The joys of building Windows computers

That joy being that every configuration has it's quirks. You can make some general assumptions, but you can never really know for sure.
 
I have two questions - hopefully at least some folks here may have answers!
 
1) I use a Frontier Dakota/Montana combo for my audio interface. They have worked flawlessly for me since, well, since they were introduced. In looking at new motherboards I discovered that none seem to have 'real' PCI slots. Those that include 2 PCI slots use a PCI to PCIe bridge, and most are 3.3V, but claim to be 5V friendly. This is a potential problem. I recently built a game machine for my wife's uncle, using a Gigabyte mobo with the Via bridge chip. The Dakota worked. Can I expect the Dakota to work with most of the bridge chips if they are labeled safe for 5V boards? Anyone successfully using a Dakota in a Z86 based board? How about X79 based boards? (yeah, on the fence!)
 
2) While I had the time, and the parts, I tried a new disk configuration. It worked really well, in this particular case, so I'm curious to see if anyone else has tried a similar arrangement. I'm shying away from SSDs at the moment because my sample libraries take up almost 1GB, and that would be expensive. I could move the heavy libraries to an SSD, but it's still expensive, and it's more complex.
 
So I set up a pair of 1TB drives (7200rpm, 32MB cache, SATA/6) as a striped pair. This successfully eliminated all my streaming problems. A large project, for me, would have 4-5 instances of Kontakt, all fully loaded, or nearly so. The libraries that cause me agita include things like the Orange Tree guitars, KH CSii and CBii, and to a lesser degree Diamond, a couple of the Cinesamples libraries, and a ton of stuff from Tonehammer, SoundIron and 8Dio. They use LOTS of samples, and they were killing me when I was using a non-raid drive.
 
As I am paranoid (not that there's anything wrong with that) I mirror the array to an external 2GB drive as a backup. The mirror is an off-line mirror, so it isn't using any resources unless I'm backing up.
 
For all the rest of my data files, and my audio project files I had a pair of 1TB drives configured as a mirrored pair. I was a little concerned that write speeds would be a problem when recording or rendering, but that never happened. I was also a little concerned about mixing static data files with audio files, but that too proved to be a non-issue.
 
Since I had an SSD for the game machine I tried the hybrid trick that many new mobos support - Intel Smart Response. I don't think I used it long enough for it to learn, I noticed no improvement in general operations or streaming. I didn't expect to see the streaming improve, since it is my impression that only stuff from the C drive is migrated.
 
Lastly, I tried an SSD for the OS and applications... I had one for the game machine so what the heck! I did not run into any problems, but neither did I notice an performance improvement over a conventional drive. I also tried a RAID mirrored pair for the OS and apps, and in this case there was a perceptible, but not really measurable hit. Things just were not as responsive. Since imaging has proven to be a pretty good hedge against disk failures I'll probably just stick with that for now. I might even spring for the SSD.
 
One 'trick' I have used forever is a separate drive for all temp files. I currently use a SATA/3 drive (same as the rest of the drives) and I put my swap file and temp directories (TEMP, WTMP, Cakewalk Audio and Video directories, etc) there. It makes a noticable difference. Hard to believe with current speeds that an extra platter would matter!
 
Anyway - anyone using any of these strategies? Over time have any of these strategies proven worthwhile?
 
OK, I lied, since I'm asking questions I have one more. I'm really wrestling with CPU and Chipset choices. If money were no object I'd go with the SandyBridge-E family if for no other reason than the quad memory access. But money is an object.
 
The i7 SandyBridge (e.g. 2600K) seems to be a reliable choice - lots of folks using it, no one running out of steam. But there are i5 processors that hit the same benchmarks, or get close (not that benchmarks are all that great a resource, but you got to work with what you got). And then there is the Ivy Bridge, and the socket 2011 vs 1155, and so on.
 
My most complex projects use 48 to maybe 80 Kontakt instruments (max 5 fully loaded instances of Kontakt). They have anywhere from 6 to maybe 18 audio tracks. They might also use up to 10 or 12 synthesizer tracks (Dimension, Rapture, FM8, Pro-53, Jamstix, DFH Superior, etc). All the audio tracks usually include processor plug-ins from UA, Waves, Voxengo, Kjaerhus, etc. There are usually at least half a dozen aux busses hosting plugins from UA, Waves, SoundToys, etc. There is always one external insert driving a Lexicon Reverb. All the sample librarie are bussed for processing (strings, brass, winds, percussion), and the audio tracks may also be bussed.
 
Just how much horsepower do I really need? I know there is no definitive answer, but I welcome general impressions. And just to make things even more interesting (maybe) I anticipate upgrading some of my sample libraries over the next year. I need a better choir (probably Requiem Lite and Olympic Combo from Sound Iron), and I'd like better strings (LASS or Cinematic Strings2), brass (CineBrass) and winds (Cinewinds).
 
Guess I should also mention that being budget challenged I'll be building this myself (I long for the day I can just order it!) It will be Windows7 x64, and it will likely have 16GB of memory. I'll be reusing the rack mount case and 500W power supply, I might use the on-chip graphics if I get a CPU that includes same, or I'll just reuse my current nVidia GForce 6200 video card. Have I forgotten anything?
 
Thanks for reading this dreadfully long post, and thanks for any and all suggestions.

Thanks Beepster... I built the game machine around the 2600K, and NOTHING I threw at it - including a number of projects that I can not play back on my current rig (Q6600/P5K-c) without massive freezing - made any impression on it. So I know that will work, thing is, even $100 makes a difference right now. One of the reasons I'm considering 1155 vs 2011 chipsets is that motherboards using the 2011 are a lot more expensive. I may have to give up my trusty Dakota - I'm not happy about it, but I have alternatives. I can keep my converters (three Tangos) for now and use either a MOTU or an RME solution, which will work out.

If the current rig were not so bogged down I'd wait, in fact I'd skip over the Sandybridge entirely and leap to the Sandybridge-E. And that's still a possibility.
The benefit of going with i5 now is that I can get more work done, bring in more money, and then upgrade. At least that's the plan<G>.

The original plan was that this next build would be a stepping stone - reasonably priced i5 rig that would be come a slave machine for sample playback when I built the next firebreathing dragon.

This still may be the best solution, but I just need to be a bit more careful, as finances, and work have forced me to reconsider everything<G>... I hate it when that happens!

It is not "some" boards. It's a LOT of boards. The mobo manufacturers are selling to the gamer crowd and the gamer crowd do NOT use old PCI crap anymore. It's a major problem for the a/v world who still rely on those old cards... which really still work perfectly fine with the right support. It is a slap in the face to an entire segment of power PC users. But yanno... just as long as everyone can play Halo or whatever the crap it's all good I guess. Shameful.

bloop... ;-)

@SCorey... No need to abandon your old i/o. Just slap it into an older system. My Layla will be going back to live in my old P4 again to run Nuendo. Then I'll have two studio systems. :-)

@slartabartfast... Cakewalk tech support advised me against those FWIW.

Cakewalk tech support advised me against those

 
So presumably they have had some frustrated users calling.
 
This compatibility issue is one of the more important reasons not to commit to an interface that plugs directly into the motherboard. To engineer an interface to an external standard communication protocol you only need to deliver the data in the correct format and signal specifications to a plug of the right configuration. To make something work inside a computer of the future, you need to have enough space to fit it, the right power supply etc., AND you have to figure out what socket will be there before anyone has invented it, or some way to fit an adapter inside the case and drivers that will translate everything so that the legacy equipment sees it as if it were still plugged in to an obsolete motherboard. There are plenty of usable PCIe to USB and firewire adapters available, even though much of the external equipment that is connected to them was built during the PCIold era, and a pretty good bet that if PCIe is replaced, someone can engineer a new adapter to fit the new MB socket and put out USB or firewire data that will keep the external device happy. The tiny improvement in theorectical decreased latency by direct-to-motherboard audio interface connection is probably not worth the cost of trashing an audio interface that cost a couple of grand because some hot new MB socket has become popular.

That Delta 1010 runs all day at 64 sample buffer size with high track count/high cpu load projects. From what I understand there were some chipsets with PCI bridge nonsense, but Z77 seems to work perfect! BTW, it was a Gigabyte board FYI.... R