AMD CPU Optimizations for Sonar X1 /X2

"bitflipper"
Far and away the best optimization anyone can do is to dedicate the machine to the single purpose of being an audio workstation. Which is what it sounds like kevo is doing. That means no network (or at least one that's only enabled when needed), no unnecessary devices (e.g. use a corded mouse rather than a cordless mouse), no non-audio software (leave out Microsoft Office and definitely no computer games), no unnecessary services (e.g. security monitors and anything network-related). The key to stability and performance is keeping the configuration simple and then leaving it the hell alone.

Glyn Barnes


I really don't know if this is true, but I have read that the best optimisation for an AMD chip is to get an Intel one instead. Any reason for going against the conventional wisdom and getting a AMD chip?

bitflipper

Far and away the best optimization anyone can do is to dedicate the machine to the single purpose of being an audio workstation. Which is what it sounds like kevo is doing. That means no network (or at least one that's only enabled when needed), no unnecessary devices (e.g. use a corded mouse rather than a cordless mouse), no non-audio software (leave out Microsoft Office and definitely no computer games), no unnecessary services (e.g. security monitors and anything network-related). The key to stability and performance is keeping the configuration simple and then leaving it the hell alone.

chuckebaby


if you really dont know if its true,then why even post?
baffling.

kevo


I don't know if anyone is interested or not, but I made my choice for my next build.
I sincerely hope you don't think I simply wanted to waste anyone's time.
All of your comments, info, and links helped greatly in my choosing my next build.

I have built several AMD systems over the years and every one has been rock solid. In the past I always chose AMD because imho they have offered more bang for the buck. However this time, I have chosen to build an Intel i5 system.

Shock and awe!

I was fully ready to build the AMD system I listed in my initial post. However, after doing more homework it seems Intel at this point in time has the edge over AMD.

The system I listed above cannot outperform and i5 system from Intel in most tests. It actually does not even perform as well as the older Phenom in some cases.

After comparing performance with costs, I can build an i5 system for about the same price and the performance of the i5 according to Tom's Hardware is overall better than AMD's flagship chip.

Other considerations to choosing Intel is that Microsoft optimizes their operating systems for Intel chips. Cakewalk also works closely with Microsoft and Intel as they develop Sonar.

Thank you to everyone who responded!
Your input was most appreciated and helpful!

Silicon Audio

Hi Noel, 
 
The AVX testing in question shows that Copy Int24toFloat64 gets almost as much accelaration on the Bulldozer as it does on the newer Intel chips.  However, the Copy Float32toFloat64 showed a 77% loss on the AMD.
 
Can you explain in laymans terms when Copy Float32toFloat64 would be used and what the real-world disadvantage would be for a Sonar user?  I think this is quite important for us as users to be able to make an informed choice when building a new DAW.
 
Thanks!

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk
]

Silicon Audio

Hi Noel, 

The AVX testing in question shows that Copy Int24toFloat64 gets almost as much accelaration on the Bulldozer as it does on the newer Intel chips.  However, the Copy Float32toFloat64 showed a 77% loss on the AMD.

Can you explain in laymans terms when Copy Float32toFloat64 would be used and what the real-world disadvantage would be for a Sonar user?  I think this is quite important for us as users to be able to make an informed choice when building a new DAW.

Thanks!

CopyInt24ToFloat64 gets more use typically than the other function. Both these functions get used a lot during mixing using the double precision engine, since we upconvert 24 bit audio in tracks to 64 bit before it hits the mixer. The 32 bit case gets exercised when streaming 32 bit track data (typically from bounces/freezes) and also when upconverting the output of plugins that do not support 64 bit double precision.
These functions are also used when bouncing audio to 32 or 64 bit files.


I wouldn't use just AVX performance to pick between Intel and AMD though. The above was only one common hotspot that we optimized for. 

Talking about processor level optimizations X2 has some new opts for sample rate conversion. This gets used whenever you export to a different sample rate and also when you import audio into a project at a different sample rate. We initially optimized for AVX but it turned out that the AVX version of the SRC was actually slower than the standard version!
So we ended up doing an SSE2 optimized version of the same which was much faster. In our sandbox this performs about 27% faster than the standard version. So you should see a nice boost when exporting or importing wave files with SRC.
AVX doesn't necessarily apply well to all contexts - it depends on the kind of processing loops and how you are accessing the data. In this case SSE2 was faster because the overhead of setting up for AVX outweighed the benefits.