CPU Question .....again

[Bob Barker]

I want to record myself playing guitar. I will be playing rhythm guitar, lead, my own bass as well as vocals. . I will be using amp sims, some kind of drum sim, maybe keyboard and strings sim will not be doing any big productions. Will I be able to get by with an i5 and 8 gb of ram? I just want to be able to play along without latency. 

Thanks to all in advance!

 

[Neil Cummins]

I get by with CbB Bob with a Dell 5748 with an i3 processor and 8Gb of RAM,but with as much Windows 10 disabled as possible in terms of apps,services,no anti-virus running and following lots of the DAW optimisation tips and tricks that are well publicised on forums like this and on YouTube.

The number of plugins used simultaneously will have a significant impact on CPU cycle usage,and so using track freeze and archive techniques are well worth reading up on to save on CPU time.

Tools such as Ozone and Neutron which are starting to employ Machine Learning are very heavy on CPU time,and I have to make compromises in how many instances can be run at once.

So with some judicious tuning and acceptance that you may hit your system limits at some point,then you should be able to get some decent results.

BR//

Neil.

[Bob Barker]

Thanks!!!

[Jonathan Sasor]

Yeah, I mean, simply recording multitrack audio is pretty easy on systems these days. The processing becomes more of an issue when you start loading down plugins, but that's also very dependent on what plugins and how many you're using. You could certainly accomplish a lot with the stock plugins included with Cakewalk, which are not super CPU intensive. 

[Rico Belled]

Even a modern i3 will provide more than enough horsepower; more important is the audio interface, and no, more expensive is NOT better.

 

R

[Bob Barker]

Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond to my question. Hope to get started this week and hope that I can get knowledgeable enough to help some else in return. Thanks everyone.

[bitflipper]

On 8/23/2020 at 6:28 PM, Bob Barker said:

Will I be able to get by with an i5 and 8 gb of ram? I just want to be able to play along without latency. 

 

Yes.

Just don't use any computer-based effects while recording, and then raise your buffer sizes while mixing if you'll be using a lot of effects. (You may think you won't be using a lot of fx, but everybody eventually does. The cornucopia of cheap digital effects available is just too alluring.)

[Rico Belled]

58 minutes ago, bitflipper said:

Yes.

Just don't use any computer-based effects while recording, and then raise your buffer sizes while mixing if you'll be using a lot of effects. (You may think you won't be using a lot of fx, but everybody eventually does. The cornucopia of cheap digital effects available is just too alluring.)

BS, back in 2010 I ran sessions for my XR7 record on a FIRST GEN i3; it did FULL plugs on all instruments, drum set, bass, percussion and gtr, 16 to 18 inputs, with 4 individual headphone mixes, compressors, eqs, couple of reverbs, and here comes the good part: at 64 sample buffer size ALL DAY LONG. I did multiple sessions, full SOFTWARE input monitoring, without a hiccup.

A modern i5 will do even better, with a good low latency sound device of course.

 

R

[bitflipper]

Semantic distinction: YMMV <> BS

 

[Rico Belled]

1 hour ago, bitflipper said:

Semantic distinction: YMMV <> BS

 

You literally said: "Just don't use any computer-based effects while recording" and I'm sorry Bitflipper but that's BS. ANY modern i5, even ultra low power dual cores, will allow you to do a LOT of effects at 64 samples with full input monitoring, as in MULTIPLE Guitar Rig or Amplitube instances and all the Prochannel EQs, CA2As, Console Emulators you want. Of course you could find plugins that might overload it, but the generic YMMV, which is quite a step back from your original statement is still kind of unfair.

R

[Gswitz]

Bit's point is that on a slow processor FX add up to unbearable latency faster than on a multi-core with high clock-speed. No big deal. He's telling the person rightly that they can record with near zero latency. I do. With few or no FX. As you add them the latency will climb and it will climb faster with a slow processor.

I have an 8 core something or other that runs at 4.x Ghz and I can overdrive it. So my bet is I could overdrive a scrawny laptop.

Edited August 28, 2020 by Gswitz

[Rico Belled]

18 hours ago, Gswitz said:

Bit's point is that on a slow processor FX add up to unbearable latency faster than on a multi-core with high clock-speed. No big deal. He's telling the person rightly that they can record with near zero latency. I do. With few or no FX. As you add them the latency will climb and it will climb faster with a slow processor.

I have an 8 core something or other that runs at 4.x Ghz and I can overdrive it. So my bet is I could overdrive a scrawny laptop.

Except he said to use NO computer based effects and that's just BS. Of course you can overload that CPU, you can overload ANY CPU. Again, I used a 1st gen i3 for my second record, and ran all session for basic tracks with full input monitoring for four headphone mixes, EQs, Compressors, 2 or 3 Reverbs, live full drums (9 mics), percussion (3 mics), keys, guitar and bass at 64 sample buffer size for DAYS without a single dropout.

Point in case, a modern i5 can do TONS of effects at ultra low latency, not a "few" and certainly not "none". I'll give you another example: I have a Dell XPS 18 with a i5-4300U, I've done hours and hours of gigs with this rig, running Ableton Live at 64 sample buffer size, streaming 20 tracks of audio, while running Trillian, Lounge Lizard, Native Instruments B4, Addictive Drums 2 without problem.

R

Edited August 28, 2020 by Rico Belled

[Bristol_Jonesey]

So how you do you eliminate the unavoidable latency introduced by look ahead plugins?

[Gswitz]

We're all good, Rico. ? 

Everyone's just trying to help the OP. I'm sure he takes your help too. All the best!