Vienna Symphonic Library Forum
Forum Statistics

181,962 users have contributed to 42,196 threads and 254,639 posts.

In the past 24 hours, we have 5 new thread(s), 11 new post(s) and 56 new user(s).

  1. Home
  2. Sample Libraries
  3. Vienna Instruments Libraries
  4. Intel Quad Cores, 2 of 2.8GHz, 2 3.0GHz or 2 3.2GHz?

  • Intel Quad Cores, 2 of 2.8GHz, 2 3.0GHz or 2 3.2GHz?

    A
    A
    Hello, I'm about to buy a Mac Pro but I want to know if 2 2.8GHz processors will be enough (I'll be sing VI Special Ed. Full + Plus and the Spectrasonics instruments in DP5) or if its worth to spend a couple of thousand dollars more getting 2 3.2GHz? Or maybe just a thousand more for 2 3.0GHz? Is there really a lot of difference? I know the more processor power the better (besides RAM) but I just want to make sure I don't spend a lot of money and end up by not using that much processor power. Thanks. -Alvaro
  • M
    M
    Hi arosales, Just read this... http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/17359.aspx Ho to help
  • S
    S

     This is, I think, an important question for those here who in the market for a new computer.

    Does anyone here have hands on experience with any of the new "Harpertown" 8 core MacPros?

    Are the differences in processor speed significant for Vienna Instrument users? If so, what is their significance?

    If you want to use the machine as a slave with the 64 bit version of VE 3 - - and run a 64 bit version of Windows on it - - would it be better to run XP Pro 64 or Vista Ultimate 64? 

    I, and I think many other forum participants would be most appreciative of insight regarding these issues.

    Thanks. 
  • J
    J
    While I can't speak directly to the specifics of the new machines, historically the middle model has always been the best bang for the buck. In this case, the 2.8 might just be the best for the money. The difference in the price for the top model CPU often results in very moderate performance improvements with 0.2 Ghz at issue, especially where other features are identical on all models. For price points of $2800, $3600, and $4400, the customer will be set back $800 per 0.2Ghz of CPU. Does VSL run $800-1600 better at a cost increase of 22-28% ? The answer is probably "no". Based on various benchmarks from previous model groupings, the improvements are probably closer to 5%-10%.

    Check this link for a general readout of the three models. $800-1600 better? [url]http://www.barefeats.com/harper7.html[/url]
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @stevesong said:

    If you want to use the machine as a slave with the 64 bit version of VE 3 - - and run a 64 bit version of Windows on it - - would it be better to run XP Pro 64 or Vista Ultimate 64? 

    The only part of this on which I have experience is:

    1. Setting up XP64 on a Mac Pro is a bit tricky, so it is not for the faint hearted.
    2. Vista 64 is not the most stable OS, and unless VE has been tested thoroughly on it, I wouldn't risk it.

    DG
  • cmC
    VSL Team
    cmC

    setting up VISTA64 on a macPro is almost as easy as installing OS X ...

    - make sure your system volume has only one partition (otherwise the BootCamp wizard will not work)

    - create a partition of at least 150 GB using the BootCamp wizard

    - insert the VISTA64 DVD and reboot (as the wizard asks you)

    - VISTA will ask you where to be installed (only the newly created partition makes sense of course) and is reformatting it to NTFS

    - the install process will reboot the machine several times and finally you should run the drivers installation from the Leopard DVD

    - i'd recommend to allow windows update to run and install the latest drivers and fixes

    - finished (set network settings, shares, install programs according to your needs then)

     

    use MacDrive to access HFS+ (MacOS formatted) partitions or reformat sample drives to NTFS at your convenience (leo can read NTFS, write only with third party tools)

     

    make sure your audio device has working VISTA64 drivers before you do all this ...

    christian

     

    edit: i did 5 VISTA64 installs so far which all run stable and i'm tempted to say the install on the macPro has been the smoothest of all ...

    and remember: only a CRAY can run an endless loop in just three seconds.
  • D
    D
    last edited
    last edited

    @cm said:

    make sure your audio device has working VISTA64 drivers before you do all this ...

    christian

    edit: i did 5 VISTA64 installs so far which all run stable and i'm tempted to say the install on the macPro has been the smoothest of all ...

    That's useful to know. I had problems with every aspect of setting it up, and not just drivers, but that was a few months ago, so things may be easier now.

    DG
  • S
    S

     Christian:

    Thanks very much for the helpful information. However, I'm still hoping for an answer to the question regarding whether the faster models (3.0 & 3.2GHZ) are worth investing in. My goal is not just to have a slave machine but, when there is an OSX 64 bit version of VE, to run VE as the playback object of both Logic and Finale (running on the same machine). 

    As far as 64 bit Vista drivers are concerned, MOTU has them ready for download for its interfaces.  
  • A
    A
    Hello everyone, Thank you guys for your interest in my question, but I as Stephen says, the question still is if it is really worth the exra $1600 for the two 3.2GHz processors instead of the 2.8Ā“s. Perhaps it would be better to buy 2 MacPros w/two 2.8 each (considering we are paying $400 for every 0.1 GHz)?
  • P
    P

    Have you both read JWL's post? I think that sums it up pretty well... you won't gain linearly more efficency with linearly more money. Your machines will get outdated just a month later. So it's for me just a question of justifying giving out the money I could invest in another beast... Yet it's almost always proven to be better to have two machines for the price of one beast to host it all - but that also comes with all other disadvantages of not having it all in one machine.

    PolarBear 
  • E
    E
    I got my 2.8Ghz a week ago, after waiting for the MacPro-update for months. IĀ“m not really a VSL power-user, IĀ“ve got the Special Edition standard & extended, Chamber and Appass strings 1 and 2, used to work on a G5 dual 2.0. I really couldnĀ“t justify spending the extra money for the 3.0 or 3.2, they cost a lot more, without a very significant speed-bump. You pay a lot to be cutting edge, a friend of mine bought the old 8-core in november and paid $2500 MORE than I paid for a faster and better machine in january (of course Macs are more expensive here in Norway than in the US). Anyway, if you come from a G5, either one of the MacPros will be a pure joy, the old sessions that my G5 had a hard time playing back hardly make the CPU-meters move on my MacPro (cool with 8 meters :-)), and itĀ“s nice to be able to slap on as many Altiverbs as you want. I havenĀ“t done any scientific testing with trackcounts, and I donĀ“t have the other MacPros to compare with, so this is very general and just my opinion, and of course your needs may be different, but I would get the 2.8, and maybe when the next generation of processors come around sell it and buy the new one. Eyvind
  • J
    J
    last edited
    last edited

    @arosales said:

    Hello everyone, Thank you guys for your interest in my question, but I as Stephen says, the question still is if it is really worth the exra $1600 for the two 3.2GHz processors instead of the 2.8Ā“s. Perhaps it would be better to buy 2 MacPros w/two 2.8 each (considering we are paying $400 for every 0.1 GHz)?
    Yes-- 2x @ 2.8. Spend the extra money on hard drives, RAM, and more VSL licenses!