Susan G
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12016
- Joined: 2003/11/05 22:49:26
- Location: Putnam County, NY
- Status: offline
Just to confirm CPU requirement
Hi- The processor requirement for X1 is posted as Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 2.67 GHz/AMD Phenom Quad Core 9750 2.4 Ghz. I have an Intel Core 2 Duo 6300 @1.86 GHz processor, so I won't be able to run X1, correct? It doesn't say if that's minimum or recommended here. Thanks- -Susan
2.30 gigahertz Intel Core i7-3610QM; 16 GB RAMWindows 10 x64; NI Komplete Audio 6.SONAR Platinum (Lexington) x64
|
Guest
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4951
- Joined: 2009/08/03 10:50:51
- Status: online
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:27:51
(permalink)
You will be able to run it, but it may not run as well as 8.5. I suspect it will be mostly due to the increased amount of power it will take to run the GUI. Not a fair trade IMHO.
|
Stone House Studios
Max Output Level: -40 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3550
- Joined: 2004/05/07 15:07:32
- Location: Natural Bridge, VA USA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:34:18
(permalink)
Susan G
Hi-
The processor requirement for X1 is posted as Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 2.67 GHz/AMD Phenom Quad Core 9750 2.4 Ghz. I have an Intel Core 2 Duo 6300 @1.86 GHz processor, so I won't be able to run X1, correct?
It doesn't say if that's minimum or recommended here.
Thanks-
-Susan
Hey Susan - It says "required." Apparently that's the only system it will run on!  Brian PS I'll need a new PC if I want to upgrade. I'm calling it an excuse!
Core i7-6700@3.40Ghz Windows 10x64 16 GB RAM Sonar Platinum/Studio One PreSonus Studio 192
|
snaporaz
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 43
- Joined: 2010/07/03 01:09:28
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:35:51
(permalink)
As a newb, the workflow on 8.5 was kicking my ass. I'm getting the hang of it, but I am really stoked about the new GUI. This isn't a cheap hobby but Sonar is the cheapest part of it. I would have no problem upgrading my PC if I happened to have a PC that doesn't meet the requirements.
I7-3930k ASUS P9-x79 pro 16 RAM Windows 8 Sonar X2 x64 Komplete Audio 6 K9 Ultimate
|
Susan G
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12016
- Joined: 2003/11/05 22:49:26
- Location: Putnam County, NY
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:39:26
(permalink)
Hi Brian-
They used to have "minimum" and "recommended", but I guess you're right -- that must be the "required minimum" processor.
Oh well, that takes care of that -- I won't be upgrading for some time then.
Thanks-
-Susan
2.30 gigahertz Intel Core i7-3610QM; 16 GB RAMWindows 10 x64; NI Komplete Audio 6.SONAR Platinum (Lexington) x64
|
GMGM
Max Output Level: -81 dBFS
- Total Posts : 494
- Joined: 2007/10/26 21:01:15
- Location: Omaha, NE
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:53:46
(permalink)
Me neither, I guess. Dang.
DAW: SONAR Platinum PC: i7-2600 @ 3.40GHz, ASUS Motherboard, 16G RAM OS: Windows 10 Home 64-bit I/O: MOTU 8M / MOTU 8PRE / PreSonus DigimaxLT / M-Audio Oxygen 49
|
superdan54
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 526
- Joined: 2006/02/10 01:21:54
- Location: BanjoLand, USA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:57:39
(permalink)
Hmm I can't remember where I saw it but that's not the Minimum it's the recommended. I remember the minimum being a Pentium 4 with 1GB RAM. I'll try and find the source though. ETA: hmm that may have been something else, can't find the source, sorry!
post edited by superdan54 - 2010/11/01 19:01:19
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 18:57:45
(permalink)
Susan G
Hi Brian-
They used to have "minimum" and "recommended", but I guess you're right -- that must be the "required minimum" processor.
Oh well, that takes care of that -- I won't be upgrading for some time then.
Thanks-
-Susan
I'm hoping it's needs more CPU to run the Pro Channel and whatnot on lots of channels, not the GUI and core functionality. Same with the RAM - if it needs 2GB just for Sonar, running Kontakt is going to be a problem for me. It's not like my computer is that old, and if it won't run at all on a reasonably priced laptop either, well that's kind of pathetic.
|
PenguiN42
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 201
- Joined: 2004/06/19 20:05:36
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:02:24
(permalink)
Most likely you'll have no problem running X1 on any computer that could run 8.5. However, you might get slow performance using some of the nifty new features.
This is just my guess, of course. But there's no reason it *won't run* -- it may just run slowly.
I have less than the "minimum" specs (an athlon x2) and am running 8.5 with no problem, and I intend to upgrade to X1.
|
Susan G
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12016
- Joined: 2003/11/05 22:49:26
- Location: Putnam County, NY
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:06:31
(permalink)
I asked for clarification of whether the req is minimum or recommended on the "X1" thread, so we'll see. It seems high for a minimum requirement.
-Susan
2.30 gigahertz Intel Core i7-3610QM; 16 GB RAMWindows 10 x64; NI Komplete Audio 6.SONAR Platinum (Lexington) x64
|
Robin Kelly [Roland]
Genuinely Swell Guy
- Total Posts : 571
- Joined: 2003/11/07 10:04:44
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:10:53
(permalink)
The CPU requirements are higher but the the SONAR 8,5 minimum CPU was an Intel Pentium 4 which stopped production in 2008.
SONAR X1 CPU requirement is the Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 2.67 GHz was released in Jan 2008.
So yes the CPU requirement went up from a Pentium 4 to a Core 2 Duo from 2008.
Hope that helps,
Robin
That's my blog Omnia illa et ante fiebant, Omnia illa et rursus fient.
|
PenguiN42
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 201
- Joined: 2004/06/19 20:05:36
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:16:30
(permalink)
Robin Kelly [Cakewalk
]
The CPU requirements are higher but the the SONAR 8,5 minimum CPU was an Intel Pentium 4 which stopped production in 2008.
SONAR X1 CPU requirement is the Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 2.67 GHz was released in Jan 2008.
So yes the CPU requirement went up from a Pentium 4 to a Core 2 Duo from 2008.
Hope that helps,
Robin
Robin, I think it's clear what the minimum requirement *is* -- the question is ... what if your computer is below the minimum requirement (but, for instance, ran 8.5 fine)? Is it still worth running X1 on such a computer or will performance be too horrible to bear? Honestly, such a high "minimum" requirement on a DAW makes no sense to me. The amount of CPU/RAM needed should be directly proportional to the number of tracks/effects/instruments etc. So on a slower machine, maybe you'd have to freeze more tracks or load smaller libraries or use a higher latency -- but the software should still *run*. Maybe a "recommended" requirement of that caliber would make sense, but minimum?
|
Susan G
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12016
- Joined: 2003/11/05 22:49:26
- Location: Putnam County, NY
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:20:42
(permalink)
So yes the CPU requirement went up from a Pentium 4 to a Core 2 Duo from 2008. Thanks, Robin. Just asking.  -Susan
2.30 gigahertz Intel Core i7-3610QM; 16 GB RAMWindows 10 x64; NI Komplete Audio 6.SONAR Platinum (Lexington) x64
|
Robin Kelly [Roland]
Genuinely Swell Guy
- Total Posts : 571
- Joined: 2003/11/07 10:04:44
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:24:50
(permalink)
I wish we could easily say X CPU and Y RAM = Z Tracks and effects. Unfortunately (or fortunately) all DAWs, plugins and synths are not made equal so it is near impossible to give a definitive answer.
In another thread many folks are asking if the engine has been improved. We have made incremental improvements and one of the ways that DAWs keep getting more powerful is by leveraging the latest CPUs. Obviously, there needs to be a balance between what the software should be coded to and what the customers are using in terms of CPU.
The increase in CPU has little or no impact on the GUI. The GUI has an extremely low footprint on system resources and is more efficient than SONAR 8.5.
So will SONAR X1 run on a machine below the system requirements? Yes but at what level is a good question. If you are doing a few audio tracks and mainly MIDI you will be fine. If you are running SONAR 8.5 now and have no trouble you can expect the same. Important point is systems below the requirements are not official supported.
Robin
That's my blog Omnia illa et ante fiebant, Omnia illa et rursus fient.
|
DaveElson
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 350
- Joined: 2004/01/16 12:42:38
- Location: Bothell, WA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:31:24
(permalink)
Susan
Just a thought, but have you considered upgrading the cpu? I know it can be a bit of a minefield, but although I haven't yet, I looked at doing so for my relatively old 2 core and some of the options were quite cheap.
Obviously take good advice, and make sure whatever you buy will be compatible, but a decent speed upgrade may be possible quite cheaply.
|
PenguiN42
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 201
- Joined: 2004/06/19 20:05:36
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 19:44:18
(permalink)
If you are running SONAR 8.5 now and have no trouble you can expect the same. Important point is systems below the requirements are not official supported. Ah this is what I expected... Thanks for the clarification!
|
Stone House Studios
Max Output Level: -40 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3550
- Joined: 2004/05/07 15:07:32
- Location: Natural Bridge, VA USA
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 20:13:07
(permalink)
PenguiN42
If you are running SONAR 8.5 now and have no trouble you can expect the same. Important point is systems below the requirements are not official supported.
Ah this is what I expected... Thanks for the clarification!
Agreed - great clarification. Unfortunately, It is still time for an upgrade in CPU. Brian
Core i7-6700@3.40Ghz Windows 10x64 16 GB RAM Sonar Platinum/Studio One PreSonus Studio 192
|
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5769
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
- Location: Willits, CA USA
- Status: offline
X1 carries a hefty minimum
2010/11/01 20:20:03
(permalink)
<whew>... For thos of us out here too poor to have such a recent machine.... The minimum system they're recommending is a Core2Duo 2.67GHz machine... My poor little Core2Duo 2.00GHz machine is way under the limit so now the upgrade will require that I buy a new machine as well... Tho I would love to, I can't see how I'll come up with that so I guess I'll be dreaming for the foreseeable future. Have Fun Everydocy... <sigh>... 
|
Susan G
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12016
- Joined: 2003/11/05 22:49:26
- Location: Putnam County, NY
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 20:20:32
(permalink)
Yes, that was a better clarification.
@Dave- Yes, I've considered it. No can do right now, unfortunately.
-Susan
2.30 gigahertz Intel Core i7-3610QM; 16 GB RAMWindows 10 x64; NI Komplete Audio 6.SONAR Platinum (Lexington) x64
|
Peter J
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
- Total Posts : 424
- Joined: 2003/12/19 20:40:35
- Status: offline
Re:X1 carries a hefty minimum
2010/11/01 20:27:34
(permalink)
Keni, reading between the lines I think your machine would run it just fine. 
-Phoen1x the artist formerly known as Peter J new music soon from Tightrope Fortune! The *brand new* Phoen1xDAW: Core i5 3.3 GHz on Asus P8B75-M 32 GB Mushkin Blackline RAM (2) Seagate 1 TB HD's 1 GB nVidia Vid Win 7 Pro SP1 SONAR X3! My DAW is not cutting edge. It is middle-of-the-blade super bang for the buck! The BAM is in the RAM. ;-|
|
Phoenix
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1886
- Joined: 2003/11/07 18:25:33
- Location: Long Island, New York
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 20:48:51
(permalink)
Robin Kelly [Cakewalk
]
I wish we could easily say X CPU and Y RAM = Z Tracks and effects. Unfortunately (or fortunately) all DAWs, plugins and synths are not made equal so it is near impossible to give a definitive answer.
In another thread many folks are asking if the engine has been improved. We have made incremental improvements and one of the ways that DAWs keep getting more powerful is by leveraging the latest CPUs. Obviously, there needs to be a balance between what the software should be coded to and what the customers are using in terms of CPU.
The increase in CPU has little or no impact on the GUI. The GUI has an extremely low footprint on system resources and is more efficient than SONAR 8.5.
So will SONAR X1 run on a machine below the system requirements? Yes but at what level is a good question. If you are doing a few audio tracks and mainly MIDI you will be fine. If you are running SONAR 8.5 now and have no trouble you can expect the same. Important point is systems below the requirements are not official supported.
Robin
I would still like a little more clarification. My laptop is new, ADK core i7 (boy, am I glad I didn't listen to the "you can get by with just a cheap machine" folks!), but my desktop is a few years old and is an AMD Phenom 9850 Quad 2.53 GHz--not much more than the "AMD Phenom Quad Core 9750 2.4 Ghz" mentioned. It runs 8.5 fine. Can you tell me definitely that it will run X1 the same? Because I can't afford a new desktop yet, not with the specs I'd want...
|
ba_midi
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14061
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:58:18
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 20:54:06
(permalink)
Robin Kelly [Cakewalk
]
The CPU requirements are higher but the the SONAR 8,5 minimum CPU was an Intel Pentium 4 which stopped production in 2008.
SONAR X1 CPU requirement is the Intel Core 2 Duo E8200 2.67 GHz was released in Jan 2008.
So yes the CPU requirement went up from a Pentium 4 to a Core 2 Duo from 2008.
Hope that helps,
Robin
Hmm, I need a little more clarity here as well. At the moment I am running on a Q6600 2.4GHz ... so that is below the minimum now or is that 'good' since it's quad core? IOW, I would want to know clearly if my system is going to work and so far that's not clear.
|
Robin Kelly [Roland]
Genuinely Swell Guy
- Total Posts : 571
- Joined: 2003/11/07 10:04:44
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:03:59
(permalink)
maybe this will help? I shot the videos on a Core 2 quad 9300 machine with 4 Gig of RAM. That chip was released in March 2008 and is 2.5GHz and I have had zero trouble running SONAR X1, screen capture and a VS-700 at 4.4msec latency all at the same time and that's on Vista 32. My Core 2 is extremely close to you AMD Phenom so if you are happy with SONAR 8.5 performance then i would expect SONAR X1 to be fine. To be clear I have not personally tested that chipset but it is very close to my Dell M4400 so I have to believe you will be fine. Robin
That's my blog Omnia illa et ante fiebant, Omnia illa et rursus fient.
|
Phoenix
Max Output Level: -56.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1886
- Joined: 2003/11/07 18:25:33
- Location: Long Island, New York
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:09:44
(permalink)
Thanks, Robin. I'm no expert on the differences between chipsets, and the various naming systems sure don't help, so it does help to hear that you have run X1 on one that is similar.
|
drewfx1
Max Output Level: -9.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6585
- Joined: 2008/08/04 16:19:11
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:15:22
(permalink)
Robin Kelly [Cakewalk
]
I wish we could easily say X CPU and Y RAM = Z Tracks and effects. Unfortunately (or fortunately) all DAWs, plugins and synths are not made equal so it is near impossible to give a definitive answer.
In another thread many folks are asking if the engine has been improved. We have made incremental improvements and one of the ways that DAWs keep getting more powerful is by leveraging the latest CPUs. Obviously, there needs to be a balance between what the software should be coded to and what the customers are using in terms of CPU.
The increase in CPU has little or no impact on the GUI. The GUI has an extremely low footprint on system resources and is more efficient than SONAR 8.5.
So will SONAR X1 run on a machine below the system requirements? Yes but at what level is a good question. If you are doing a few audio tracks and mainly MIDI you will be fine. If you are running SONAR 8.5 now and have no trouble you can expect the same. Important point is systems below the requirements are not official supported.
Robin
I think what a lot of us are asking is, "what's the reason for the increase?". And, "will we see similar performance to what we're getting now with the same number of tracks if not running the cool new toys included with X1?". It sounds like maybe you are just choosing more recent machine specs to officially support, which is fine, but I'd like a little more clarification as to whether, say, just opening an existing Sonar 8 project and hitting "play" will consume significantly more CPU and RAM in X1 than in 8. Some of us just don't upgrade our machines all that often, particularly when they meet our current needs and are stable (knock on wood).
|
ba_midi
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14061
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:58:18
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:21:39
(permalink)
Robin Kelly [Cakewalk
]
maybe this will help?
I shot the videos on a Core 2 quad 9300 machine with 4 Gig of RAM. That chip was released in March 2008 and is 2.5GHz and I have had zero trouble running SONAR X1, screen capture and a VS-700 at 4.4msec latency all at the same time and that's on Vista 32.
My Core 2 is extremely close to you AMD Phenom so if you are happy with SONAR 8.5 performance then i would expect SONAR X1 to be fine. To be clear I have not personally tested that chipset but it is very close to my Dell M4400 so I have to believe you will be fine.
Robin
That helps me feel a little better about my setup, so thanks. It's not that I wouldn't want to upgrade, it's just that it takes SOOO much time, which I don't have much of these days.
|
Robin Kelly [Roland]
Genuinely Swell Guy
- Total Posts : 571
- Joined: 2003/11/07 10:04:44
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:27:07
(permalink)
I have found that SONAR 8.5 files run better in SONAR X1 on the same machine. I am being serious and not throwing up some sales talk.
Sure adding the ProChannel to every track on a 24 track project will increase the load but that would happen if you patched 3-4 similar plugins on each track. Apples to apples I have seen improved performance in SONAR X1.
As mentioned in other threads the GUI improvements were not just pretty pictures but and entire improvement on how views are drawn, optimized and managed. This is a good thing.
We increased the requirements as we normally do each cycle. Some cycles like 8.5 did not require a large increase if any at all. So to be fair it has been a few years since a significant jump in the CPU requirements. To make sure we are coding to and leveraging the latest technologies we need to draw a line somewhere.
Robin
That's my blog Omnia illa et ante fiebant, Omnia illa et rursus fient.
|
Chappel
Max Output Level: -52.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2300
- Joined: 2009/07/11 14:55:32
- Location: California
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:27:27
(permalink)
Sounds like a nifty deal. I'll probably get it when I can afford to upgrade my mainboard, cpu and ram and upgrade to Windows 7 64. Until then I'll just have to keep trying to get the best out of what I already have.
|
Susan G
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 12016
- Joined: 2003/11/05 22:49:26
- Location: Putnam County, NY
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:30:26
(permalink)
I think what a lot of us are asking is, "what's the reason for the increase?". And, "will we see similar performance to what we're getting now with the same number of tracks if not running the cool new toys included with X1?". Right, esp. since Robin said the new GUI "has an extremely low footprint on system resources". I can just wait until the demo's available, but I'm curious, too. I understand they updated the reqs since it's been a while since they were made current/realistic, but the new ones might be a little off-putting to some who can't afford to upgrade both hardware and software at the same time. -Susan
2.30 gigahertz Intel Core i7-3610QM; 16 GB RAMWindows 10 x64; NI Komplete Audio 6.SONAR Platinum (Lexington) x64
|
ba_midi
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14061
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:58:18
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re:Just to confirm CPU requirement
2010/11/01 21:33:02
(permalink)
Susan G
I think what a lot of us are asking is, "what's the reason for the increase?". And, "will we see similar performance to what we're getting now with the same number of tracks if not running the cool new toys included with X1?".
Right, esp. since Robin said the new GUI "has an extremely low footprint on system resources". I can just wait until the demo's available, but I'm curious, too.
I understand they updated the reqs since it's been a while since they were made current/realistic, but the new ones might be a little off-putting to some who can't afford to upgrade both hardware and software at the same time.
-Susan
Hi Susan, I think it's been answered in some way, Susan. I would think with all the new inline mixer stuff that are basically plugins (whether they're inline or not they still are plugins) are one of the main reasons for needing added "umpph".
|