Jim Roseberry

To be fair, Intel has their own issues.

ie: Can't seem to actually get the new i9-10980 out to suppliers.

Out of stock across the entire US and Canada... and probably not available thru the end of 2020.

 

23 hours ago, Mark Morgon-Shaw said:

But outperformed by the 3900x which is cheaper

Who runs the 9900k at 4.9GHz???  😉   It'll run all 8 cores locked at 5GHz... with air-cooling... and do so nearly dead-silent.

The 3950x  (4.7 max turbo) doesn't out-perform the 9900k when working at ultra low latency settings.

Using a Presonus Quantum, fire up an instance of Helix Native (patch using dual 2048-sample Cab IRs) running at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size.

That's running Helix Native at ~2ms total round-trip latency.

• With the 3950x... pops/ticks
• With the 9900k... audio is glitch-free

BTW, The 3700x is ~$90 less than the 9900k.

• Active-Cooled chipsets
• Small incompatibilities with AMD (not really AMD's fault)
• Flaky motherboards (requiring BIOS resets)
• Some motherboards have no option to disable onboard audio, WiFi, etc

To save $90?  Not for me or our clients.  

 

As I've mentioned 1001 times, Threadripper and Ryzen shine in heavily multi-threaded scenarios (video rendering and at larger buffer sizes).

That's when they'll smoke the Intel i9s.

In ultra low latency scenarios, Intel bests AMD (clock-speed is the single most important factor).

 

AMD is winning IPC (instructions per clock).

Intel is winning at all-core clock-speed.

If AMD can get Threadripper's TDP down (currently 280w), that'll allow higher clock-speed.

280w TDP is why AMD can't get Threadripper's all-core clock-speed higher than ~4GHz.

Even with 105w TDP, the  3950x can't get all-core clock-speed much more than about 4GHz.

If you're used to a super quiet machine, you're not going to like a 3970x build.  There's just too much heat to keep it quiet.

2 hours ago, Zo said:

Any exeperience if those emulations ? 

I'd go IK on the SVT plugin.

I've got the UAD plugin... but don't use it.  It's ok.

I remember the first time I saw an SVT (Classic).

I said... "there's no way that thing weighs 80 pounds."

Then... I lifted it.  (Groan) Yep!  It weighs 80 pounds.

 

Any classic electric bass into an SVT Classic is (IMO) the definition of rock-bass tone.

 

Great to have... if you have the physical space.

Not so great to move/transport...

This is almost identical to the embedded Torpedo on the Revv D20 and G20 lunch-box tube-amps.

I just got a G20.  It's an amazing little amp (Torpedo sounds much better than I expected).

 

Watch Shawn Tubbs demo videos of the D20 and G20. 

He's using the Torpedo direct out in many of them.

14 hours ago, abacab said:

I wonder what @Jim Roseberryhas to say on the topic? Last I heard he was testing Ryzen processors, but only using Intel for his Studiocat builds... https://studiocat.com/opencart2/index.php?route=common/home

We've discussed this subject a lot over the past several months.  

Ryzen and Threadripper excel at heavily multi-threaded scenarios (video rendering).

The 3970x will smoke the 10980xe for rendering video.

 

Where Ryzen and Threadripper are weak is scenarios that aren't heavily multi-threaded (do to lower clock-speed).

ie: If you're running Helix Native at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size (1ms total round-trip latency), that's not something that lends itself to being heavily multi-threaded.

In this case, the "lowly" 9900k will out-perform CPUs from Intel and AMD that are double/quadruple the cost.

 

Not every process in a DAW can be multi-threaded.

Performance increase from adding cores doesn't scale 1:1.

IOW, Doubling the number of cores doesn't double performance.

This is why clock-speed is still the single most important factor.

Having more cores is certainly beneficial, but not at the expense of significant clock-speed.

 

For an "Audio" machine, the major problem with Threadripper is its 280w TDP.

There's no way to build a quiet Threadripper machine.   Large water-cooler is absolutely necessary.

The motherboard chipsets have to be actively cooled (meaning small high RPM fan).

If you're used to a quiet machine, the high-pitched "whine" from the chipset fan is super annoying.

By comparison, the 9900k has TDP of 95w.  With quality air-cooler, it'll run (all 8 cores locked at 5GHz) near dead-silent.

The 3950x has a much more manageable TDP of 105w.  It'll also run near dead-silent with quality air-cooler.

Side note:  We tested 3950x with 360mm water-cooler... and there was no appreciable performance increase compared to using quality air-cooling.

Socket 2066 i9-10980xe has a TDP of 165w.  Water-cooler is necessary... but it'll run much quieter than Threadripper.  Chipset isn't active-cooled.

 

I tested numerous Threadripper and Ryzen 9 builds... using multiple top-tier motherboards.

Some of the motherboards don't allow turning off extraneous hardware in the BIOS (onboard audio, WiFi, etc).

I've also seen flaky behavior from numerous motherboards:

• RAM related issues (requiring an occasional BIOS reset)
• Disabling onboard audio could cause the machine to no longer post/boot (requiring a BIOS reset)
• Disabling SMT could cause the machine to no longer post/boot (requiring a BIOS reset)

If you're fairly tech savvy, a BIOS reset isn't a big deal... but it is annoying.

 

Ryzen and Threadripper have never had much OC headroom (the current generation is no different).

The 3950x can do ~4GHz across all 16 cores... maybe 4.1GHz.

By comparison, the 9900k can easily run 5GHz across all 8 cores.

If you get a 3970x hoping to achieve anywhere near 4.5GHz across all cores, you'll be disappointed.

The reason why is the 280w TDP.  There's just nowhere to go (already pushing the limits of cooling).

 

AMD is winning IPC (instructions per clock).

Intel is winning all-core clock-speed.

 

If I'm spending $2000-$4000 for a CPU, I want top-performance in all scenarios.

AMD needs to get Threadripper's TDP better under control... and that'll allow higher clock-speed.

With higher clock-speed,  passive-cooled (no fan) chipset, and motherboards "sans flake"... AMD would have a clear winner.

 

I always bring up the i9-9900k... because it's an amazing performer at ~$500.

Super high clock-speed... 8 cores... and it runs near dead-silent.

In scenarios that aren't heavily multi-threaded, it'll out-perform CPUs that are double/quadruple the cost (both Intel and AMD).

 

We've got professional composer clients who work under stressful deadlines (TV/Film).

There's absolutely no way I'd build a Threadripper or Ryzen machine for these clients.

On 4/22/2020 at 9:19 AM, Soundwise said:

The only benefit was getting the suite with full Independence and SpectraLayers Pro.

For someone making commercial records, the Suite version also has DDP Export.

At GearFest a couple years back, I got to meet Roger Linn... and he personally demonstrated the LinnStrument.

Out of all the gear, (IMO) it was one of the coolest things we saw.

Meeting Roger Linn... and getting to thank him for all his contributions to music/technology was also a highlight.

 

 

 

 

37 minutes ago, Patrick Derbidge said:

280w!!! Wow, that's hot, although we are talking 32  cores vs 18. I wonder if Intel will find a way to do better when they get there.

Intel is having a hard enough time getting the new 10980xe to distributors/vendors.   😉

 

Intel Xeon 8180 is 28 cores with super low clock-speed of 2.5GHz.

TDP is 205w

Terrible DAW performer... at a cost of ~$11k.   😃

You can project TDP at significantly higher clock-speed would be thru the roof.

 

11 hours ago, Patrick Derbidge said:

I can definitely believe that.  One of the main reasons I didn't consider AMD over Intel for many years was due to how hot they ran,. Having said that, wouldn't an Intel 9980xe be more of a comparison to the Thread ripper? I'm pretty sure a 9980xe would be a beast to try and cool as well.

• Threadripper - TDP = 280w
• i9-10980xe - TDP = 165w
• i9-9980xe - TDP = 165w

Socket 2066-i9 requires water-cooling, but because the TDP is significantly lower, it can run quieter.  Also, the chipset is passive-cooled (no fan).

2 hours ago, Patrick Derbidge said:

Personally, I think think this is an apples to oranges debate. I get it though. For years we are used to focusing on overclocking capabilities of Intel vs AMD and making those head to head comparisons but I just think that the AMD architecture is just so different now that you have to look at AMD and Intel from their individual stand points. AMD's Performance Boost (not be confused with PBO) works in such a unique way that it gives the user the best "overall" performance one can possible get out of the cpu, along with the ability to maximize memory performance through the infinity fabric. The point being that there is no reason to overclock a Ryzen chip, and if you do the performance gains are negligible considering the loss of warranty that comes with it. Intel's 9th and 10th gen is not wired this way and is more "traditional" one might say and the speed of memory has very little impact on performance (which can also be a good thing). I'm not saying that higher clock speeds don't help Ryzen, but rather that it is only one component of the Performance Boost system that they've come up with.

The problem with Threadripper is the TDP is too high.

An ultra quiet 3970x build simply can't be done.  I know for sure (I've done everything possible to make it work). 

Way too noisy for myself and clients!

This is why Threadripper has little to no OC potential (why the clock-speed can't be ramped up); heat quickly gets out of control.

 

I've mentioned this many times... but I'll repeat (yet again).

Not every process in a DAW can be heavily multi-threaded.

In those processes, 3.5GHz clock-speed is a significant performance hit.

Highest clock-speed and more cores is the key to dominant performance in all DAW scenarios.

This is why I rail on about clock-speed.

If you're talking ultra low latency audio settings, any type of performance throttling is not desirable.

 

 

4 hours ago, RSMcGuitar said:

Jim, since you seem to be the resident computer building expert, I was wondering if you have any advice on sound dampening a computer case?

Is this something people even do or is it more common to buy a case that is made for that already? I would be concerned that any dampening material might act as heat insulation and trap more heat in the case. Thanks!

Sound damping material in a case won't cause thermal issues.

Keep in mind that a "Silent" computer case isn't air-tight.

You've got intake and exhaust fans that keep air moving thru the case.

 

The sound-damping material in a case is really more for vibration and resonance type noise.

If you use noisy components in a "Silent" type case, it'll still be noisy.

A silent DAW is the sum of all components.  All components need to be quiet.

 

If you have proper intake/exhaust fans, acoustic damping material isn't a problem.

9 minutes ago, InstrEd said:

It is nice though that AMD does have some great chips out now and hopefully the next round of AMD CPU's will have some more head room in overclocking.  Us as consumers win.

Agreed.

I'm coming off sounding negative toward AMD.

I've used AMD in the past (many Athlon based machines)... and I'd do so again (if the circumstances were a good fit).

 

Things I'd like to see:

• Clock-speed equal or better than Intel
• TDP reduced to where noise is more manageable
• Motherboard issues ironed out

The highest end socket 2066 i9 (10980xe) is currently out of stock across the entire US.

That was some of the impetus to try and get a Threadripper build that would be rock-solid and quiet enough.

 

Noise: 

I'm used to a machine that's near dead-silent.  

Moving to a machine with high-RPM small fan (high pitched whine) is not appealing.

On the 3950x build, I used a 120mm quiet fan  focused on the chipset (to keep the small fan from coming on).

That took care of the noise issue with Ryzen-9.

I was disappointed that using a quality 360mm water-cooler resulted in no appreciable performance increase.

 

Upon using the 3950x in my main studio DAW:

Working at ultra low latency (performance wise) was a step backward from the (less expensive) 9900k.

With the 9900k, I could do things like play DI guitar thru Helix Native (software plugin version of Line-6 Helix) at 96k using a 32-sample ASIO buffer size.

That's playing in realtime thru Helix Native at ~2ms total round-trip latency (equal to Helix hardware).

With the 9900k, it was a heavy load... but audio is glitch-free.

With the 3950x, audio would occasionally glitch.

Granted, this isn't something that everyone would be doing, but (for me) was a significant step backward.

19 hours ago, Jeffrey O'Hara said:

It's a shame that reviewers don't test with pro audio and musicians in mind. 

Keep in mind that we (DAW users) are a minuscule group (number wise) compared to the general-purpose  and gaming computer users.

That's why the reviewers don't worry about audio testing...   

5 minutes ago, Starise said:

That high end thread ripper looks like something I could heat my house with

At 280w TDP, you could...   😉

On 4/22/2020 at 6:29 PM, Jeffrey O'Hara said:

Hi Jim,

I was wondering if during your testing, the 3960X faired better with overclocking. If not, would I be better off to see what the 4th Gen Threadripper would being when they come out this year in terms of performance? Zen 3 in general is rumored to have 10-15% increase in IPC and small speed bump. I already bought a Gigabyte Designare Trx40 so I'm pretty much committed to a Threadripper build. I would be upgrading from an i7-6800K and would continue to use an RME MADIFX PCI-E card. 

 

As someone who's built DAWs professionally for going on 30 years, here are my thoughts on AMD's latest offerings:

 

The 3970x (Threadripper) and 3950x (Ryzen 9) have very little OC headroom.

Little to none... (same with the 3960x)

If you get a Threadripper or Ryzen 9 with the idea of locking all cores at anywhere close to the maximum turbo frequency, you'll be disappointed.

 

sTRX4 motherboards have active-cooled chipsets.

You can get quiet 360mm water-cooler, quiet PS, quiet case, etc.

If you're used to something like a i9-9900k (which runs near dead-silent on quality air-cooling), the high RPM fan noise (whine) is particularly annoying.

• Threadripper has a TDP of 280w.  (large water-cooler absolutely necessary)
• Intel Socket-2066 i9 CPUs have a TDP of 165w (water-cooling necessary but will run relatively quiet - chipset not active cooled)
• The Ryzen 9 has a TDP of 105w (near dead-silent with large quality air-cooler)
• The i9-9900k has a TDP of 95w (near dead-silent with large quality air-cooler)

 

Threadripper and Ryzen 9 excel at heavily multi-threaded scenarios.

Video rendering is a perfect example.

For video rendering, Threadripper smokes Intel i9 CPUs.

Where Threadripper and Ryzen 9 are weak (compared to the i9 CPUs) is pushing heavy loads at super small ASIO buffer sizes (ultra low latency).

This is a scenario that doesn't lend itself to heavy multi-threading.

The higher clock-speed of Intel's i9 is a significant benefit in these types of situations.

 

Not every process in a DAW can be multi-threaded.

This is why clock-speed is still so important.

Another thing to note is that performance gain from adding cores doesn't scale 1:1.  

IOW, Doubling the number of cores doesn't double performance.

This is why you don't want to chose more cores at the expense of significant clock-speed.

Doing so will result in a performance "hit" (for all but heavily multi-threaded scenarios).

 

Why do I always mention the i9-9900k?

At $500, it offers a great balance of performance/cost/noise.

The 9900k can run all 8 cores locked at 5GHz.

You've got super high clock-speed... and 16 processing threads.

The 9900k will do so rock-solid... running near dead-silent.

 

Based on all the above, I was ultimately more intrigued by the 3950x.

I've tested it with both 360mm water-cooling... as well as large/quality air-cooling.

With its significantly lower TDP (105w vs 280w for Threadripper), it'll run as quiet as the 9900k.

Interestingly, when running 360mm water-cooling, there was no appreciable performance increase.

If you're talking "all core" clock-speed, the 3950x will top out ~4GHz (maybe 4.1GHz).

 

AMD is winning at IPC (instructions per clock).

However, Intel is winning at overall clock-speed.

Again, for all those scenarios that can't be heavily multi-threaded, the (relatively) inexpensive 9900k is going to best most CPUs.

 

One other thing to keep in mind... is that with AMD, you may see some flaky behavior.

Some of the motherboards don't allow you to disable things like onboard audio.

Not all software/plugins are optimized for AMD CPUs. 

To be fair, this really isn't the fault of Threadripper or Ryzen 9.

 

So what's my verdict on Threadripper and Ryzen 9?

If you're fairly tech-savvy and know what you're getting into... and especially if you're working with video rendering, you'll be fine with Threadripper/Ryzen 9.

I'd liken the scenario to old MG sports cars.  Can be a lot of fun... but may require "turning the wrench". 

ie: During several months of testing Threadripper and Ryzen 9 (including using the 3970x and 3950x in my main studio DAW), I had to reset BIOS numerous times (across multiple builds using multiple motherboards).  That's not a big deal for me personally, but for less-tech savvy... or those under pressure, it's not a welcome event.

As someone who builds machines for professional composers on demanding tight deadlines, there's absolutely no way I'd build a Threadripper or Ryzen based machine for the likes of Fred Coury, Timothy Wynn, Wayne Bacer, Evan Jolly, Noah Lifschey, etc.

 

If you're looking for a small tube-amp for the home studio, you might want to check out either the Revv D-20 or the Revv G20 (depending on the amount of gain you're looking for).

• Both are 20w tube amps (12ax7 preamp tubes, 6v6 power tubes)
• Embedded Two-Notes reactive-load (can be used without connecting a cab) and Torpedo Cab sim (can run two simultaneous Cab IRs)
• 9-lbs

$1200-$1300

 

I just got the G20... and it sounds/responds great.

I wasn't interested... until watching the video.  I thought it was just auto-generated bass parts.

 

The ability to drag drum/guitar parts into EZBass... is a whole different animal.

For complex "tutti" type parts, that could save a lot of time/effort!

Even if you prefer recording real electric bass, it would still be useful to (quickly) map out parts.

12 hours ago, Jay Soren said:

I just came across this thread from google. I am actually planning on building an i9-9900K workstation with a Gigabyte Z390 AORUS ULTRA motherboard and this scared me a little bit. I have an RME HDSPe AIO PCIe interface that I plan on using so disabling onboard audio would be ideal. Is the AORUS lineup bad and should I avoid it? As some background I produce a wide range of genres (everything from EDM to film scoring) and also do a lot of Photoshop work (UI design mostly). I'm also starting to question my CPU choice and wondering if AMD would be better suited for my needs.

Jim, you really sound like you know your sh*t, would you mind weighing in?

Thanks for any advice.

 

Was only an issue on the AMD motherboards.  

Does your machine have Thunderbolt-3?

How important is lowest possible round-trip latency?

Do you have dedicated mic preamps?

Impossible to make a good recommendation without more specific details.  😉

On 3/21/2020 at 11:13 AM, msmcleod said:

I bought one of these a long time ago... actually I traded in my YAS-32 sax for it (still regret that   ) - but it's great for both saving/restoring patches & also playing sequences.



It also worked great in the studio. I could sequence all my keys at home, "bounce" it to the data-disk then sync it up to the BRC in an ADAT system. Random access to anywhere in the song on the ADAT worked a treat. The only downside was manually entering tempo maps into the BRC.

For live, I'd store each song as a combination of sysex/patch changes so that my whole rig was set up exactly how I wanted in around 2-3 secs.

I owned one of those (years ago).

Used it a lot...

I've been programming a Montage for live use... and have really been enjoying the synth-engine.

Unlike past units, there's no separate "single-patch" and "multi-patch" paradigm.

All patches are "Performances".  Each performance can use up to 8 internal parts (individual sounds).

Each individual sound can be comprised of up to 8 "elements" (oscillators)... with some advanced triggering/switching options.

Not as flexible as Kontakt, but you can setup some advanced/detailed sounds.

If you're working with your own samples, John Melas' "Waveform Editor" is a tremendous help... as is Sample Robot.

 

I like having a balance of hardware and software synths.

Each have strengths/weaknesses.

 

 

I've been programming a Montage for live use... and have really been enjoying the synth-engine.

Unlike past units, there's no separate "single-patch" and "multi-patch" paradigm.

All patches are "Performances".  Each performance can use up to 8 internal parts (individual sounds).

Each individual sound can be comprised of up to 8 "elements" (oscillators)... with some advanced triggering/switching options.

Not as flexible as Kontakt, but you can setup some advanced/detailed sounds.

If you're working with your own samples, John Melas' "Waveform Editor" is a tremendous help... as is Sample Robot.

 

I like having a balance of hardware and software synths.

Each have strengths/weaknesses.

 

 

FWIW, I'd sit on the decision for a while... to make sure it's not "burn-out", "odd-times" we're currently living thru, etc.

 

Speaking for myself, I've loved music since my earliest memories.  I almost feel like it chose me (rather than me choosing to love music).

My grandfather was an opera-singer (died before I got to know him), so it may be genetic.

I can't imagine totally letting music go.

The technical side has kept me occupied to the point where I haven't much time/energy to write/record my own music.

The older I get, there's a growing sense of urgency to "find" more (some) time for writing/recording.

 

I've watched my step-father go thru retirement.  He's planned well and is fine financially, but he wakes up each day bored out of his mind.  He's bought new "toys" (takes a custom truck to shows), but it seems like a poor substitute for things he was passionate about.

 

If retirement means leaving behind things I've loved my entire life, I want no part of it.   

I want to be around music until the day I pass.

 

In any event, take the ramblings of a 53 year-old for what they're worth.   😉