[moisiss]

So here is the deal...

I want to get a laptop to use as a mobile DAW/electronic(midi)insturment/effects processor. I have the Presonus Firpod and use a Cubase/Reason combo and a variety of plug-ins (Waves, Amplitube, etc.) to do most of my recording/production. I was wondering if it would be better to get a multi-core comp (c2d or X2) or get a single core processor.

As far as I know (but this is part of my question, so if anyone has info it would be much appreciated) Cubase is not written as a multi-threaded application.... and neither is Reason. The programs are written to work together, and when I open both and link them (via rewire) they sync up (tempo/cues/etc.) and run together. Does anyone know, if I had multiple cores, if Cubase and Reason would run on different cores when linked via Rewire? Also, what about plug-ins? Will they run on a different core then Cubase/Reason (as this would greatly increase the amount of plug-ins that I could run without getting glitches)?

I know that a muli-core processor would be more "future-proof", but I want to use this comp specifically for music performance/production and budget is an issue. The point of this is, if these programs will utilize multiple cores I will get a C2D laptop... but if they will only use one core I will get a single core and save some money. Any help would be appreciated!

[King X13]

you would be able to set each program to run on a different core. so you would be able to say :

Reason = Core 1

Cubase = Core 2

they would each use only that core and single thread on it thus making them twice as fast.

[The General]

When would it ever be better to get a one core processor? That's like "What's better? Finding a bag with $1,000,000 in it, or finding TWO bags with $1,000,000 in each?"

Get a C2D, I really can't believe anyone actually asked that.

[King X13]

Originally posted by The General

Get a C2D, I really can't believe anyone actually asked that.

there wouldnt be a forum if people didnt ask questions.

[moisiss]

General, did you even read my post?

When would it ever be better to get a one core processor?

Uhhhh.... how about if the software you use is not multi-threaded, you don't care about multitasking, and you want to save some money?

It doesn't make much sense to buy a C2D if none of the software I use is capable of using multiple cores. What would I have the other core for?... Good times (and no I won't be surfing the net/burning cds/and playing a game at the same time that I record)? You can get a single core processor laptop for much cheaper than a C2D laptop (and one that would perform comparably when running single threaded apps)... and I specifically noted that "BUDGET IS AN ISSUE"... so I am asking if anyone knows whether the software I have (and the way I use it) is capable of utilizing both cores. If it is not, I will save some money and buy a single core laptop.

And I would appreciate, General, if in the future you don't have anything constructive to add to the conversation... please don't post. Thanks, bye.


King X13,

So you can choose which core you want a program to run on? How do you do that?

[moisiss]

Oh yeah, and just to be clear...

I'm not sure if when running Reason with Cubase they are acting as two separate programs or if they are acting more like one program with Reason acting as a sort of "plug-in".

When I start up the setup I have, I have to open Cubase first and then open Reason (in that order) to get them to sync up and close them down in the reverse order... close Reason and then close Cubase (in fact, it won't let me close Cubase if I haven't closed Reason in this set up). If I don't open the programs in this order, they don't sync up and act as two completely independent programs. So I guess that's where the confusion occurs for me.... If I was using them as two independent programs at the same time then the multi-core would obvoiusly be faster.... but if they are sort of lump summed into one program... well I don't know.

[The General]

You people have no idea what you're talking about. On your computer right now, there are probably 140 threads running. The operating system does something called "load balancing" where it takes half of the load and sticks it on one core (or processor) ... If your view on how a computer works is so dim and narrow that you can't comprehend load balancing and how it is beneficial to performace (especially when running high end content creation apps such as those) then you need to go back to Intro to Computers and learn it all over again.

You don't have to chose which processor the app runs on, the affinity defaults to "both" in which the operating system does that for you.

If you think that what I am saying now isn't constructive, then you can screw off and buy a ****ty AMD Turion single core, but I will tell you right now that any one core CPU you can get these days is extremely outdated and gets its crap handed to by C2D's which aren't even expensive... ($1000 for a MacBook ... :rolleyes: )

Now, if you are going to run Cubase and Reason at the same time, get a dual core unless you like REALLY slow performance.

It's not about how many "applications" you run at once, its about how many threads. Check it out, even if Reason and Cubase run as one thread (which they most certainly do not) ... you could still up the nice of the process and use one whole core for that thread, and leave the other thread for daemons, services, background apps kernel tasks, etc. (if you STILL don't understand what I am saying... that would greatly increase peformance.)

To change the affinity and nice, go to the Task Manager and right click on the process.

EDIT: Err... nice = priority.

[moisiss]

Thanks General.... that was much more informative.

It seems like in the past I have seen benchmarks for multi-core processors that don't show much improvement over single core processors when tested using apps that don't make use of multiple cores. Maybe I just misread/misunderstood though....

So i guess I will just save up some more and get a dual core (I don't consider the macbook an option though... too small, not a very good video card, no 7200 RPM hard drive option... the last one kills me about the Macbook pro too... but what can you do?)

[The General]

Originally posted by moisiss
Thanks General.... that was much more informative.

It seems like in the past I have seen benchmarks for multi-core processors that don't show much improvement over single core processors when tested using apps that don't make use of multiple cores. Maybe I just misread/misunderstood though....

So i guess I will just save up some more and get a dual core (I don't consider the macbook an option though... too small, not a very good video card, no 7200 RPM hard drive option... the last one kills me about the Macbook pro too... but what can you do?)

Yeah the screen is too small for me, I guess you could plug it into a monitor but who wants do to that?

The videocard wouldnt really matter for audio editing ... like ... at all.

And you can get a 7200RPM 100GB drive on the MacBook Pro 17" ... I swear I saw that for all of them at some point ... then again you could just get any mSATA drive and stick it in there.

[EricB]

I built an amd 3400 2gig ram 64 bit computer for a guy (music producer) this summer using reasons, cubase and fruity loops. he was having all kind of problems with it. when the mobo died after a couple of month of use, I let him use an amd 2800 machine (he put his 2 gig of ram in it) while he waited on the new mobo. he's never had a problem with it, so I ended up keeping that other machine (I don't sound edit, I video edit)

a lot of my dj friends have had problems with dual core, 64 bit and hyperthread machines. the new rule of thumb for sound editing is use the more powerfulest single core processor that you can find until software designers rewrite their software to take advantage of these new processors