PC Build from Scratch. How do the specs look for Reason?

Want to talk about music hardware or software that doesn't include Reason?
User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

12 Jun 2016

I kind of prefer mine Gorgon ;) . This is one of 2 5960X builds I use for Reason. This one is mainly for gaming with the 980Ti but I use it occasionally for Reason too depending on where I am in the house

5960X Octacore @ 4.4Ghz. 32GB DDR4 Kingston HyperX Predator 3200Mhz. Samsung 28" 4k monitor. 2X Samsung 850 pro 1TB SSD's in Raid0. 2 X 2TB WD black in Raid0, 2X750GB WD Black raid0. 6TB WD Black for auto backups of the raid arrays. All EK custom watercooling. The other is the same spec, but with 64GB and just passive cooled gfx for near complete silence.
Attachments
fr_594_size1024.jpg
fr_594_size1024.jpg (256.5 KiB) Viewed 1275 times
loadpassed.jpg
loadpassed.jpg (409.18 KiB) Viewed 1275 times

User avatar
friday
Posts: 336
Joined: 17 Jan 2015

20 Jun 2016

Does someone has the experience with performance differences (for Reason) between Skylake, Haswell-E and Broadwell?

My idea was to buy a Haswell-E or Bradwell, but i have found this Site and there it seems that the Skylake is a more efficient buy for less money?

Only multicore perf seems to be better for Haswell-E and Broadwell, so does Reason has a benefit of that, or is Reason more comfortable with higher Ghz per Core?

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/In ... 3502vs2579

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/In ... 3502vs3607

ok, now i have seen this, and think that is important for Reason... +43% Much faster multi-core Floating Point Speed.

dezma
Posts: 268
Joined: 02 Jun 2015

22 Jun 2016

I have 5820 since 1 year, and highly recommend it for use with reason. It's a good choice value for money. Also,go for DDR4, maybe start with 8GB (unless you're really using huge sample libraries) and upgrade to 16 GB later.

SSD is very easy to add yourself later on, so if money is an issue I would personally skip on this in first instance. Off course reason will start quicker with SSD but you will not be able to run more synths (as opposed to the 5820 upgrade).

User avatar
Gorgon
Posts: 1233
Joined: 11 Mar 2016

22 Jun 2016

dezma wrote:I have 5820 since 1 year, and highly recommend it for use with reason. It's a good choice value for money. Also,go for DDR4, maybe start with 8GB (unless you're really using huge sample libraries) and upgrade to 16 GB later.

SSD is very easy to add yourself later on, so if money is an issue I would personally skip on this in first instance. Off course reason will start quicker with SSD but you will not be able to run more synths (as opposed to the 5820 upgrade).
If you don't go for an SSD nowadays for an OS disk, you're hopeless. Yes you will be able to "run more synths" because your CPU won't be bogged down with low speed IO operations.
"This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit."

User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

25 Jun 2016

friday wrote:Does someone has the experience with performance differences (for Reason) between Skylake, Haswell-E and Broadwell?

My idea was to buy a Haswell-E or Bradwell, but i have found this Site and there it seems that the Skylake is a more efficient buy for less money?

Only multicore perf seems to be better for Haswell-E and Broadwell, so does Reason has a benefit of that, or is Reason more comfortable with higher Ghz per Core?

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/In ... 3502vs2579

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/In ... 3502vs3607

ok, now i have seen this, and think that is important for Reason... +43% Much faster multi-core Floating Point Speed.
As I mentioned in an earlier post - i'd go for Haswell-E with the 2011-V3 socket. Go for as many cores as you can. I would advise against any quad core if you can help it. Go for a 6 or 8 core CPU. Take out the Intel tuner option and do a basic overclock on the FSB. Even an overclock of 4Ghz on a 5820k is easy to do. Most quad core i7's will stop early in the Benchmark song that's posted somewhere on here. My octacore 5960X plays all the way to the end and DPS usage maxes out with barely 3 notches on the DSP meter. In fact I think a hexacore will play the benchmark song right through too. So Hexacore or octacore is the way to go. As I mentioned earlier, a friend ended up pulling his hair out with his quad core i7 4790k. He's now got his 5960X and say's he's in 'heaven'. So, more cores is always the way to go.

As for Broadwell... hmmm I recently built a 10 core 6950x even overclocked, it ended up being only slightly faster than the average overclocked 5960x. The maximum stable overclock I could get out of this particular 6950x was 3.9Ghz, this is due to the tighter transistor spacing being a bit detrimental to overclocking. Bang for buck - The 10 core Broadwell-E is just not worth it's outlandish price.

To answer your question, Reason is more comfortable with more cores AND more frequency! The more cores you have and higher frequency, the better Reason will run with busy tracks. With a 6 core 5820k you'll have 1 core running Reason's interface, the other 5 cores will be grinding your Re's. This will outperform any quad core i7 by a long enough way to justify your buy. With the octacore 5960x. 1 core for Reason's interface etc and 7 cores for Re's etc. You get the idea....

So in a nutshell:

4 core CPU if you want to be crying in the near future when synths like Zero bring it to it's knees and you have to end up selling your CPU, Mainboard and ram to upgrade to an X99 based system for a higher core count.
6 core if you want headroom away from the quadcore.
8 core if you want your CPU to pretty much laugh at every track you make.

With release of Broadwell-E the Haswell-E's are going for really attractive money. The second hand market is a great option for a 6 or 8 core Haswell-E at the moment. But you obviously need to be treading carefully buying second hand.

User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

25 Jun 2016

Yes, an SSD is the ideal for speed of loading software and samples etc. But the thing is: Once the sample or whatever is loaded to memory then it's loaded to memory. I'd rather wait a short loading time than have pops and clicks because of a CPU struggling to even play the track. The important thing here is 'playing back your track' which demands CPU grunt - an SSD can't help here. So if money is this guys issue, then dezma is right to advise leaving the SSD to later especially if buying an SSD now would compromise buying a 5820k. Some 7200rpm drives are actually surprisingly nippy (especially when in a raid array)

I will say though. If you're getting a 5820k CPU then 16GB DDR4 (4X4GB) is a minimum 'must have'. Ideally on an X99 based system you want to be running in quad channel mode. For this to be active you need 4 memory modules.

User avatar
Gorgon
Posts: 1233
Joined: 11 Mar 2016

28 Jun 2016

XysteR wrote:Yes, an SSD is the ideal for speed of loading software and samples etc. But the thing is: Once the sample or whatever is loaded to memory then it's loaded to memory. I'd rather wait a short loading time than have pops and clicks because of a CPU struggling to even play the track. The important thing here is 'playing back your track' which demands CPU grunt - an SSD can't help here. So if money is this guys issue, then dezma is right to advise leaving the SSD to later especially if buying an SSD now would compromise buying a 5820k. Some 7200rpm drives are actually surprisingly nippy (especially when in a raid array)

I will say though. If you're getting a 5820k CPU then 16GB DDR4 (4X4GB) is a minimum 'must have'. Ideally on an X99 based system you want to be running in quad channel mode. For this to be active you need 4 memory modules.
If you buy such a system without an SSD, you're a complete idiot.
"This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit."

User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

29 Jun 2016

Gorgon wrote:
XysteR wrote:Yes, an SSD is the ideal for speed of loading software and samples etc. But the thing is: Once the sample or whatever is loaded to memory then it's loaded to memory. I'd rather wait a short loading time than have pops and clicks because of a CPU struggling to even play the track. The important thing here is 'playing back your track' which demands CPU grunt - an SSD can't help here. So if money is this guys issue, then dezma is right to advise leaving the SSD to later especially if buying an SSD now would compromise buying a 5820k. Some 7200rpm drives are actually surprisingly nippy (especially when in a raid array)

I will say though. If you're getting a 5820k CPU then 16GB DDR4 (4X4GB) is a minimum 'must have'. Ideally on an X99 based system you want to be running in quad channel mode. For this to be active you need 4 memory modules.
If you buy such a system without an SSD, you're a complete idiot.
You clearly didn't read my post in full - I effectively said "if buying an SSD now would compromise buying a 5820k then don't do it. Get the 5820k" an SSD can be easily and cheaply be added later when funds are available.

Not buying a 5820k for the sake of an SSD would be ill advised - CPU power is king here for the long term.

We all know an SSD is a 'must have' component these days, even my 70 year old mother knows lol. But it would be poor advice to have the guy opt for a lower core count for the sake of an SSD. Especially when he can buy a 5820k now and get an SSD shortly after - It would be worth it in the long run.

There is no need to directly, or indirectly call anyone a 'complete idiot' either!

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests