Reason 8.1 & above CPU Stress Test (songfile included)!

This forum is for discussing Reason. Questions, answers, ideas, and opinions... all apply.
User avatar
Kategra
Posts: 327
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

21 Mar 2017

gak wrote:
Le Boeuf wrote:So i got the new PC today and was rushing to test it :D

Intel® Core™ i7-6800K 6x3.4GHz(Turbo 3.6GHz) 15MB cache
Asus X99-A II Motherboard
Kingston 16GB DDR4-2400
Balance
Windows 10

And was i excited to see that it played the whole song at 4096 samples with no stops, yay!
Even without overclocking. The 6800K is really bang for the buck.
Even at 1024 samples with 13 ms lag, which i would still be able to play with. It goes almost to the end of the track. Maybe it would nail it with some OC.
I hate you :lol:
you can hate me too :lol:
gak wrote:The Ryzen just isn't the shizzle. It just isn't. I'm sorry for people that have it, but it's not the intel-killer it's hyped to be.

......

Well, I'm returning my R7 1700X. Who knows... maybe 1 year from now software will handle the new AMD architecture better... until then...I already ordered:

i7 6800K box (387 EUR, VAT included),
Asus X99-A II Motherboard (280 EUR, VAT included)
HyperX Savage Black 16GB, DDR4, 2400MHz, CL12, 1.35V, kit 4x4GB (125 EUR, VAT included)

I'll use my old PH-TC14PE CPU cooler, hope I can OC the CPU @ 4.0-4.2 Ghz stable.

Le Boeuf
Posts: 91
Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

21 Mar 2017

Kategra wrote:
gak wrote:
Le Boeuf wrote:So i got the new PC today and was rushing to test it :D

Intel® Core™ i7-6800K 6x3.4GHz(Turbo 3.6GHz) 15MB cache
Asus X99-A II Motherboard
Kingston 16GB DDR4-2400
Balance
Windows 10

And was i excited to see that it played the whole song at 4096 samples with no stops, yay!
Even without overclocking. The 6800K is really bang for the buck.
Even at 1024 samples with 13 ms lag, which i would still be able to play with. It goes almost to the end of the track. Maybe it would nail it with some OC.
I hate you :lol:
you can hate me too :lol:
gak wrote:The Ryzen just isn't the shizzle. It just isn't. I'm sorry for people that have it, but it's not the intel-killer it's hyped to be.

......

Well, I'm returning my R7 1700X. Who knows... maybe 1 year from now software will handle the new AMD architecture better... until then...I already ordered:

i7 6800K box (387 EUR, VAT included),
Asus X99-A II Motherboard (280 EUR, VAT included)
HyperX Savage Black 16GB, DDR4, 2400MHz, CL12, 1.35V, kit 4x4GB (125 EUR, VAT included)

I'll use my old PH-TC14PE CPU cooler, hope I can OC the CPU @ 4.0-4.2 Ghz stable.
Yay, congratulations mate. Good choice :-)

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

21 Mar 2017

Le Boeuf wrote:So i got the new PC today and was rushing to test it :D

Intel® Core™ i7-6800K 6x3.4GHz(Turbo 3.6GHz) 15MB cache
Asus X99-A II Motherboard
Kingston 16GB DDR4-2400
Balance
Windows 10

And was i excited to see that it played the whole song at 4096 samples with no stops, yay!
Even without overclocking. The 6800K is really bang for the buck.
Even at 1024 samples with 13 ms lag, which i would still be able to play with. It goes almost to the end of the track. Maybe it would nail it with some OC.
With lag you mean latency? 13 ms is not possible at 1024. At a sample rate of 44.1KHz, 10ms is 441 samples rounded of as 512 samples (at least 12 ms or more). So at 1024 the latency should be at least 24 ms or more. And that's only on DA processing.

User avatar
bjmatt
Posts: 25
Joined: 05 May 2015
Location: Budapest

21 Mar 2017

Carly(Poohbear) wrote:
bjmatt wrote:
Le Boeuf wrote:
bjmatt wrote:Reason 9
CPU: Intel i7 7700K @ 4.2GHz (no overclocking)
RAM: Crucial 8GB DDR4 2400MHz Ballistix Sport
Soundcard: Focusrite Solo, 44100Hz, 1024 samples
CPU usage limit @ 95%
playback stops @ 24.4.1.193 / 0:00:47:601

I was expecting a little more from this config, any ideas for improvement?
Did you try at 4096 samples as the test says?
I had the 7700 non k and got to 46 sek aswell, but i also only had 8 gbs of ram.
Nah, 1024 is the maximum with Focusrite ASIO. But something's weird, i've just tried it again, and it played through the whole song, but with lots of crackling after ~50-55 seconds. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Did you still have the CPU usage limit on? (as the result you are describing sounds like it was switched off)..
You're right, i have changed the usage limit in the meantime, but forgot about it.

User avatar
Carly(Poohbear)
Competition Winner
Posts: 2871
Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Location: UK

21 Mar 2017

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
Le Boeuf wrote:So i got the new PC today and was rushing to test it :D

Intel® Core™ i7-6800K 6x3.4GHz(Turbo 3.6GHz) 15MB cache
Asus X99-A II Motherboard
Kingston 16GB DDR4-2400
Balance
Windows 10

And was i excited to see that it played the whole song at 4096 samples with no stops, yay!
Even without overclocking. The 6800K is really bang for the buck.
Even at 1024 samples with 13 ms lag, which i would still be able to play with. It goes almost to the end of the track. Maybe it would nail it with some OC.
With lag you mean latency? 13 ms is not possible at 1024. At a sample rate of 44.1KHz, 10ms is 441 samples rounded of as 512 samples (at least 12 ms or more). So at 1024 the latency should be at least 24 ms or more. And that's only on DA processing.
Don't mean to speak out of turn here but I bet he is talking about the Input\Output latency shown under Preferences (and trying not to digress too much these figures are not always true, my system reports that the input latency is 1 ms and output latency 0 MS all time no matter what buffer size I choose, but you can clearly hear it's way over 100 ms on certain settings).

Le Boeuf
Posts: 91
Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

21 Mar 2017

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
Le Boeuf wrote:So i got the new PC today and was rushing to test it :D

Intel® Core™ i7-6800K 6x3.4GHz(Turbo 3.6GHz) 15MB cache
Asus X99-A II Motherboard
Kingston 16GB DDR4-2400
Balance
Windows 10

And was i excited to see that it played the whole song at 4096 samples with no stops, yay!
Even without overclocking. The 6800K is really bang for the buck.
Even at 1024 samples with 13 ms lag, which i would still be able to play with. It goes almost to the end of the track. Maybe it would nail it with some OC.
With lag you mean latency? 13 ms is not possible at 1024. At a sample rate of 44.1KHz, 10ms is 441 samples rounded of as 512 samples (at least 12 ms or more). So at 1024 the latency should be at least 24 ms or more. And that's only on DA processing.
Sorry my bad.
Yes, latency but i wrote wrong obvoiusly, at 512 samples it got to 1:21:305 sek with 13 ms latency but with some crackling sounds at the end. :)
At 1024 it got to 1:27:310 with around 24 ms latency.
And with some slight overclocking (14% on cpu and 2% on ram ) it actually plays the whole song at 512 samples. HALLELUJAH!
I feel like its gonna be a while before i run in to power problems, but you never know with the next gen of RE's :D

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

21 Mar 2017

Just a reminder.

Please bear in mind here, when the original CPU Stress Test file was designed (this one is a later version) the point was it was very unlikely that any CPU around at that time would get to the end of the test, thus it was a way of comparing performance not a means of proving that your machine was capable of running Reason succesfully.

You'll still be able to run Reason successfully even if your computer doesn't complete the test, it was never intended that your machine would complete it.

So before you rush out to spend $1000's on a machine just so you can complete this test, bear in mind that completing this test isn't a pre-requisite for running Reason comfortably.

A 7700k based Reason with 16 Gb of RAM is going to be able to run Reason well with some pretty heavy projects even at stock speeds.

I used to run an 8Gb i7 2600k system for about 5 years and I'm now using a 16 Gb i5 6600k@ 4.3 Ghz which is almost a year old, I get just over 50 seconds with that (because of the overclock) but other than running this test I can't remember seeing the 'computer too slow' message using Reason in the real world in all that time, bear in mind I run at 48Khz SR with a 64 sample buffer and Reason CPU usage is set and forgotten at the default 80% too.

So as ever when comparing, just because someone has a bigger one than you it doesn't mean they are having as much fun with it as you... ;)

Le Boeuf
Posts: 91
Joined: 16 Mar 2017
Location: Copenhagen
Contact:

22 Mar 2017

Ostermilk wrote:Just a reminder.

Please bear in mind here, when the original CPU Stress Test file was designed (this one is a later version) the point was it was very unlikely that any CPU around at that time would get to the end of the test, thus it was a way of comparing performance not a means of proving that your machine was capable of running Reason succesfully.

You'll still be able to run Reason successfully even if your computer doesn't complete the test, it was never intended that your machine would complete it.

So before you rush out to spend $1000's on a machine just so you can complete this test, bear in mind that completing this test isn't a pre-requisite for running Reason comfortably.

A 7700k based Reason with 16 Gb of RAM is going to be able to run Reason well with some pretty heavy projects even at stock speeds.

I used to run an 8Gb i7 2600k system for about 5 years and I'm now using a 16 Gb i5 6600k@ 4.3 Ghz which is almost a year old, I get just over 50 seconds with that (because of the overclock) but other than running this test I can't remember seeing the 'computer too slow' message using Reason in the real world in all that time, bear in mind I run at 48Khz SR with a 64 sample buffer and Reason CPU usage is set and forgotten at the default 80% too.

So as ever when comparing, just because someone has a bigger one than you it doesn't mean they are having as much fun with it as you... ;)
Could not agree more.
One can only speak for himself tho, i found myself limited on my Macbook pro which reaches 47 sek or something and the cpu usage at that point is something i reach pretty fast in my projects. So when i bought the 7700 non k which does not even get that far i was pretty disappointed. So im just hoping people will read my post if they are thinking about buying the 7700 non k for use with Reason, dont - get the 6800k for the sake of all music gods, i know its a little bit more expensive but you are just so much more ready for the future :)
Maybe im doing things wrong, making to much parallel comping, to many fx directly on the racks, who knows.
I just want to be able to have fun and make music freely without thinking too much about the cpu.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

22 Mar 2017

It's hard to compare things based on the past. REs are way more demanding than VST/AU, at least on OSX. And when recording guitars and basses Reason can quickly become overloaded using amp sims and impulse responses for speaker simulation.

It all depends on your own productions. I have done many projects using Ableton Live for audio recording and editing and Reason as a synth/drum-rack Rewired. That's a heavy config. Back in the day using a Sony Vaio laptop I was capable of doing complex stuff with it like 60 tracks in Ableton + Reason rewired. I then switched in 2008 to Mac, bought my first MacBook Pro (2.5 gHz processor with 4 gb ram). Which when compared to my 5 year old Sony (1.5 gHz processor with only 1 gb ram) didn't perform any better.

Performance is stil a very difficult issue. It is a compromise in my opinion. Compromise between many things, including the preferred OS, the preferred program(s) etc. That's why I am using both Ableton Live and Reason.
sony-versus-apple.jpg
sony-versus-apple.jpg (66.79 KiB) Viewed 3870 times

Ostermilk
Posts: 1535
Joined: 15 Jan 2015

22 Mar 2017

Le Boeuf wrote:
Could not agree more.
One can only speak for himself tho, i found myself limited on my Macbook pro which reaches 47 sek or something and the cpu usage at that point is something i reach pretty fast in my projects. So when i bought the 7700 non k which does not even get that far i was pretty disappointed. So im just hoping people will read my post if they are thinking about buying the 7700 non k for use with Reason, dont - get the 6800k for the sake of all music gods, i know its a little bit more expensive but you are just so much more ready for the future :)
Maybe im doing things wrong, making to much parallel comping, to many fx directly on the racks, who knows.
I just want to be able to have fun and make music freely without thinking too much about the cpu.
The 6800k is a great choice for getting on the tried and trusted X99 platform. I also believe it's where the 'bang for buck' sweet spot now resides whereas up until fairly recently it was still clearly in socket 115? territory. As you rightly say the price difference now between a 7700k build and a 6800k one isn't that massive either.

My comments about the test weren't aimed at anyone in particular or the choices they make it was more along the lines that the objective was to be able to test like for like performance across different setups and anyone getting figures from 30 secs upwards is still going to be able to get a fair bit done using Reason even if they have to marshal their resources more carefully.

User avatar
Kategra
Posts: 327
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

24 Mar 2017

I assembled the new PC & I overclocked the CPU.

Hardware:
CPU i7-6800K @ 4 Ghz all 6 cores / 1.250 Vcore / cooler Phanteks PH-TC14PE (it's silent & it keeps the CPU < 45 Celsius, while playing the benchmark song, my PC case is always open, because the CPU cooler is too tall)
RAM 16 GB Quad channel Kit 2400 Mhz, DDR4-2400 CL12-14-14 @1.35V
Motherboard Asus X99-A II
SSD Samsung Evo 850 250 GB (Win 10 + Reason on SSD)
Audio interface RME ASIO Fireface 400

CPU usage limit set in Reason 8.3 = 95%
Sample rate = 44,100 Hz
Buffer length = 128 samples
Plays the whole song.


Sample rate = 96,000 Hz
Buffer length = 2048 samples
Computer too slow to play song @ 36 seconds

moogerfooger
Posts: 4
Joined: 29 Jan 2017

08 Apr 2017

Can someone apply this power setting and retry thier ryzen CPU on the benchmark and see if there is any difference please.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-ryzen ... 55294.html

GRIFTY
Posts: 658
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

17 Apr 2017

AMD FX8350 OC@ 4.2 GHz
32 Gb
Focusrite Scarlett 18i8
furthest i made was 26 seconds on the first run.
fiddling with settings and whatnot has not helped, subsequent runs have all failed at or before 25 seconds

chrischrischris
Posts: 196
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: UK

03 May 2017

Ryzen 1800X @ 4.0
ASUS B350M-A
16gb Corsair 3000 C 15 @ 2400
Presonus Firestudio Project

44.1
2048
95% = Stops @ 1 Minute 6 Seconds
Attachments
1111.png
1111.png (156.28 KiB) Viewed 3501 times
Last edited by chrischrischris on 03 May 2017, edited 2 times in total.

chrischrischris
Posts: 196
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: UK

03 May 2017

moogerfooger wrote:Can someone apply this power setting and retry thier ryzen CPU on the benchmark and see if there is any difference please.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-ryzen ... 55294.html
I am going to try that now.

Chris

Edit

Makes Zero Difference.

I put a lot of The "Computer" Power down to a great DSP Chip inside The Soundcard which I have yet to buy!

Chris

User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

03 May 2017

I'm pretty chuffed with my Reason performance running the benchmark. 4k resolution on a 40" monitor hence the large screenshot.
Song completed on 2 DSP bars, sometimes momentarily flicking up to 3 bars towards the end. Oddly, CPU usage never went above 30%

Main specs:
5960X @ 4.7Ghz water cooled
32GB 3200Mhz DDR4
Windows 10 on 2 X 1TB Samsung Pro 850 SSD (Raid 0)
Focusrite Pro 24 DSP

Image

GRIFTY
Posts: 658
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

04 May 2017

There's no way you have a 5960x stable at 4.7

User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

04 May 2017

GRIFTY wrote:There's no way you have a 5960x stable at 4.7
Ah but I do, and for close to a year now. Not only does it do 4.7 but it does it at low volts too. It'll do 4.9ghz but the volts/temp difference just isn't worth it so settled for 4.7 stable. And yes. It's had a shit ton of stress testing for stability. 100% stable

User avatar
devilfish
Posts: 183
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

04 May 2017

devilfish wrote:Two Songs simultaneously will stop at 25 seconds...
My old PC Stops at 32 seconds with just one Song *lol*

I really Love my new Baby :puf_smile:

Computer is still running very fine. No crashes... ;)

Intel Xeon E5-2683v3 ES/QS (QFQK)
14x2,7 GHz Turbo :D

GRIFTY
Posts: 658
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

04 May 2017

impressive. i thought the highest they would clock with stability was around 4.5

User avatar
XysteR
Posts: 421
Joined: 20 Nov 2015

04 May 2017

GRIFTY wrote:impressive. i thought the highest they would clock with stability was around 4.5
4.5 is average for a 5960X there are plenty out there that do 4.7 and higher. Mind you, the 6960X isn't a good Overclocker. Not as good as the 5960X anyway. Awesome chip that'll do me for a good few years to come

User avatar
Bonkhead
Posts: 335
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

04 May 2017

Ok, now I'm confused . .... I was looking to get a ryzen 1700 to overclock to 3.8 and seeing the 6800k performing better much here .. while I read other benchmarks they should be much closer.
And I read this: http://www.scanproaudio.info/2017/03/02 ... for-audio/

Well, still a 100 euro's price difference with 6800k, so I need to rethink this. I'm sure I'm going to hit 70 secs easily, compared to the 42 sec on my 4 y/o i7 3770.
And hopefully the software/bios/windows updates get better and better to handle the ryzen architecture like the improvements we already saw in games this last month.

User avatar
Kategra
Posts: 327
Joined: 18 Jan 2015

05 May 2017

Bonkhead wrote:Ok, now I'm confused . .... I was looking to get a ryzen 1700 to overclock to 3.8 and seeing the 6800k performing better much here .. while I read other benchmarks they should be much closer.
And I read this: http://www.scanproaudio.info/2017/03/02 ... for-audio/

Well, still a 100 euro's price difference with 6800k, so I need to rethink this. I'm sure I'm going to hit 70 secs easily, compared to the 42 sec on my 4 y/o i7 3770.
And hopefully the software/bios/windows updates get better and better to handle the ryzen architecture like the improvements we already saw in games this last month.
I recommend the 6800K. The 100$ difference gets you considerably more Reason performance, less heat, and more OC headroom.
While I seen my ex CPU Ryzen 1700X @ 4Ghz with a voltage exceeding 1.4V and was stable in Reason, but not stable in prime95 (Notcua D15S, open case), the i7 runs at 4 Ghz with just 1.25V pime95 1hour torture test OK. I can get the 6800K @ 4.2 Ghz, prime 95 stable, but with 1.35ish voltage which, for me, is not worth the extra heat and noise...
I expect that by 2020 ... 6950X would cost < 500 EUR second hand and would have 50% to 80% extra performance in Reason 10 versus the 6800K. So no need to change the mobo / ram then....

User avatar
Arrant
Competition Winner
Posts: 521
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

05 May 2017

i7 6700k @ 4.0Ghz
16GB 4000Mhz DDR4
Windows 7 64-bit and Reason 9.2 on old crappy SSD
E-mu 1820 audio interface, must be roughly 10 years old now
44khz max buffer of 22528 samples

Stock 4.0 GHz result: 37.2.1.75 - 1:12:539

Overclocked to 4.4 Ghz: 40.1.2.64 - 1:18:158

User avatar
EnochLight
Moderator
Posts: 8405
Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Location: Imladris

08 May 2017

Kategra wrote:I recommend the 6800K. The 100$ difference gets you considerably more Reason performance, less heat, and more OC headroom.
..at the expense of +45 TDH wattage/energy consumption on the 6800K. It's a miracle you got it to run cooler...
Kategra wrote:While I seen my ex CPU Ryzen 1700X @ 4Ghz with a voltage exceeding 1.4V and was stable in Reason, but not stable in prime95 (Notcua D15S, open case), the i7 runs at 4 Ghz with just 1.25V pime95 1hour torture test OK. I can get the 6800K @ 4.2 Ghz, prime 95 stable, but with 1.35ish voltage which, for me, is not worth the extra heat and noise...
I expect that by 2020 ... 6950X would cost < 500 EUR second hand and would have 50% to 80% extra performance in Reason 10 versus the 6800K. So no need to change the mobo / ram then....
I'm still not convinced that Ryzen is out completely. I'm wondering if others can chime in with their experience, as drawing a conclusion from a few builds doesn't seem wise. I'm not discounting your personal experience; I would just like to see more samples in testing. There's so many other factors on these builds when taken as a whole.
ryzen_vs_i7.JPG
ryzen_vs_i7.JPG (118.59 KiB) Viewed 3339 times
Win 10 | Ableton Live 11 Suite |  Reason 12 | i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz | 16 GB RAM | RME Babyface Pro | Akai MPC Live 2 & Akai Force | Roland System 8, MX1, TB3 | Dreadbox Typhon | Korg Minilogue XD

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests