop can take advantage of hyperthreading so they do perform better, but for audio recording, production and mastering, I dont know any software that will give you any better performance really for having more cores.