Dual core vs. Quad core

OK...another stumbling block here...
Three more questions for ya'll...

I'm looking at a DAW and have the option of choosing either CPU listed below:

2.66GHz Dual-Core Intel Core2 Duo E8200
Bus Speed: 1333 MHz
L2 Cache Size: 6MB
64-bit compatible
Core: Wolfdale (45nm
Bus Speed: 1333 MHz
L2 Cache Size: 6MB
64-bit compatible
Core: Wolfdale (45nm)

Or

2.5GHz Quad-Core Intel Core2 Quad Q9300
Bus Speed: 1333 MHz
L2 Cache Size: 6MB
64-bit compatible
Core: Yorkfield (45nm)
Bus Speed: 1333 MHz
L2 Cache Size: 6MB
Manufacturing Technology: 45nm
64-bit compatible
Core: Yorkfield (Quad Core)

Question 1:
They are both 64 bit compatible so that means they will both be able to run all of my 32 bit hardware and software without a problem..right? (I'm pretty sure I have this right from my last thread but I'd just like to confirm.)

Question 2:
The Quad core is only $65.00 more, so money is not an issue in the decision. It appears that the bus speed and cache size on both of them are the same. The dual core has a slightly higher GHz than the quad core. But will a quad core actually be able to run more plug-ins and handle more tracks than the dual core?

Question 3:
If I want to run more than 2GB of memory I will need to run Windows XP Pro instead of Windows XP Home even though the computer will be a stand alone computer. I've read somewhere that, in most cases, adding more than 2 GB of memory is a waste because the system won't be able to use more than 2GB anyway. Would running 4 GB of memory actually be any better than running 2GB with either of the 2 processors that I've listed above?

Sorry for bombarding ya'll with all these questions but if I ask a sales associate they're just going to try to sell me as much as they can.

Thanks,
Pete

Holy Cow!

Beag, thanks for pointing me to those posts. That's the information that tells me what I need to know. However reading those posts was like reading an alien language.

Aparently there's Single Core, Multiple Core, Dual Core, Quad Core, Dual-Quad Core.........Arrrgh! And then of course different folks experience different results even when running the same applications while using the same processors with the same amount of memory.

Being only a "user" and not a "tech" I am assuming that anything above a single core is a multi-core?

That was all way above my comprehension level. But here's what it looks like to me.

There is no benefit to upgrading to anything above a single core processor. And no benefit to having more than 2GB of memory installed. It appeares that folks who have state of the art systems are not able to process any more tracks or any more plug-ins than I've been able to process with my single core CPU.

And if that's the case then I should forget about buying a new DAW and just replace the damaged hard drive in my current system and just continue replacing the future hard drives as they crash until Cakewalk has developed thier product line to be able to take advantage of all the new CPU technology.

Of course some of the folks were saying that they did notice a considerable improvement....Hmmmm....I am just totally lost. Partially because I have no idea what they're talking about and partially because
because they're giving conflicting information. So I'm trying to read between the lines so that I can just get an over all picture of the message they're trying to send. (Kind of like reading the Bible. Many, many interpretations and discrepancies but one clear message in the big picture.)

Hey Beag...Let me put you on the spot for a moment:

I currently have an HP Pavilion a700n that I made some upgrades to. It has the following:
3000+ AMD Athlon XP processor
Processor speed 2.10GHz, 512KB L2 cccache, 400MHz Front Side Bus
1500 MB PC2700 DDR SDRAM memory
120 GB 7200RPM Ultra DMA hard drive
Windows XP Home Service Pack 2 Operating System
Buit in front access 9-in-1 memory card reader, high speed USB 2.0 and FireWire ports.
It also has rear USB and FireWire ports
CD/DVD RW Drive
CD-RW/DVD ROM
Integrated graphics with 64MB shared video memory(that's all the info I could find on this one)
It has a network (Ethernet I think) card for connecting to the Internet
3 PCI slots (1 of those I use for my sound card)
1 other slot that's shorter than the PCI slots but I couldn't tell you what it is and I can't pull up my computer specs because it's crashed right now.
It has only one hard drive (internal of course) and there's no extra bays in the case (internal or external) that would allow the installation of any additional hard drives unless I ran it via USB or FireWire.
One printer port
One video monitor port (I am happy with only one)

I use the computer for just about everything:
Mostly for Sonar and all related audio peripherals such as PODxt and my Sansa mp3 player.
In Sonar I do use several plug-ins and run a multitude of tracks but when things get bogged down I bounce to tracks and archive the original tracks with the effects.
Internet surfing
Connecting and downloading pictures from my digital camera
MS Word, MS Excel, and MS Publisher
Windows Media Player, and Real Time
A scanner for scanning photos
Burning and backing up files to CD and DVD
EDIT: Oh, I do, on occasion, play video games.
(OK, I know dedicating a machine for DAW only is the best way to go but keep in mind this is an amateur home studio and not a professional recording studio.)

Whew! OK... that being said....Can you see any benefit for me to upgrade my DAW to the system in the link below other than the fact that it has 2 hard drives?
http://www.pcaudiolabs.com/create01.asp?cat=comp&style=lunar

Do you think I would get any better performance by upgrading to the new DAW as opposed to just installing a new hard drive into my existing DAW? The only things I would like to improve would be:
1. Stop my hard drive from becoming damaged. (This is the second time I'm replacing it)
2. Be able to run more tracks and more plug-ins than I'm currently running

I'm perfectly happy with everything else about my current DAW.

I know you can only offer your own opinion but I just do not possess the knowlege(nor do I have the energy to learn all this highly technical stuff) to make an informed decision. It's just too much for me to take in and it would take me months or even years to learn all this technical stuff. The deeper I dig the more complex it becomes until I'm totally lost in a maze of technical jargan.

I'd appreciate hearing your opinion and promise not to hold it over your head for the rest of our lives.

Thanks,
Pete

OH! - and even if you decide not to upgrade for now - I'd definately recommend getting a better video card. your onboard video card sharing resources with your CPU and RAM will cause performance problems with Sonar. get either an AGP or PCIe (whichever your MB has) and with a 128M or more RAM of its own, but without its own cooling fan (adds noise to your system).

Wow Beag! It's like you just turned on a light switch for me!

I'm certainly going to listen to your advice.

OH! - and even if you decide not to upgrade for now - I'd definately recommend getting a better video card. your onboard video card sharing resources with your CPU and RAM will cause performance problems with Sonar.

That makes perfect sense. When I have 30 tracks or so running at one time my video starts skipping and freezes even though the project continues to play. Now I understand about video cards running on their own memory. I never understood that before but I do now. My video card shares the memory resource that my project is using. I thought the only reason I would need to upgrade my video card was so that I could play that new video game I got for Christmas because it said my card wasn't good enough. Now I understand. Thanks

Power Supply: 300 Watt Power Supply (I would want at LEAST a 400W)

I noticed that also. I read somewhere on the Cakewalk site that they recommend 400.

1 Rear, 0 Front FireWire 400 Ports (only ONE port?)

My current DAW has FireWire in front and back but I've never used them.

So it comes down to 2 options:
1. Replacing the hard drive and the sound card in my current DAW knowing that the probability of another crash is high.
OR
2. Buying a new DAW with a dual core processor from one of the vendors you suggested. Also just going with 2 GB of memory because it looks like not only do I have to upgrade to Windows XP Pro if I want to use more memory but I'd also have the nightmare of trying to figure out the "Large Address Aware" function in both the OS and the software applications.

You've been a tremedous help Beag! Thanks so much!
Pete

Pete, one of the ottle necks in your system is the same as mine, it's the ram, 2700mhz DDr ram is 333 buss speed, Where DDR PC 5300 os 667mhz buss speed and now there is 800mhz buss speed, the newer systems allow that speed of ram. Here is an option I would consider. http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=3401758&CatId=332 A nice little compact system with a lot of bang for the buck

Hi Robo,
OK, that makes sense about my memory. I can change the amount of memory but not the type of memory in my computer which is a bit behind what's now available like Beagle was saying. Yea, some of the DAW's I've been viewing have 800mhz speed which is considerable faster than 2700mhz. Thanks for the link. I checked it out quickly but not long enough to really make a good analysis but it looks interesting. I need to spend some time with my other half tonight but I'll certainly check it out better tommorrow when I have more time. Thanks again.

Alkie,
Actually I'm seriously considering doing just that and I'm going to try to price out some stuff tommorrow to see just exactly how much it would save me. I've already done things to my other computers like add more memory, install audio cards, install video cards, install CD/DVD Roms, add additional hard drives making one slave and another master, replacing power supply, installing Networking cards, etc...The truth is I know more than the average person when it comes to computers but when I talk to someone who possesses extensive knowlege about them (like a computer tech) I feel like I'm an infant trying to talk to a Harvard grad. However I must say that lately I've been feeling like I know next to nothing with all the new technology. But I think I'm certainly capable of taking a screwdriver and attaching things to a casing and pushing connections together. The hardest part is selecting the right hardware that is compatible with the motherboard and other hardware on the DAW. The MicroCenter near my home has computer techs that will advise me if I buy my parts from them. Heck they even have classes. So I could probably check out the specs of some commercially built DAW's and use that as a guide. And I know it's all a bit harder than I'm making it sound but I think it's certainly do-able. However one of the drawbacks of building your own is that you don't get a warranty or any kind of support after it's built. And you don't get a restore disk if anything happens down the road. I'd have to reformat the hard drive and start from scratch all over again installing drivers for everything. I did that once and wow, what a pain that was. I had a business that I closed down and I had several computers left over that I had a company build for me. So...even though they supplied me with my copies of Windows 98 and Windows NT, they did not supply me with any driver software for anything else on the computers. At the time I had a service agreement with them and one of the ways they make money is to come out to repair the computers. They don't want you to have any of that driver software. I had to search the internet to find drivers for everything. I finally completed the task but it took about a week! Sometimes those restore disks are nice features to have and worth the extra money spent. But as I stated above I haven't discounted any options yet and building my own DAW is one way to go.
Thanks,
Pete

I built my last three computers, each one got better as i learned what to buy and what not to buy. I like the idea of buying a barebones kit. That way you get the basic to start, a good Mobo, chip, and ram with a decent HD. All that is needed it the sound card (comes out of the old system), graphics card, DVD burner.

Hey I try to stay out of the habit of recommending computer specifics to anyone cause my job's so intense in computers, and ya realize that aside from a few simple pointers, there are SO many options out there that it's really a VERY individual decision. But it sounds like you have amassed all the basics already and are looking at the right things and asking the right questions. Items I'd be looking at -

- the need to dedicate a PC to the DAW work. Trying to surf, play games, etc on your DAW? not a good mix at all, as the drive just gets messed up routinely with garbage. Next thing ya know, latency is the LEAST of your worries.

- the need to ask yourself, what am I going to do (applications-wise) with this powerhouse PC, will that software take advantage of it? (in the case of quad core, I'd say no, it's not there yet with CW, maybe soon but not yet). I have not even seen positive evidence that dual-core is taken advantage of by Sonar or MC4, but if I was buying a new PC at this point I'd get it anyway knowing it'll be used before long. It's not gonna HURT anything to have that power in the meantime.

- barebones kits are the way I did my last 2 upgrades and a good way to go, you get total control of each component. Choosing the right motherboard is crucial and worth spending extra research time on. For a DAW I'd try to NOT get integrated audio, so as to avoid any conflicts with the truly PRO Audio card you're gonna want to get....

- seeking higher-end video is a good and valid point as well, for your DAW.

You're gonna end up with a great system. Lots of help on here. Enjoy!