Helpful ReplyAMD 8core vs I7 - which?

Author
MagicMike
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 188
  • Joined: 2013/11/25 11:21:34
  • Location: Cardiff
  • Status: offline
2016/06/13 05:44:31 (permalink)

AMD 8core vs I7 - which?

Apologies if this has been done to death but having issues with the forum search, not really returning anything about this question.
 
So, I have Win 8.1 x64, Sonar Platinum, 16GB RAM, SSD, Gigabyte board running an AMD FX 8 core processor running at stock speed.
 
I've started mixing a project and my CPU is crapping out even at the highest latency setting on my RME Fireface UCX. Freezing Addictive Drums to separate outs takes an absolute age - I mean somewhere in the region of 15 to 20 minutes! This may be another issue but have tried tweaking the freeze options, the bouncetomsec config settings to no avail.
 
Anyway on the crux of my question, will I see much of a performance boost if I go for a current i7 CPU vs the AMD 8 core?
 
Cheers! 

Windows 10 x64, 16 gb RAM,i7 4.2GHz, 250GB Samsung SSD for OS/Programs, SSD for current projects,  1TB Disk for audio and backup project files, RME UCX interface on USB, ASUS motherboard, dual screen setup with latest AMD FX 5450 catalyst drivers for graphics, Cakewalk by Bandlab. Samson Graphite 49 keyboard.
#1
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 13146
  • Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 07:37:49 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby MagicMike 2016/06/13 08:11:30
this is something I am very well know to as I just got done building an Intel I7 4790K 1150 LGA.
my previous build that I used for 2 years or so was an AMD 8 core bulldozer.
I don't over clock any of my processors. and I don't use super cooling methods.
 
I noticed an instant difference in speed using Sonar.
loading time, project depth (resources being used) I can load a ton of plug ins with plenty of room to spare.
how ever the difference  is not what you would think. its not oh my god why haven't I been using Intel.
I found AMD to be pretty effective TBH. but the I7 is a step above no doubt and the 16GB or ram vs. 8GB is also a step up.

Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64
Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GB
Focusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
   
#2
MagicMike
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 188
  • Joined: 2013/11/25 11:21:34
  • Location: Cardiff
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 07:54:18 (permalink)
Thanks for sharing your experience Chuck.

Windows 10 x64, 16 gb RAM,i7 4.2GHz, 250GB Samsung SSD for OS/Programs, SSD for current projects,  1TB Disk for audio and backup project files, RME UCX interface on USB, ASUS motherboard, dual screen setup with latest AMD FX 5450 catalyst drivers for graphics, Cakewalk by Bandlab. Samson Graphite 49 keyboard.
#3
Starise
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7563
  • Joined: 2007/04/07 17:23:02
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 07:55:07 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby hockeyjx 2016/06/13 10:04:12
The last info I had about AMD cpu's is that they have multi threading as opposed  to hyperhreading. Hyperhreading is pretty much a patented Intel function. This may be one reason that Intel runs Sonar so well, since it's designed to run on multiple cores well.
 
An 8 core AMD chip will make much more heat than a similar more recent Intel chip. Too much heat and not enough cooling can slow a cpu down or lock it out altogether.
 
I'm not sure if there are other issues with your OS. This is also a possibility.

Intel 5820K O.C. 4.4ghz, ASRock Extreme 4 LGA 2011-v3, 16 gig DDR4, ,
3 x Samsung SATA III 500gb SSD, 2X 1 Samsung 1tb 7200rpm outboard, Win 10 64bit, 
Laptop HP Omen i7 16gb 2/sdd with Focusrite interface.
 CbB, Studio One 4 Pro, Mixcraft 8, Ableton Live 10 
 
 www.soundcloud.com/starise
 
 
 
Twitter @Rodein
 
#4
MagicMike
Max Output Level: -87 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 188
  • Joined: 2013/11/25 11:21:34
  • Location: Cardiff
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 08:04:58 (permalink)
"The last info I had about AMD cpu's is that they have multi threading as opposed  to hyperhreading"
Good point, will read up on this

Windows 10 x64, 16 gb RAM,i7 4.2GHz, 250GB Samsung SSD for OS/Programs, SSD for current projects,  1TB Disk for audio and backup project files, RME UCX interface on USB, ASUS motherboard, dual screen setup with latest AMD FX 5450 catalyst drivers for graphics, Cakewalk by Bandlab. Samson Graphite 49 keyboard.
#5
THambrecht
Max Output Level: -73 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 867
  • Joined: 2010/12/10 06:42:03
  • Location: Germany
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 08:08:16 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby MagicMike 2016/06/13 08:27:45
We restore thousends of tapes and vinyl and have projects with over 200 GB of audia-data.
We only have 3 PCs Intel QuadCore and 8 GB of RAM. And we have no problems.
But I also make music with many tracks, plugins and vst-instruments and have no problem.
 
From my experience - over 15 years SONAR - Intel is always much better then every AMD.
I would never buy AMD for an Audio-Workstation.
 

We digitize tapes, vinyl, dat, md ... in broadcast and studio quality for publishers, public institutions and individuals.
4 x Intel Quad-CPU, 4GHz Sonar Platinum (Windows 10 - 64Bit) and 14 computers for recording tapes, vinyl ...

4 x RME Fireface 800, 2 x Roland Octa Capture and 4 x Roland Quad Capture, Focusrite .... Studer A80, RP99, EMT948 ...

(Germany)  http://www.hambrecht.de
#6
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 13146
  • Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 08:09:59 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby MagicMike 2016/06/13 08:27:53
also a great article here.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043-5.html
its a few years old as AMD has really evolved since.

Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64
Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GB
Focusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
   
#7
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 11:37:09 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby tlw 2016/06/15 18:03:09
If you're after maximum performance... you want an Intel i7 CPU.
The cost savings by going AMD (especially when considered over the life of the machine) is minimal.
 

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
#8
DrLumen
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 621
  • Joined: 2005/07/05 20:11:34
  • Location: North Texas
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 13:27:27 (permalink)
If it is taking 15 - 20 minutes to do something then there is more wrong that just the processor. Maybe you have a drive going bad? Or there are conflicts on the bus or with drivers.
 
As to intel, all I can say is I'm biased.

-When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.

Sonar Platinum / Intel i7-4790K / AsRock Z97 / 32GB RAM / Nvidia GTX 1060 6GB / Behringer FCA610 / M-Audio Sport 2x4 / Win7 x64 Pro / WDC Black HDD's / EVO 850 SSD's / Alesis Q88 / Boss DS-330 / Korg nanoKontrol / Novation Launch Control / 14.5" Lava Lamp
#9
Prog Nut
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9
  • Joined: 2015/08/19 05:54:59
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/13 14:56:44 (permalink)
DrLumen
If it is taking 15 - 20 minutes to do something then there is more wrong that just the processor. Maybe you have a drive going bad? Or there are conflicts on the bus or with drivers...
 


Correct!!!

 

 
 

 
I have to chime in here! Yes, the newer (more expensive) Intels typically are a bit faster than the AMDs. And AMD generally gets hotter.

But, to my experience, an 8-core AMD cpu is absolutely adequate in the most cases, and if something takes
 
ridiculous time something else usually is wrong.

First; AMD FX are true multi-core processors (yes, I promise!), as opposed to Intels hyperthreading (HT) where each core executes two threads "at the same time" but in reality serialized. HT is just an glorified cache optimizer so that the cheduler can fill up the cache more effective.

An 8-Core Intel i7 has only 4 physical cores, where each core can handle two threads. Some softwares in reality takes a performance hit therefore, and could benefit from disabling HT. Of course the most programmes benefit from HT, but not all.

An 8-Core AMD FX really has 8 physical cores, BUT (and here lies the source of controversy) each core-pair shares the floating point unit. In other words, an amd FX has 8 integer "units" and half of that (4) floating point "units".

AMD was betting that softwares in the future would use other means to calculate float math (i.e. the GPU which is much faster at floting point calculations). A sound theory, but the marketing folks at Intel and, hence, the software developers, didn't want that to happen. And the rest is history... Software using mostly integer instructions is VERY fast on AMD! This story could be longer, but really is irrelevant and off topic in this case...

I have an FX8350 humming along at 4,5 GHz, 16GB low latency memory, a modern motherboard with SATA3 speed (500+ to my SSD's). I have tweaked the bios a little by disabling all "low power" states, and also synchronized the HT and the NB frequencies. This setup have been basically the same for over three years, and my computer NEVER have any strange hiccups. Sonar SPLAT only seems to get "better with age".

If you, on the other hand own an old, say, FX8120, an motherboard with only SATA2 capacity, you are slow to begin with. Adding outdated drivers and a non-optimized BIOS, certain things CAN be slow. But that certainly applies to un-optimized Intel setups too!
 
So, buying an brand new (Intel) setup shouldn't be your first priority!

#10
Starise
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7563
  • Joined: 2007/04/07 17:23:02
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/14 13:31:05 (permalink)
Thanks for that info Prog Nut. 
 
I have a question about this: 
 
"An 8-Core Intel i7 has only 4 physical cores, where each core can handle two threads. Some softwares in reality takes a performance hit therefore, and could benefit from disabling HT. Of course the most programmes benefit from HT, but not all."
 
Are you referring to HT? My 6 core intel chip shows 12 cores in Sonar. I have 6 physical cores. With HT engaged a 4 core chip will show 8 cores. If an Intel chip is marketed to have 8 cores, then it should have 8 physical cores.

Intel 5820K O.C. 4.4ghz, ASRock Extreme 4 LGA 2011-v3, 16 gig DDR4, ,
3 x Samsung SATA III 500gb SSD, 2X 1 Samsung 1tb 7200rpm outboard, Win 10 64bit, 
Laptop HP Omen i7 16gb 2/sdd with Focusrite interface.
 CbB, Studio One 4 Pro, Mixcraft 8, Ableton Live 10 
 
 www.soundcloud.com/starise
 
 
 
Twitter @Rodein
 
#11
Prog Nut
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9
  • Joined: 2015/08/19 05:54:59
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/14 17:12:16 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby AntManB 2016/07/08 08:47:51
 
Starise
Are you referring to HT? My 6 core intel chip shows 12 cores in Sonar. I have 6 physical cores. With HT engaged a 4 core chip will show 8 cores. If an Intel chip is marketed to have 8 cores, then it should have 8 physical cores.

Yes, that is the correct statement! But some (most?) people are, eh...confused, how this works in reality. And the marketing departements here and there doesn't make things clearer.
Take for example the Haswell i7 4770k: (Exchange the "__" to "tt", otherwise the forum erases my links)
h__p://ark.intel.com/products/75123/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_90-GHz
That in the spec sheet says 4 cores and 8 threads, whereas the nearly identical silicone Haswell i5 4670k: h__p://ark.intel.com/products/75048/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz
specifies 4 cores and 4 threads! Main difference is that Intel has disabled the HT logic...

Now, Intel has manufactured 2 physical cores CPUs with HT, and Intel evidently manufacture processors with 4 physical cores without HT. Both this CPU's will show up as a 4 core CPU in Windows.

As people got confused by this, Microsoft recently has begun to (I don't know which Windows version that got this "update") specify "Cores" and "Logical processors" in the Task Manager, so now it is easier to see what kind of CPU you got under the hood.

Unfortunate for AMD, they didn't manage to convey to the community the principle and potential advantages of the FX cores. Namely that an 8 core FX behaves like an 8 core while executing integer math, but like an 4 core executing float instructions. Few people know that most program code use mainly integer instructions, so with a few exeptions an 8 core AMD really IS an 8 physical core CPU! Nevertheless AMD also nowadays shows up as 4 physical and 8 logical cores, despite an altogether different design compared to Intel.

The irony is that in the early Pentium 4 versus Athlon days, AMD was better at float math, and consequently(???) got critisized for that too!!! It is never easy to be the "underdog"... ;-(  And if you take a walk down the history lane, there were several softwares that took a serious performance hit when enabling HT on the earlier Intel CPU's.

For the record, and without knowing anythig specific, I am convinced that a DAW uses nearly exclusively integer code, with some additional specific SSE functions where the need of high precision and fast floating point calculations occationally rises. My experience with my AMD FX8350 is that it has always behaved fast, stable and with an effective load balancing on all 8 cores. On top of that it has always been a blazing multi-tasker, and I can have several programs loaded and running at full load, without any hesitation when I "Alt-Tab around" among all windows. My Intel i7 at work (CAD-station) is rather more sluggish compared to my home setup, which contradicts the "established truth" among the "experts"... (to me, anyway...)
post edited by Prog Nut - 2016/06/14 17:35:28
#12
Starise
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7563
  • Joined: 2007/04/07 17:23:02
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/15 13:46:56 (permalink)
Thanks for that info. I thought that I knew what you intended there. I didn't want to mislead a potential Intel customer in thinking that the cores advertised weren't the actual number represented. Anyone serious should investigate the specs before buying, especially if they want to use HT. I wasn't aware that HT was disabled in some chips.
 
I'm curious what effect the new load balancing will have on Intel .vs Amd chips.

Intel 5820K O.C. 4.4ghz, ASRock Extreme 4 LGA 2011-v3, 16 gig DDR4, ,
3 x Samsung SATA III 500gb SSD, 2X 1 Samsung 1tb 7200rpm outboard, Win 10 64bit, 
Laptop HP Omen i7 16gb 2/sdd with Focusrite interface.
 CbB, Studio One 4 Pro, Mixcraft 8, Ableton Live 10 
 
 www.soundcloud.com/starise
 
 
 
Twitter @Rodein
 
#13
kitekrazy1
Max Output Level: -40 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3524
  • Joined: 2014/08/02 17:52:51
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/15 13:54:14 (permalink)
  If cost is a concern, I wouldn't go over $150 on an AMD processor.  The FX 8300s are a nice value. Other than that stick with Intel. Hopefully AMD steps up their game since Intel is pricey.

Sonar Platinum, W7 Pro 32GB Ram, Intel i7 4790, AsRock Z97 Pro 4,  NVidia 750ti, AP2496
 
Sonar Platinum, W7 Pro, 16GB Ram, AMD FX 6300, Gigabyte GA 970 -UD3 P, nVidia 9800GT, Guitar Port, Terratec EWX 2496
#14
denverdrummer
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 278
  • Joined: 2011/01/10 12:15:24
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/15 14:04:25 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby tlw 2016/06/15 18:04:56
I used to build systems with AMD back in the late 90's early 00's but I pretty much exclusively use Intel now.  Quite simply they benchmark better.  Even certain 4th gen i7's will outperform the latest AMD 8 core processors.  The only thing faster is a Xeon which start at 4x the price of an i7.  I get that the AMD has 8 physical cores, but the processors in general are slower.  Intel is also better at making very fast mobile processors that have reasonable power consumption for laptop/tablet use.
 
For the amount of cost savings for an AMD processor, you could buy a 4th or 5th generation i7 for the same price or lower and have better performance.
 
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
 

Win 10 Pro 64 bit, Dell Inspiron 15, core i7, 16GB RAM, Focusrite Scarlett 18i20, Mackie MR5 Mark 1 speakers
#15
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/15 14:36:18 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby tlw 2016/06/15 18:05:05
denverdrummer
The only thing faster is a Xeon which start at 4x the price of an i7.  



Don't be seduced by the Xeon name.
There is no benefit to using a Xeon CPU for a DAW.
You'll pay significantly more... AND... take a performance hit.
Xeon clock-speed is significantly slower.
 
Witness, right now, the fastest Mac you can buy is NOT a Mac Pro.
Rather... the latest iMac with 6700k
 

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
#16
Prog Nut
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9
  • Joined: 2015/08/19 05:54:59
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/15 16:35:29 (permalink)
denverdrummer
I used to build systems with AMD back in the late 90's early 00's but I pretty much exclusively use Intel now.  Quite simply they benchmark better.  Even certain 4th gen i7's will outperform the latest AMD 8 core processors.  The only thing faster is a Xeon which start at 4x the price of an i7.  I get that the AMD has 8 physical cores, but the processors in general are slower.  Intel is also better at making very fast mobile processors that have reasonable power consumption for laptop/tablet use.
 
For the amount of cost savings for an AMD processor, you could buy a 4th or 5th generation i7 for the same price or lower and have better performance.
 

 




Well, I bought my AMD setup in 2012 (when the revised Bulldozer went "Vishera"). The Intels you could buy at this time was the second generation "Sandy Bridge" architecture (the core i2xxx, for example the i5 2500 or i7 2600 models, with and without HT...  ). At the time Intel were very expensive, and their motherboards were on the verge of being outdated (and, of course, nevertheless very expensive...).

At that time (2012) AMD was absolutely competetive, and I had hopes that the community should embrace what AMD thought was best for the future of CPU's!

Unfortunately Intel wouldn't allow for this, and paid many software developers money for "optimizing" the code in a way that AMD should look bad in comparison. There are vast information available to dig out fact about this, but being OT otherwise lets say that hand written optimized (for each CPU) code often was a great deal faster on AMD. Now, nobody writes manually in Assembler, and since Intel did "help" the compiler developers, the code was never ever optimized for AMD's CPUs... Adding to this the HEAVILY Intel optimized "benchmarking programs", that many people took for the truth, made AMD look like the fools they absolutely not was. One could wonder if people really buy computers solely for running benchmark programs day and night??

As a consequence AMD's "naive" hope that the smartest architecture would win went down the drain, and so did the economy of the company.

Naturally, as this made it hard for AMD to develop new and more effective CPU's, and at the same time Intel came out with the third, the fourth, the fifth and the sixth generation, it would of course be a shame if a new "Skylake" i7 6800K wasn't substantially better than an old "Sandy Bridge". Funny(?) enough the difference is not as big as one would thought. There are many "Sandys" humming along presently, and likewise many AMD FX still do all thrown at them without ever hesitating.

But, of course, building "the fastest" computer today requires an Intel CPU, that is a fact (at least until AMD's new ZEN CPUs comes out)! For me, as an "idealist", I will nevertheless continue to support AMD because I know that if Intel would gain monopoly everybody will loose (except Intel's owners...). And I also know that an optimized AMD system in 99 cases of 100 still is enough!

I have to say that my investment (in 2012), without a doubt, was the right one, and using 8 4,5GHz cores these four years has spoiled me performance wise, and never let me down!
#17
microapp
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 653
  • Joined: 2013/10/31 12:21:31
  • Location: Wondervu, CO
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/15 18:07:04 (permalink)
In the Bulldozer architecture, there is one shared FPU (floating point unit) for every two cores. This would lead to reduced performance in a DAW application (and many others as well). AMD was sued over false advertising regarding this issue. This is one major reason Intel won out over AMD regardless of conspiracies, real or imagined.
The Zen architecture does look more promising but to date, I have not seem any benchmarks since I do not think the silicon is at the sampling stage.
 

Sonar Platinum, Cubase Pro 8.5, Reaper 5, Studio One 2
Melodyne Studio 4, Finale 2012
I7-5820K 4.5GHz, 32 GB DDR4-2800,3 monitors,Win 10 Pro
Toshiba P75-A7100,l7-4900 2.4 Ghz/8MB Win 8.1 Pro
Tascam FW-1884, Emu 0404USB, CMC-AI,Axiom 61
Yamaha HS-50's, Sony SA-W2500, Sennheiser RS170's, ATH-M50
Ibanez Jem7VWH, RG-1570
Jackson DK2-S(Sustainiac),Les Paul Custom
Digitech Valve-FX, GFX-1,TSR-24,RP-90
#18
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/16 09:56:46 (permalink)
If AMD offered a CPU that was faster (for our purposes), we'd be first in line to use it.
(We used Athlon CPUs back when they were outperforming Intel)
 
Over time, hardware changes...  (as well as the accompanying configuration/tweaks)
A brand that's not on top today may be one of the best choices several years later.
ie: Anyone remember Maxtor HDs in the early 90s vs. the later 90s?
Maxtor made huge strides in the later 90s.
 
 
 

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
#19
DrLumen
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 621
  • Joined: 2005/07/05 20:11:34
  • Location: North Texas
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/16 19:12:30 (permalink)
Jim Roseberry
If AMD offered a CPU that was faster (for our purposes), we'd be first in line to use it.
(We used Athlon CPUs back when they were outperforming Intel)
 
Over time, hardware changes...  (as well as the accompanying configuration/tweaks)
A brand that's not on top today may be one of the best choices several years later.
ie: Anyone remember Maxtor HDs in the early 90s vs. the later 90s?
Maxtor made huge strides in the later 90s.
 

 
I have had nothing but issues with AMD processors and video cards. Even when AMD's were faster, I was still using intel. For me, the possible speed increase was not useful if the system was not stable. That is the main reason I will never overclock either but to each their own... I can wait a few milliseconds if need be.
 
I had some Maxtor's back in the day. I will have to check but I think I may still have one in a Linux box.
 
Similarly, (in spelling anyway) Matrox video cards were once the shiznit. I would have to go check to see if they are even still in business.
 
I think it will be a while before intel gets knocked down, Qualcomm could possibly be one to give them a run considering their market share and the current push to smartphones and tablets. I know AMD is still kicking but I just don't see them making any type of comeback in the near future. It may be a bit unwarranted but I get the impression that the AMD processor division is circling the drain. If it weren't for Qualcomm and others like TI, I could see intel propping up AMD to hedge any monopoly type issues (ala Microsoft and Apple).
 
Back to the OP's point, I know some people swear by AMD and, per the specs, they are just a bit slower. But, they are a bit cheaper. If the performance is not a very serious issue and you feel lucky then get an AMD.

-When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.

Sonar Platinum / Intel i7-4790K / AsRock Z97 / 32GB RAM / Nvidia GTX 1060 6GB / Behringer FCA610 / M-Audio Sport 2x4 / Win7 x64 Pro / WDC Black HDD's / EVO 850 SSD's / Alesis Q88 / Boss DS-330 / Korg nanoKontrol / Novation Launch Control / 14.5" Lava Lamp
#20
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2446
  • Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/17 22:55:23 (permalink)
Anyone know anything about this:  AMD Quad-Core A10-8700P Processor?  I'm looking for bang-for-buck.  My laptop needs are modest - Sibelius,  Cubase 8.5  4-5 tracks max (if that),  minimal FX and Addictive Drums and Kontakt or SampleTank using 3-4 instruments at a time.  
 
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CZG635W/ref=ox_sc_act_title_2?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ADZU3W0Q42T5J
 
 
#21
robert_e_bone
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 8968
  • Joined: 2007/12/26 22:09:28
  • Location: Palatine, IL
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/17 23:13:46 (permalink)
I have built many computers over the years for myself, for audio recording purposes.  Some have been built with Intel CPU's. and some with AMD.
 
The fastest machine I had contained an Intel CPU (i7 2600k) a few years back, with 32 GB of memory.  VERY quick machine, and I never had performance issues with it.
 
I built other machines since then, all using AMD multi-core processors, and have to say that I can put an AMD-based CPU and motherboard in place for quite a bit less than an equivalent level of Intel CPU and an accompanying motherboard for an Intel socket.
 
In fact, the online place where I happen to pick up a lot of my computer parts from (Micro Center), offers AMD CPU/Motherboard bundled deals all the time, where you can get a top-level AMD CPU and a good motherboard for between $150-$200, which to me and MY budget (being disabled), makes very good sense.  The other components are not CPU based, so their cost would be the same, so overall, I get VERY good bang for the buck putting systems together for myself using AMD CPU's, rather than Intel.
 
That being said, the Intel CPU's ARE faster - but they ARE also more expensive, as are the motherboards, compared to a decent motherboard for an AMD socket - specially with the bundled prices available.
 
My AMD-based computers have ZERO performance issues dealing with audio streaming and processing for Sonar, so I will for myself continue to look at all options whenever putting a new computer together, but will likely continue to land on the side of saving some bucks going with AMD over Intel.
 
Bob Bone
 

Wisdom is a giant accumulation of "DOH!"
 
Sonar: Platinum (x64), X3 (x64) 
Audio Interfaces: AudioBox 1818VSL, Steinberg UR-22
Computers: 1) i7-2600 k, 32 GB RAM, Windows 8.1 Pro x64 & 2) AMD A-10 7850 32 GB RAM Windows 10 Pro x64
Soft Synths: NI Komplete 8 Ultimate, Arturia V Collection, many others
MIDI Controllers: M-Audio Axiom Pro 61, Keystation 88es
Settings: 24-Bit, Sample Rate 48k, ASIO Buffer Size 128, Total Round Trip Latency 9.7 ms  
#22
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2446
  • Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/18 11:32:43 (permalink)
Great to know.  One thing I just thought of is that the new 6th gen intel laptops get 7+ hours of battery life.  That's pretty important to me.
#23
robert_e_bone
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 8968
  • Joined: 2007/12/26 22:09:28
  • Location: Palatine, IL
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/18 19:56:46 (permalink)
Beware laptops and WiFi adapters potentially interfering with DPC latency spikes - just be prepared to disable or turn off any WiFi adapter just prior to launching your Sonar sessions, and then enabling or turning the WiFi adapter back ON right after closing your Sonar sessions.  It really depends on whether or not running Sonar with WiFi enabled is causing latency spikes that interfere with smooth performance when using audio streaming applications, such as Sonar :)
 
Bob Bone
 

Wisdom is a giant accumulation of "DOH!"
 
Sonar: Platinum (x64), X3 (x64) 
Audio Interfaces: AudioBox 1818VSL, Steinberg UR-22
Computers: 1) i7-2600 k, 32 GB RAM, Windows 8.1 Pro x64 & 2) AMD A-10 7850 32 GB RAM Windows 10 Pro x64
Soft Synths: NI Komplete 8 Ultimate, Arturia V Collection, many others
MIDI Controllers: M-Audio Axiom Pro 61, Keystation 88es
Settings: 24-Bit, Sample Rate 48k, ASIO Buffer Size 128, Total Round Trip Latency 9.7 ms  
#24
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/19 16:10:17 (permalink)
vintagevibe
Great to know.  One thing I just thought of is that the new 6th gen intel laptops get 7+ hours of battery life.  That's pretty important to me.



FWIW, Long battery life comes at a price (that being performance).  

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
#25
vintagevibe
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2446
  • Joined: 2003/12/15 21:45:06
  • Location: Atlanta, Ga
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/19 23:41:06 (permalink)
Jim Roseberry
vintagevibe
Great to know.  One thing I just thought of is that the new 6th gen intel laptops get 7+ hours of battery life.  That's pretty important to me.



FWIW, Long battery life comes at a price (that being performance).  


I don't think this will be the case.  I'm going from an i5 3230m to an i5 6200u.  I would expect a significant boost in CPU power.
 
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01CGGOZOM/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s02?ie=UTF8&psc=1
 
#26
Jim Roseberry
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 9871
  • Joined: 2004/03/23 11:34:51
  • Location: Ohio
  • Status: offline
Re: AMD 8core vs I7 - which? 2016/06/20 12:23:37 (permalink)
If you making a big move in CPU, yes... I'd expect increased performance.
But the way to extended battery life *is* throttled performance.
There's no voodoo involved.   
 
Long battery-life and highest performance are diametrically opposed.
 

Best Regards,

Jim Roseberry
jim@studiocat.com
www.studiocat.com
#27
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1