Modartt user forum - Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (MrRoland) — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 20:31:09 +0000

Actually, since starting this topic, I dusted off my Orangepi pc (32 bit quadcore H3) and installed pianoteq stage. I expected it to be insufficient and it was... Until I raised the CPU clock from 1.2 Ghz to 1.53 Ghz. I had to reduce the internal samplerate to 20...khz.
I expected bad sound quality... But I'm surprised by the fact that it still sounds better than my Numa compact 2. I can play the model D prelude and closed lid etc without problems. Only the more demanding presets like model D jazz cause overflows.
But for now I'm very happy with the results. I will change the board for a more powerful one, but I've got enough presets that are usable so no rush. I hooked up a 5 inch 800x480 lcd, this is sufficient. Only thing remains is connecting the touch screen and get it working.

It seems however that the ASUS Tinkerboard is a good upgrade. It runs at 1.8 ghz.

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (SteveLy) — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 17:47:10 +0000

EvilDragon wrote:

Pianoteq utilizes all cores over here evently.

Maybe the benchmarking I am thinking of is dated... or maybe it's brainfailure on my part.

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (SteveLy) — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 17:45:57 +0000

MrRoland wrote:

Yes, more of both is the best,
I saw a nice octacore board that I put on my wish list, but the clock speed is the same as the RPI3, so the gain will be limited I think.
So i'm going to search for a quadcore 2 ghz board.

Quad core is pretty much the minimum these days anyway for SBCs. Let me know when you find the board. I am looking for one too but gave up for now. Sticking with used laptops - cheaper. Small Gen2 or gen3 i5 laptop (thinkpad or dell latitude) can be had for $AU100 off ebay (Australia) if you're a little patient. Every SBC solution I looked at ends up costing more for less performance once I figure in all the add-ons required.

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (EvilDragon) — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 17:35:08 +0000

Pianoteq utilizes all cores over here evently.

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (SteveLy) — Fri, 23 Mar 2018 17:21:10 +0000

From benchmarking I've seen posted on these forums (sorry forget by whom but he did a very thorough job) I recall that Pianoteq utilises 2 cores, and any more than that results in marginal improvement if any. So go for clock speed!

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (EvilDragon) — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 14:01:26 +0000

Yes, that should be quite decent.

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (MrRoland) — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 13:17:08 +0000

Yes, more of both is the best,
I saw a nice octacore board that I put on my wish list, but the clock speed is the same as the RPI3, so the gain will be limited I think.
So i'm going to search for a quadcore 2 ghz board.

Re: Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (EvilDragon) — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:36:34 +0000

More of both would be best, but in a pinch, higher CPU clock is somewhat more important.

Arm board: more cores vs higher clock rate

null@example.com (MrRoland) — Sat, 17 Mar 2018 06:59:07 +0000

I'm investigating the possible options for Pianoteq on a arm board.
What would give you the best performance?
- higher cpu clock
- more cores.