Intel's 12th-generation Core i9 Processor ​ ​Faster Than Apple Silicon M1 Max

[kitekrazy]

3 minutes ago, bdickens said:

If you can even do that....

Those Mac cheese graters were very upgradable.  People got a lot of life out of them and still do. Apples biggest mistake.

[kitekrazy]

 I still like those AMD 65 watt cpus.

[Hugh Mann]

1 hour ago, bdickens said:

I suppose the time having to replace all your apps cuz they don't work anymore don't count huh?

But that didn’t happen.  I could use pretty much all of my software, via Rosetta , right off the bat. And the few that didn’t work, got Rosetta updates like in a month. Out of all my software, d16 lush 101 is the only one that didn’t work. And they said they will charge for an M1 version. But the rest all worked. I’ve got too much software to list, like many of u I’m sure. But they worked. Now there is a  very small performance penalty when using Rosetta. So Mac user were waiting for M1 native versions.  But I don’t notice any difference between Rosetta and M 1 native. actually it’s  a very impressive technical accomplishment.  

[Byron Dickens]

Maybe they came up with this Rosetta thing because of all the backlash they faced in the past.

[Hugh Mann]

56 minutes ago, MusicMan said:

By the time you pay for new versions of software due to Apple dramatically changing the OS and making them incompatible, I'd say not ?

Also super easy just to upgrade components with PC, so the second build is often quite a lot cheaper.

AMD in particular is good in new ranges of CPUs traditionally being compatible with older motherboards as well, so people can sometimes get away with very decent upgrades, for crazy cheap by the time they need an upgrade.

Internal storage is so overpriced with Apple as well that if you're matching internal for internal, there's even less chance of Apple competing on price.

Apple has some advantages, but price for me isn't one of them.

I went from producing on PC to trying Apple for a number of years, then back to PC and couldn't be happier ?

Under Rosetta, most of my x86 software worked within a month of release. Now when you are talking re using old parts, you are no longer comparing bananas to bananas are you?  ( didn’t want to say apples, lol) . I agree they rip you off on ram and ssd space. Even so, it’s not that different in cost. Maybe a few hundred more if you upgrade the ram and ssd. But you get really high quality  everything. So it’s still pretty even, when you account for the quality of parts and materials used. Like the laptop screens. Excellent. Color calibrated. Lots of quality things like that. 

[Doug Rintoul]

28 minutes ago, Hugh Mann said:

But that didn’t happen.  I could use pretty much all of my software, via Rosetta , right off the bat. And the few that didn’t work, got Rosetta updates like in a month. Out of all my software, d16 lush 101 is the only one that didn’t work. And they said they will charge for an M1 version. But the rest all worked. I’ve got too much software to list, like many of u I’m sure. But they worked. Now there is a  very small performance penalty when using Rosetta. So Mac user were waiting for M1 native versions.  But I don’t notice any difference between Rosetta and M 1 native. actually it’s  a very impressive technical accomplishment.  

if Rosetta works so well, why are people bitching because plugin developers aren't producing M1 native versions fast enough? Is the very small performance gain really worth all that extra development?

[Hugh Mann]

11 minutes ago, Doug Rintoul said:

if Rosetta works so well, why are people bitching because plugin developers aren't producing M1 native versions fast enough? Is the very small performance gain really worth all that extra development?

Some developers do seem to be dragging their feet. But it’s precisely because Rosetta works so well that they can. For example, UAD. The performance hit is not noticeable in real world  use. An impressive feat, considering it’s translating software written for a completely different architecture. Really, developers could leave it Rosetta compatible. Some are doing that. Like plug in alliance. But we want every last drop of power. Even if we won’t ever use it lol 

[Fleer]

49 minutes ago, Doug Rintoul said:

if Rosetta works so well, why are people bitching because plugin developers aren't producing M1 native versions fast enough? Is the very small performance gain really worth all that extra development?

‘Cause most of us are *****. 

[simon]

5 hours ago, Doug Rintoul said:

if Rosetta works so well, why are people bitching because plugin developers aren't producing M1 native versions fast enough

and because Apple are going to drop Rosetta from upcoming versions of MacOS - it's seen as a short term, stop gap solution.

Edited January 28, 2022 by simon

[Carl Ewing]

15 hours ago, marled said:

More and more we need faster systems, because a lot of software gets heavier and heavier (plugins, especially from the mid and larger companies). But if I take Reaper and some older excellent plugins I can run with the same speed on a 10 years old system. Will the mix be worse than on a new potent system with "modern" plugins? I doubt!

Software developers got spoiled by the ever increasing speed, efficiency and lowered cost of CPUs / hardware. Why bother writing efficient software when the consumer can just keep updating their specs? But now...with costs & efficiency plateauing...especially on the price front... I specifically choose developers that maximize existing tech. No tolerance for horribly optimized plugins, or absurdly bloated sample libraries taking up needless drive space on expensive SSDs. (Opus strings is half a terrabyte - I could rant about this specific bit of developer nonsense.). Some of these recent bottlenecks were finally forcing developers to think carefully about software design if they wanted to appeal to a larger audience who can't upgrade their specs every 6 months. Unfortunately, these recent CPUs may halt that progress, although affordable hard drive space is still going to be a problem for a while.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Carl Ewing

[MusicMan]

5 hours ago, Hugh Mann said:

Under Rosetta, most of my x86 software worked within a month of release. Now when you are talking re using old parts, you are no longer comparing bananas to bananas are you?  ( didn’t want to say apples, lol) . I agree they rip you off on ram and ssd space. Even so, it’s not that different in cost. Maybe a few hundred more if you upgrade the ram and ssd. But you get really high quality  everything. So it’s still pretty even, when you account for the quality of parts and materials used. Like the laptop screens. Excellent. Color calibrated. Lots of quality things like that. 

I wasn't referring to the M1 change, but more even just a number of the yearly OS updates that quite often render applications incompatible because Apple decided to change something without caring about the impacts for their customers. But that's OK, because the applications they sell, which let's face it are the only ones they want you to buy will be compatible. Unfortunately some of the developers are no longer in business, so they will never be updated.

Windows PCs often support things almost indefinitely. Hell 32 bit plugins from 10 years ago still install and run perfectly. My DAW doesn't natively support them, but some DAWs still do and most importantly the underlying OS does. Apple OS updates often break them so they don't work in any DAW, or even install.

Back on the parts, for HDD, looking at the Mac Mini to upgrade FROM 512GB to 1TB is about $200 or so I believe. To buy a Samsung 970 EVO Plus M.2 2TB NVMe hard drive outright for a PC, is about the same price. Not just to get an extra 512GB, but to buy from scratch.

I looked at the Mac Pro to check the upgrades, but when I saw the starting from prices, the argument for Apple being cheaper/similar is already lost, even if they paid you for a hard drive upgrade ?

As for CPU, no, I'm not talking old parts. Brand new parts, just a more current generation. Like we know, often a couple of generations ahead, the cheapest CPU will be faster than what was the flagship at times. So in a few years, you could simply buy a much better performing CPU and drop it straight in with AMD. That's where Apple just can't compete. Even if people go for the lot and upgrade the CPU, Motherboard and RAM, then it's lightyears cheaper than a new Apple, so your TCO over the life of your PC DAW just gets further and further ahead.

I still can't see it being anywhere close to even. If I spent the same money on a PC build as a Mac Pro, it would be ridiculous.. I'd just be buying the most expensive best parts just to get there!! Or I could easily buy the same spec, for less money and even still have money left for a new instrument, some awesome mic pres, or other bits of audio hardware.

I do agree on the screens. I like their screens ? But even then, with all the money  saved, I could buy a couple of top end non Apple screens and still be in front.

Apple looks better from an aesthetics perspective I'd say and marketed amazingly. But I can't agree that they price similarly and I've owned both.

[Nick Blanc]

Just to jump on this topic since I happen to have an i9 12th gen. I have a brand new PC, no bloat, everything up-to-date (I think, I'm checking the grapics drivers tonight). I'm an Ableton user. So I was thinking I will blast through everything I could throw at it.

The f**% idles (!) at 8% CPU load (on Abletons meter). Throw in a plugin or 2 and I'm running at a 25%. My old and crappy i5 did better than that. Support from Ableton is slow and the first thing they want me to do look at everything OTHER than Ableton.  Sure, I will update my drivers. I already did the power plan thing. 

Here's the weird thing which support ignores (besides my old i5 performing better): when I do something else similtaniously (like installing a plugin or installing an Ableton extension),  whatever needs some CPU, the usage DROPS to a cosy 1-2%. Needless to say I'm very disappointed right now. I'm guessing it has something to do with the new CPU structure, but I'm no expert. I just know it's different.

[Craig N]

21 minutes ago, Nick Blanc said:

Just to jump on this topic since I happen to have an i9 12th gen. I have a brand new PC, no bloat, everything up-to-date (I think, I'm checking the grapics drivers tonight). I'm an Ableton user. So I was thinking I will blast through everything I could throw at it.

The f**% idles (!) at 8% CPU load (on Abletons meter). Throw in a plugin or 2 and I'm running at a 25%. My old and crappy i5 did better than that. Support from Ableton is slow and the first thing they want me to do look at everything OTHER than Ableton.  Sure, I will update my drivers. I already did the power plan thing. 

Here's the weird thing which support ignores (besides my old i5 performing better): when I do something else similtaniously (like installing a plugin or installing an Ableton extension),  whatever needs some CPU, the usage DROPS to a cosy 1-2%. Needless to say I'm very disappointed right now. I'm guessing it has something to do with the new CPU structure, but I'm no expert. I just know it's different.

Something I've only just realised with Ableton is that the load shown on the meter in Ableton doesn't necessarily map to load in task manager... it almost seems designed to create an unnecessary sense of anxiety. I found this out by doing some testing with Reaper to see whether it was more efficient than Ableton, and I realised it was using something like half the reported CPU usage, but then when I checked in task manager, there seems to be basically no difference at all between the two at low levels of load. I'm not sure why, but it's something to consider before stressing out too much. 

[MusicMan]

30 minutes ago, Nick Blanc said:

Just to jump on this topic since I happen to have an i9 12th gen. I have a brand new PC, no bloat, everything up-to-date (I think, I'm checking the grapics drivers tonight). I'm an Ableton user. So I was thinking I will blast through everything I could throw at it.

The f**% idles (!) at 8% CPU load (on Abletons meter). Throw in a plugin or 2 and I'm running at a 25%. My old and crappy i5 did better than that. Support from Ableton is slow and the first thing they want me to do look at everything OTHER than Ableton.  Sure, I will update my drivers. I already did the power plan thing. 

Here's the weird thing which support ignores (besides my old i5 performing better): when I do something else similtaniously (like installing a plugin or installing an Ableton extension),  whatever needs some CPU, the usage DROPS to a cosy 1-2%. Needless to say I'm very disappointed right now. I'm guessing it has something to do with the new CPU structure, but I'm no expert. I just know it's different.

Ableton is quite a bit heavier on resources than Cubase for me. I was surprised at just how much, even when using the same virtual instruments and plugins.

You might find it's one of the drivers making too many interrupts to the CPU as well, causing DPC Latency.

If you haven't done already, I normally go into device manager and disable anything that isn't required. I also look at what applications start up with the computer and disable anything not essential too.

[Nick Blanc]

13 minutes ago, Craig N said:

Something I've only just realised with Ableton is that the load shown on the meter in Ableton doesn't necessarily map to load in task manager... it almost seems designed to create an unnecessary sense of anxiety. I found this out by doing some testing with Reaper to see whether it was more efficient than Ableton, and I realised it was using something like half the reported CPU usage, but then when I checked in task manager, there seems to be basically no difference at all between the two at low levels of load. I'm not sure why, but it's something to consider before stressing out too much. 

You are right that the meter in Ableton is not corresponding with task manager. When I'm idleing (is that a word?) at 8-10% in Ableton and the meter is all jittery, the task manager cruises at 1-2% max. So I'm not stressing thát much. But there is so much weird behaviour. The first 30 seconds or so after I launch Ableton, the CPU meter hovers at 1%, which it should (and which my old i5 does!). But the moment I start doing anything (checking VST list, loading a sample, creating a track, whatever), it shoots up to 8-10%. I'm running Windows 11. Like it's waiting, like a predator, and as soon as I make a move, it strikes!

So I decided to test it with Massive X, some Native Instruments EQ's, audio at 48k en 128 buffer. Playing the same apreggio on 50 tracks. CPU shot up to 98%. I was expecting something better. Same thing with Kontakt and Alicia's Keys playing an arp, some EQ, reverb and distortion, 60 tracks and the whole thing starts to crackle at 80%. I've seen youtube clips of people running twice this on an M1 and Cubase with no problem.

I'm starting to suspect Ableton vs. Windows 11 vs. I9 12th gen is not a happy marriage yet. But first I have to convince Ableton support of this, and that requires me updating my graphic drivers...

I know I'm ranting in a Cakewalk forum, but I'm a bit bored at work soooo....?

[Nick Blanc]

20 minutes ago, MusicMan said:

Ableton is quite a bit heavier on resources than Cubase for me. I was surprised at just how much, even when using the same virtual instruments and plugins.

You might find it's one of the drivers making too many interrupts to the CPU as well, causing DPC Latency.

If you haven't done already, I normally go into device manager and disable anything that isn't required. I also look at what applications start up with the computer and disable anything not essential too.

At some point I think support would have me make a latency mon (or whatever the application is called) report. Which I cannot understand. But I recognise DPC. I already disabled everything I don't need. I'm running a clean ship.

[Carl Ewing]

28 minutes ago, Nick Blanc said:

You are right that the meter in Ableton is not corresponding with task manager. When I'm idleing (is that a word?) at 8-10% in Ableton and the meter is all jittery, the task manager cruises at 1-2% max. So I'm not stressing thát much. But there is so much weird behaviour. The first 30 seconds or so after I launch Ableton, the CPU meter hovers at 1%, which it should (and which my old i5 does!). But the moment I start doing anything (checking VST list, loading a sample, creating a track, whatever), it shoots up to 8-10%. I'm running Windows 11. Like it's waiting, like a predator, and as soon as I make a move, it strikes!

.....

Asio will bottleneck before CPU. You can max out Cubase as well, long before the CPU gets going. But Cubase has a significant amount of tools to help with Asio problems (Asio guard, etc.), regardless of audio interface, so perhaps Ableton isn't as well optimized?

[Carl Ewing]

45 minutes ago, Nick Blanc said:

At some point I think support would have me make a latency mon (or whatever the application is called) report. Which I cannot understand. But I recognise DPC. I already disabled everything I don't need. I'm running a clean ship.

On my mobile rig, all my problems came down to power management, whether I was plugged in or on battery. I created new power profiles (for being plugged in), ensuring that nothing was being throttled (CPU, PSU, USB suspension, Wifi / network, etc.) and haven't had a problem since. Even on desktop, I find a lot of these DPC problems relate directly to power. Windows does all kinds of funky stuff with power (even beyond windows, at the BIOS level) that significantly mess with real-time performance. Shutting off CPU throttling will do wonders for audio performance. Although that means your CPU is running at 100% day and night.  But did that for years on my studio comp and never had a problem. And like that on my laptop as well. Actually - I run an XPS 9500, which was supposedly notorious for DPC problems. I can run 150 track projects with 100 plugins no problem, with 2 4K monitors running out of a Thunderbolt hub. Zero issues.

That was only after I custom built my power profile by using some extensive registry hacks. Dell doesn't like you messing with power profiles on their systems - primarily because thermals on their machines are absolute crap. But those forced power profiles are why so many people have problems. I recommend google searching "DPC latency" + "windows power" + "registry edits" and seeing all the stuff you can actually control.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Carl Ewing

[Nick Blanc]

I will dive into my power settings some more this weekend. I followed all the usual steps which are reconmended (found it on the Sweetwater website). Ableton support sent me a link to follow, so I will do that as well. And I will doublecheck throttling. Running 100% doesn't really matter for me, I have the PC switched off when I'm not making music, so I'm not driving up my utilities bill.

See, your "150 track with 100 plugins" was what I was expecting with my setup, but I don't even have near half that. With a PC that was more expensive than my car (granted, it's a crappy one). But I'm not going anywhere near the registry.

[MusicMan]

45 minutes ago, Nick Blanc said:

At some point I think support would have me make a latency mon (or whatever the application is called) report. Which I cannot understand. But I recognise DPC. I already disabled everything I don't need. I'm running a clean ship.

Latency Mon is pretty easy so you'll be fine. I normally leave it run for about half an hour and then look at what is causing the most interrupts/latency.

It's often a driver.

Did you change OS, DAW version, Sample Rates, buffer sizes or anything at the same time as the upgrade?

Do you have a USB wireless card? Have you tried unplugging any peripherals that aren't essential to test?

I suspect you're already aware of these by the sound, but doesn't hurt to check ?