Topic: Dual core vs quadcore
Which would be the preferred option for pianoteq:
a, a high clock speed dual core.
b, a lower clock speed but quad core.
What would be the choice for more conventional sampled software.
- amhosib
- Member
- Offline
- JerryKnight
- Member
- Offline
Re: Dual core vs quadcore
As EvilDragon recently said, Pianoteq benefits more from a higher single-core clock speed.
As I understand things, sample libraries benefit more from faster storage I/O and memory.
- EvilDragon
- Member
- Offline
Re: Dual core vs quadcore
JerryKnight wrote:
As I understand things, sample libraries benefit more from faster storage I/O and memory.
RAM is very important for samples indeed, but for those samplers that have direct-from-disk streaming, random seek time of the hard drive is the most important factor - the lower, the better.
Hard work and guts!
- amhosib
- Member
- Offline
Re: Dual core vs quadcore
Are we therefore saying that currently the best compromise would be:
a, high clock speed dual core (for pianoteq) coupled to
b, large amount ram/ssd storage (for samples based software)
What advantage would a quad core provide in the above.?
- JerryKnight
- Member
- Offline
Re: Dual core vs quadcore
I'm not sure about the impact of quad-core vs dual-core for sample-based software. I'm also not sure exactly what additional gains you would get in Pianoteq, since dual-core has served me perfectly so far. Maybe there are situations where you would get more polyphony from having more cores available, but I get all the polyphony I could ever use in my dual-core system. I would suspect that the only significant benefits in either case would be if the computer is going to be doing anything else while it's running the piano software.
Last edited by JerryKnight (09-02-2015 06:38)
- EvilDragon
- Member
- Offline
Re: Dual core vs quadcore
amhosib wrote:
What advantage would a quad core provide in the above.?
More polyphony/instances of plugins.
Hard work and guts!