I didn't spend a ton of money, though I would have if I had bought the same configuration from you. And the chip in tests shows to be about equal to lower level i5/i7's I see others using here effectively. And quite frankly your tests appear to all be set by overclocking the i's. I knew the CPU was the cheapest entry level and expected to change it out quickly. I however have been somewhat surprised at its performance regardless of benchmarks.

I've been building these little boxes for over twenty years (80-88s), playing synthesizers for forty. And I make sure I continue to keep learning. I've done it your way many, many times. There's nothing wrong with that. It's just not where I'm coming from right now. I'm not looking for video editing benchmarks either and it still seems you are viewing it all from inside that box. You seem to talk around things and not through things and as soon as you say something germane to this, I will definitely have an ear to it. But that debate of yours is yours alone.

I can record (and do) with much lesser than what others insist on as a necessity.  So it's about re-thinking it all, not living with the already exhausted status quo. And what you presented so far is status quo.
 
This isn't about proving the known, but exploring possibilities in the unknown.
(At least for me.) 

This reply is likely to be completely pointless, so I'll start out with agreement.  You're absolutely right that you can run and produce excellent music with far lesser equipment than Scott tests.  The Xeon you're running will work just fine up to it's limit and certainly wont sound any different than a fire breathing hex core i7 overclocked to hell and back.

On the other hand though, you asked a question "which is better", and received an answer.  Then this whole thing descended into name calling which I found both comical and sad at the same time.  The answer to your original question remains higher clock speed.  If you wish to retort with, "but the one I chose works fine", that's true.  However, it makes your whole original question quite pointless.

So you're system works great, awesome!  Don't bother asking retroactive questions about how you spent your money and you won't be offended with answers that disagree with your extensive experience.

The CPU I chose was for price. (I've said that more than once). The higher grade chips were being bumped anywhere from 20-300% and more from the manufacturer (a common practice I see everywhere). I never expected to keep this little chip at any moment  when I bought the base system. I also had planned on pulling their supplied HD too. I was just surpised that its performance has far exceeded my expectations.
I see now I should have just posed the question without any specific chip series connected to it. I really had no idea it would spark such a negative knee jerk reaction. Especially from someone considered by many to be a good source of information. It was simply a question between cores or speed and if that answer came first before ranting of the series, then it most likely would have been a much different thread. I wanted some opinions on that at its basis, but really had broken it down to four options. (Two of the smaller chips in three groups and one larger in the last group. To be honest, the 2.4/2.0s really were never in the actual consideration and used because of it only having four cores/ six cores for comparison. But the truest answer I've found to my original post is sometimes speed shows better perfomance and sometimes cores out performs a greater speed. Would a person choose an 3.0 i5 over a 2.5 i7? Only the person making the choice ultimately knows. But maybe that would have received a more rational answer instead of going of on a anti-Xeon rant.  I have people at another DAW forum telling me I bought the wrong DAW when I went for the price of the discounted/coupon Sonar X2Pro too. There is always someone that wants to put down other peoples decisions not their own. Especially when they have the power of the group to do so.

LOL,

Scott is from Pine Island.

I spent some time in Matlacha... wouldn't surprise me to find chilighetti there either. :-)

Good times.

If I wish to speak with Scott about good times on Pine Island in the 90's I am going to.

Pine Island is only about 12 minutes from a Cheeseburger in Paradise and a Manhattan Ice Tea (not that I ever touch that stuff).

I miss boating too.


best regards,
mike

I have been to Iguana Mia a few times. :-)

I used to spend a lot of time in Cape Coral and Pine Island in the early 1980s... back when it was still cowboys and boats. I always enjoy reminiscing when I work or visit down there.

:-)

best regards,
mike

jcschild

yeah ignore the clown who thinks he knows about computers
 

I am ignoring the clown.
I have never claimed to be an expert and join these forums for rational feedback
from others I assume might know more or at least something I don't.
But there is always one person that believes they are the absolute authority and no one else knows anything.
They often speak vaguely and about everything but the subject.
Beware of the man who thinks he knows more about computers than everyone else.

Every computer I've built and repaired has worked well for years.
And all the talk here is about food and no need for anonymity.
Maybe these people ought to go join a food forum instead?

Sorry my system makes everyone so uncomfortable.

I spent the evening reading comparisons of the i7 3930k 6 core to the i7 3770k 4 core.

At first I thought 6 cores would be the way to go for me, but now that I realize how much more energy efficient the 3770k is the slight reduction in computational power seems less important.

Especially when I realize that I'd only use all 6 cores on some occasions.

Still trying to decide.

I anticipate a lot more convolution processes sneaking into our bread and butter dsp and so I'd like to future proof my next DAW purchase to some extent.

:-)

all the best,
mike
 

Thanks!

Thanks Scott, 
 I had wondered what happens at the 4.5 speed and in the audio application.

best regards,
mike

Stipes, have you considered dual E5-1620's ?

You'd get 8 cores, 3,6 Ghz for 600$.

I'm happy with my single.

I have the E5-2690 2.9 8c. I can add another if I want down the line, but this single is doing everything great. And the only reason I put another 16gb ram in was because of its price, otherwise the 20gb I already had in it was really enough.  So I have one CPU with 36gb ram upgradeable to 64 and can double that with another CPU/64gb depending on future needs. The price is starting to come down on this particular chip, so I will just keep an eye on the market for now. But, someone just turned me on to the idea of using Process Lasso to optimize core usage, so that's what I'm exploring/researching at the moment.