It is optimised for DAW performance.

Sure, I do other stuff with it though.

It was concieved as a collaboration between myself and a successful PC builder to add to his range of PC's and was designed for maximum Audio performance on a low budget.

We were not aiming for cutting edge producers more for the enthusiast on a budget (someone just like me and many others here), hence going with the H67 to use the 3000 graphics on the 2600 chip, we succeded.  He was retailing those boxes a year ago to the same spec for £500 and they were trumping £1200 offerings from other manufacturers.

So it was built to a specification, and fits that specification perfectly.  I'm always a long way off maxing it out.  Sure you can spend more money for a bit more performance if you need it but what's the point just for the sake of it?

Get something that exactly fits your particular needs and get the most out of it, or get into some kind of competition where you get the latest and greatest at a premium price so you can brag on a forum about theoretical figures.  It's a free choice.

Does that answer your transparently obvious question?  Dedicated for DAW only....LOL!  I need a working tool not a shrine matey...

Add to that, you've also got a dedicated builder, a top end dedicated DAW builder too, here telling you as well you don't need to piddle about with all that 'Core Parking' garbage anymore and still you are trying to convince everyone you've got it right.

Post the figures to prove it.  It's easy enough to do.  Rather it would be if there was any discernable improvement.

Take that stupid AISuite off too, it has two buggy drivers that are known performance killlers and runs background tasks that serve no useful purpose.  It diminishes Audio performance far more than 'Core Parking' does.  If you need to watch guages and thermometers displaying numbers then get something that only runs when you double click it to do the job...

"Jonbouy"
It is optimised for DAW performance.

Sure, I do other stuff with it though.

It was concieved as a collaboration between myself and a successful PC builder to add to his range of PC's and was designed for maximum Audio performance on a low budget.

We were not aiming for cutting edge producers more for the enthusiast on a budget (someone just like me and many others here) ...

<sarcasm free zone>Now that's pretty darn cool to involve yourself in such a project. A win-win for all involved, and I'm sure you and your PC builder made many musicians day so to speak by giving them access to a "high-end like" DAW at a amazing price.</sarcasm free zone>

"Jonbouy"
Get something that exactly fits your particular needs and get the most out of it, or get into some kind of competition where you get the latest and greatest at a premium price so you can brag on a forum about theoretical figures. It's a free choice.

Of course, that's the goal, although I fail to grasp the pertinence of the 2nd part of your 1st sentence. Is there a message in there for someone in particular?

"Jonbouy"
Does that answer your transparently obvious question? Dedicated for DAW only....LOL! I need a working tool not a shrine matey...

The fact that I'm demanding of the tools I chose to work with has nothing to do with religion, shrines and rhymes. The fact that you also use your machine for non-audio related tasks, makes it much more difficult/unwise/impossible for you to optimize/streamline/tweak your machine as I would mine. The fact that you overclock your machine, albeit reasonably, makes it unwise for you to turn off core parking. It's all about choice, I completely agree. And these facts don't make you or me bigger/longer/holier than the other, matey. We obviously have different needs and budget to meet those needs.

"Jonbouy"
Add to that, you've also got a dedicated builder, a top end dedicated DAW builder too, here telling you as well you don't need to piddle about with all that 'Core Parking' garbage anymore and still you are trying to convince everyone you've got it right.

Well, I've noticed Scott mention this for the first time in this thread and as a reply to the OP, not me. I don't agree btw. And I don't recall Jim mentioning anything at all to that effect. Who's trying to convince who again? You are the only one that erroneously perceives my opinion as trying to convince everyone. And who's everyone. That's a pretty broad statement, don't you think? The bottom line here is clear to me and since you're so..., liberal about the "everyone" card, let me have a go at it also.

Treating everyone that ain't you or a pro DAW builder as ignorant fools that don't know any better..., doesn't make it so. Just as you have achieved your goals within your budget and specifications (which you have so proudly elaborated for everyone's benefit), so have I. And I'm talking about the "holy grail". Something I haven't seen you mention at all. DPC latency. And it's not so much the fact that I've achieved border line single digit numbers in a Win 7 environment (I could easily live with higher numbers), it's the fact that it's a flat line no matter how long the utility is used for. Completely spikeless. And that's what has allowed me to enjoy EastWest's QL Pianos for example in a stable, solid and reliable environment, consistently day in and day out. And disabling core parking was "a component" of the process that helped me achieve this. I'm just as proud about it as you are about yours. Scott and/or Jim is more than welcome to elaborate on the futility of disabling core parking in a dedicated DAW context. I'm all ears..., and good luck in trying to convince me otherwise.

"Jonbouy"
Take that stupid AISuite off too, it has two buggy drivers that are known performance killlers and runs background tasks that serve no useful purpose. It diminishes Audio performance far more than 'Core Parking' does. If you need to watch guages and thermometers displaying numbers then get something that only runs when you double click it to do the job...

Now now Jon, you're assuming again and being a poor sport (grown men don't act this way). And a Freudian slip to boot. Priceless!

""Well, I've noticed Scott mention this for the first time in this thread and as a reply to the OP, not me. I don't agree btw. And I don't recall Jim mentioning anything at all to that effect. """

you dont agree really? are you on an X58 or beyond.. X58 see this thead.
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/465221-c1e-c3-c6-eist-speedstep-turbo-boost-core-parking.html

if you are on 1155 or 2011 then forget every bit of it..

UMM yes Jim most certainly said the same..
 
and i would echo the request post the benchmarks.... as i can prove it..

1155...

"jcschild"
Core parking: since this so far only seems a potential (not definitive) issue for Sonar i wont say much. (its also only for Sonar) its Hyper-threading way of doing C1E if there are not enough threads
required it will "park" shut down the HT cores to a ready but not active state. (Win 7 only). Core parking is supposed to be an efficient way of data caching with concern to HT as well. With Core parking enabled it can cause threading issues in Sonar.

All of this power management is supposed to be about "Green" frankly if i want to save energy i will lower my heat and put a sweater on.
 for DAWs ideally you would turn all of this off and have 100% access to full power at all times. leaving it on can cause issues particularly low latency power users.

Seems to me like we do agree about the benefits of disabling core parking, especially in a dedicated DAW context. Thanks Scott! 

He said 1155 or 2011 then foget every bit of that.

Shall I post an old quote where you are using AISuite to update the BIOS as well then Alegria?  I assume nothing!

You really are beyond belief, after several tests I've finally decided.

Hey Jon,
are you sure he is using asus ai suite? as much as a PITA he can be i think he is far smarter than that?

Ai suite= not too bright...

jcschild


Hey Jon,
are you sure he is using asus ai suite? as much as a PITA he can be i think he is far smarter than that?

Ai suite= not too bright...

He certainly was at one point.  He may deny it now though, he said I was assuming that just now but he actually posted about it...

Careful with that 'smart' word btw, especially if you combine it with 'alec', it's been known to cause weeping before...

"Jonbouy"
He may deny it now though, he said I was assuming that just now but he actually posted about it.

There's no need for me to revisit this as all my posts are public and usually non-edited (contrary to yours). We've had this conversation before and a quick search would put your misleading comments about the Asus AI suite to rest. Next...

And I would appreciate a reply to my post #32, if you will. Oh, and the topic was/is about core parking. Remember? 

"Jonbouy"
He said 1155 or 2011 then foget every bit of that.

I know what he said and simply followed the link he provided. If there was a particular post of his he wanted to emphasize, then linking to said post is a simple affair and the least he can do. I have better things to do then to go through 6 pages of back and forth confrontational opinions about C-States. Have you noticed that about Scott? Confrontation and confusion seems to follow him around quite a bit. And that's an observation, no more no less.

@ Scott
Quid Pro Quo dude. 

all my posts are public and usually non-edited (contrary to yours).

Are you inferring something other than I have fat fingers?

btw Core Parking is no longer needed or desired.  Just so you know so you can change your stance on it just like you did when I pointed out to you that AISuite was a pile of poop.

To be fair you usually get there in the end.
 

Alegria

And I would appreciate a reply to my post #32, if you will. Oh, and the topic was/is about core parking. Remember? 

You asked a question in that post?

Ah yes I found it I think.

    Alegria

        "Jonbouy"

        Get something that exactly fits your particular needs and get the most out of it, or get into some kind of competition where you get the latest and greatest at a premium price so you can brag on a forum about theoretical figures. It's a free choice.

    Of course, that's the goal, although I fail to grasp the pertinence of the 2nd part of your 1st sentence. Is there a message in there for someone in particular?

Yes, Alegria that would be you then.

Alegria


Something I haven't seen you mention at all. DPC latency. And it's not so much the fact that I've achieved border line single digit numbers in a Win 7 environment (I could easily live with higher numbers), it's the fact that it's a flat line no matter how long the utility is used for.

Sorry, I must dash I gotta go and impress my GF with my DPC latency figures...oh my.

Alegria


I know what he said and simply followed the link he provided. If there was a particular post of his he wanted to emphasize, then linking to said post is a simple affair and the least he can do. I have better things to do then to go through 6 pages of back and forth confrontational opinions about C-States. Have you noticed that about Scott? Confrontation and confusion seems to follow him around quite a bit. And that's an observation, no more no less.

the very first post was all you had to read. the point to it is very simple.
 
IF you are not on X58 or 1156 socket
 
then all of that stuff that once needed to be done (and FYI core parking was specific to Sonar only and was pretty useless, rarely fixing anything)
is no longer needing to be done..
 
there is much tweaking to still do yes in win7 as few items in bios (far far less than XP ) but C states/core parking etc or disabling anything that stops full power use including hyperthreading
is well STUPID
 
i fail to see the confusion of that statement or for that matter any of my statements.. feel free to enlighten me so i can set you stright..
 
do you even know what Quid pro quo means.. rather out of context here..