Guys what is the best cpu for reason?
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
Yeah I'd still go with the i9-9900k. That single-thread performance is absolutely through the roof.
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
To be fair, the i9 9900K is just over a month old. There's no Xeon equivalent as of yet and maybe there wont be one. I wasn't really thinking about the i9 in my comparison as it's the i7s the Xeons have mainly been compared to. If the i9 is in your budget I'd definitely say go for it.EnochLight wrote: ↑27 Nov 2018Yeah I'd still go with the i9-9900k. That single-thread performance is absolutely through the roof.
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
I'm not interested in fair; I'm interested in "what is the best cpu for reason?" The answer is: the absolute fastest your budget can afford. Anyway, the comparison was to show the progress single-thread performance has come over those generations of chips. It's been suggested in the past that buying an older affordable used Xeon was a good option. I'd counter that their performance isn't all that great.
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
-
- Posts: 275
- Joined: 14 Mar 2017
That 9900K runs mighty hot though, a Dark Rock or even Noctua cannot really tame it, unless you either run it below stock or disable Turbo.
Even at stock settings, with Turbo enabled, it easily hits 90°C or even starts throttling in high demand loads.
It's been reviewed a thousand times already, to run the 9900K decently below 90°C you really need water cooling with a big *ss rad setup.
Also it seems to have an issue of the heatsink not always being perfectly flat, AND also the die, which would both need to be lapped,
in which case the temps DO get a bit better, say 10° cooler.
Check out Der8auwer's channel, also Hardware Unboxed and Gamer's Nexus for the actual tests and reviews.
I'd rather just have an 8700K optimized in clocks with a decent mobo and ram setup than this mess. Single clock still rules in DAWS,
and in that regard the 8700K does almost as good as a 9900K.
Then again, I even went AMD in stead, and still don't regret it.
Even at stock settings, with Turbo enabled, it easily hits 90°C or even starts throttling in high demand loads.
It's been reviewed a thousand times already, to run the 9900K decently below 90°C you really need water cooling with a big *ss rad setup.
Also it seems to have an issue of the heatsink not always being perfectly flat, AND also the die, which would both need to be lapped,
in which case the temps DO get a bit better, say 10° cooler.
Check out Der8auwer's channel, also Hardware Unboxed and Gamer's Nexus for the actual tests and reviews.
I'd rather just have an 8700K optimized in clocks with a decent mobo and ram setup than this mess. Single clock still rules in DAWS,
and in that regard the 8700K does almost as good as a 9900K.
Then again, I even went AMD in stead, and still don't regret it.
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
RandyEspoda wrote: ↑13 Dec 2018It's been reviewed a thousand times already, to run the 9900K decently below 90°C you really need water cooling with a big *ss rad setup.
This is not what first-hand user experience has been in the DAW-world. Both Kaine (who runs Scan Pro Audio) as well as Jim over at Purrrfect Audio find the 9900K runs perfectly fine on air-cooling. Jim sells systems overclocked to 5 Ghz - all 8 cores - on air, and they don't throttle at all.
The 9900K runs almost identical to the 8086k (all cores locked at 5GHz on both CPUs). Maybe a degree warmer at idle.
https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopi ... 6&t=513167
You certainly don't need water cooling for the 9900K!
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
Just sold my MacBook 2012 i5, very very tame in terms of speed etc, was having lots of issues for a good reason.
I’m about to buy an Asus ROG that someone has put more work into
It’s got an i7 7700 hq.
16gb ram
HDD 1 tb
256 solid state
And whatever graphics card people use for games
Will the i7 7700 hq cut it?
I’m about to buy an Asus ROG that someone has put more work into
It’s got an i7 7700 hq.
16gb ram
HDD 1 tb
256 solid state
And whatever graphics card people use for games
Will the i7 7700 hq cut it?
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
It’ll perform close to how my 6+ year old desktop chip performs (just a hair slower):
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
Sure it's hot but i don't sit around running synthetic test suites all day on a mobo with subpar MOSFETs. I could probably max out to 105 C if i kept it going for a few hours, but what's the point?RandyEspoda wrote: ↑13 Dec 2018That 9900K runs mighty hot though, a Dark Rock or even Noctua cannot really tame it, unless you either run it below stock or disable Turbo.
Even at stock settings, with Turbo enabled, it easily hits 90°C or even starts throttling in high demand loads.
It's been reviewed a thousand times already, to run the 9900K decently below 90°C you really need water cooling with a big *ss rad setup.
To this day, i have never seen my 9900k go above 90 on dsp heavy projects. I use the NH-D15 and some random Gigabyte auto OC between 4.7 and 5.0 GHz across all cores.
From a personal perspective it does all i ever wanted to, no hassle. I rejected Ryzen pretty early becsuse reasons.
Yamaha HS7 - HD600 - Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 - Akai MPK261 - AT2050 - Auralex Project 2™ Roominator Kit
9900K - 16 GB - 3xXB270HU - GTX 1080 ti
9900K - 16 GB - 3xXB270HU - GTX 1080 ti
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
The 9900K's T-Junction (maximum temperature allowed at the processor die) is 100°C, so you're perfectly fine. It likely throttles well below that, though.
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
AMD are due to announce new chips at the CES show. It’s looks like they’ll be significantly faster than Intel chips at the same price points. They’ll have more cores too. So if you’re planning a 2019 build it might be worth holding out for the Zen2.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-r ... 38233.html
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-r ... 38233.html
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
Really hoping they address the latency between their dies. I'm still open to building an AMD system if that's addressed.miscend wrote: ↑19 Dec 2018AMD are due to announce new chips at the CES show. It’s looks like they’ll be significantly faster than Intel chips at the same price points. They’ll have more cores too. So if you’re planning a 2019 build it might be worth holding out for the Zen2.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-r ... 38233.html
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
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
I expect it to perform great, but the question remains about running audio interfaces at low sample rates/latency (which Intel seems to excel at). That's still a problem with the Zen architecture die latency, and I wonder if the speed increases will help (I doubt it, but would love to be proved wrong).
Welcome to the forums, BTW...
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
The 3700x seems to be the sweet spot. Need more reviews/tests though.
http://www.scanproaudio.info/2019/07/12 ... ic-number/
I plan to wait a little bit before building an AMD system. It looks very promising, but I'm in no rush to be an early adopter. There's always BIOS kinks right after launch.
http://www.scanproaudio.info/2019/07/12 ... ic-number/
I plan to wait a little bit before building an AMD system. It looks very promising, but I'm in no rush to be an early adopter. There's always BIOS kinks right after launch.
-
- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 11 Apr 2019
I just hope it works at lower latencies. Seems that was a potential problem early on.
I'm using Core i5-6600K at stock speed with 16GB RAM. I have no issues with Reason by itself or with multiple apps running simultaneously. I must admit tho that I haven't really loaded up the Reason Rack but I've had as many as 10 tracks open with no issues at all.Dean wrote: ↑17 Oct 2018Hey guys,
I am upgrading my pc and i am wondering what kind of cpu i should get?
I’ve heard mixed opinions about it should have more cores or it should have fast single core speed. Which is best i7 8700k i9 7900x i980 xe or something like 2950x, 2970x ryzen?
Also higher RAM helps alot right?
I read mixed opinions about that too
- EnochLight
- Moderator
- Posts: 8405
- Joined: 17 Jan 2015
- Location: Imladris
To be clear, all of the Ryzen/Zen generation CPU’s work 100% fine at lower latencies. It’s just that Intel chips will offer slightly more plugins at low latencies (64 samples, etc). But the difference isn’t massive IIRC...reggie1979 wrote: ↑12 Jul 2019I just hope it works at lower latencies. Seems that was a potential problem early on.
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
Hi guys and EnochLight in specific,
First of all: thanks for all your great help in this thread. It's helping me at least and I guess others as well.
So I just registered to this forum since you seem to know a lot about this (and I don't). I'm currently getting a DAW assembled for Reason. I'm currently looking into the details before I buy anything.
So the guy at the shop recommended a AMD Ryzen 5 3600X if I want to save some bucks.
Reading through this whole thread you seem to propagate 2 things over and over again:
- Single Thread rating is most important for DAW's
- AMD chips have this latency problem thingy
You seem to mention Intel Core i9-9900K @ 3.60GHz a lot if I've seen correctly, so I made a comparison to that one.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AM ... 3494vs3334
The AMD chip scores higher on the Single Thread Rating as well as the CPU Mark. Can I then conclude that the AMD chip is in fact better / faster, or does the "low latencies" thing you mention have nothing to do with those numbers?
To be clear: I also read your last comment "To be clear, all of the Ryzen/Zen generation CPU’s work 100% fine at lower latencies" and I think I'm just going with the AMD chip.
I'm just trying to understand what I'm buying and/or why I should or should not go with this AMD chip
BTW: If anyone has anything interesting on the full setup, please shoot
Case Cooler Master MasterBox K500 RGB, ATX
Motherboard Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite, ATX, AM4, 4xD
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600X, 3,8GHz / 4,4GHz, 35M
SSD Intel SSD 660p, 1TB, M.2, NVMe
Graphics Gigabyte GeForce® GTX 1650, 4GB, OC
RAM G.Skill Ripjaws V 16GB(2x8GB) 3200MHz C
Power be quiet! Pure Power 11 500W, 80+ Gold
Cabels? BitFenix 3x 3-Pin Adapter 60cm Sleeved
I'm thinking about doubling the RAM to 32GB.
I'm looking forward for your insights guys.
First of all: thanks for all your great help in this thread. It's helping me at least and I guess others as well.
So I just registered to this forum since you seem to know a lot about this (and I don't). I'm currently getting a DAW assembled for Reason. I'm currently looking into the details before I buy anything.
So the guy at the shop recommended a AMD Ryzen 5 3600X if I want to save some bucks.
Reading through this whole thread you seem to propagate 2 things over and over again:
- Single Thread rating is most important for DAW's
- AMD chips have this latency problem thingy
You seem to mention Intel Core i9-9900K @ 3.60GHz a lot if I've seen correctly, so I made a comparison to that one.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AM ... 3494vs3334
The AMD chip scores higher on the Single Thread Rating as well as the CPU Mark. Can I then conclude that the AMD chip is in fact better / faster, or does the "low latencies" thing you mention have nothing to do with those numbers?
To be clear: I also read your last comment "To be clear, all of the Ryzen/Zen generation CPU’s work 100% fine at lower latencies" and I think I'm just going with the AMD chip.
I'm just trying to understand what I'm buying and/or why I should or should not go with this AMD chip
BTW: If anyone has anything interesting on the full setup, please shoot
Case Cooler Master MasterBox K500 RGB, ATX
Motherboard Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite, ATX, AM4, 4xD
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600X, 3,8GHz / 4,4GHz, 35M
SSD Intel SSD 660p, 1TB, M.2, NVMe
Graphics Gigabyte GeForce® GTX 1650, 4GB, OC
RAM G.Skill Ripjaws V 16GB(2x8GB) 3200MHz C
Power be quiet! Pure Power 11 500W, 80+ Gold
Cabels? BitFenix 3x 3-Pin Adapter 60cm Sleeved
I'm thinking about doubling the RAM to 32GB.
I'm looking forward for your insights guys.
-
- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 11 Apr 2019
Still confused. Are you saying that you'll get less at an equivalent clock speed? If so I guess then that is what you pay for since Intel is generally far more expensive.EnochLight wrote: ↑13 Jul 2019To be clear, all of the Ryzen/Zen generation CPU’s work 100% fine at lower latencies. It’s just that Intel chips will offer slightly more plugins at low latencies (64 samples, etc). But the difference isn’t massive IIRC...reggie1979 wrote: ↑12 Jul 2019I just hope it works at lower latencies. Seems that was a potential problem early on.
I'm glad I'm not going through this right now, though one of those Thread ripper chips must be laughable at how many plugs you can run!
-
- Posts: 1181
- Joined: 11 Apr 2019
Well, if money was not an issue, I'd just want bragging rights
But, I don't have the money and simply do not need anything other than what I have.
But, I don't have the money and simply do not need anything other than what I have.
-
- Posts: 62
- Joined: 21 Jun 2019
Not anymore! The 3900X is at least on par and in some tests even ahead of the 9900K.EnochLight wrote: ↑13 Jul 2019To be clear, all of the Ryzen/Zen generation CPU’s work 100% fine at lower latencies. It’s just that Intel chips will offer slightly more plugins at low latencies (64 samples, etc). But the difference isn’t massive IIRC...
cpubenchmark might not be the best website to compare CPUs for your purpose. Some tech youtubers (Steve from Gamers Nexus in particular) even say it's absolute garbage at comparing anything. CPU performance depends on a lot of variables (but mainly paired RAM and application). The single core performance of the 3000 chips is in some cases even better than the Intel's 9th gen (Cinebench scores, for example). A use case specific benchmark like the dawbench link I've linked above makes for a better comparison, imo.zagrad wrote: ↑09 Aug 2019You seem to mention Intel Core i9-9900K @ 3.60GHz a lot if I've seen correctly, so I made a comparison to that one.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/AM ... 3494vs3334
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Kilsane and 23 guests