Choice of CPU for new computer

[nautonnier]

I'm going to be replacing a ten year old Mac Pro and I'm looking for advice on what proc to get. I'm switching to PC as the new Mac offering doesn't look great for me. I'm not going to build it myself but instead going through a local shop. They offer the following i9 CPUs:

Core i9 10900X 10 cores @ 3.70GHz (max turbo @ 4.50GHz, all-core turbo @ 4.30GHz), 19.25MB cache
Core i9 10920X 12 cores @ 3.50GHz (max turbo @ 4.60GHz, all-core turbo @ 4.30GHz), 19.25MB cache
Core i9 10940X 14 cores @ 3.30GHz (max turbo @ 4.60GHz, all-core turbo @ 4.10GHz), 19.25MB cache
Core i9 10980XE 18 cores @ 3.00GHz (max turbo @ 4.60GHz, all-core turbo @ 3.80GHz), 24.75MB cache

Which version should I get? Is it worth splurging for the 18 cores at expense of some speed? I can't find any DAWBench stats for the new line of i9s. Looking at DAWBench stats for the 99xx series, it looks like the more cores you get, the more VIs you can run even if you take a hit on core speed.

Any help would be appreciated.

[Mark Williams]

I wouldn't rule out Ryzen 3000's great bang for buck, and in most cases equal or out perform their Intel equivalent. I built a system using the 3500, and haven't encountered any problem running many plugins, including the CPU eating Falcon/Omnisphere, without any hitch's. They are definitely worth considering and looking at and save you some cash too.

[kitekrazy]

I'm going to be replacing a ten year old Mac Pro and I'm looking for advice on what proc to get. I'm switching to PC as the new Mac offering doesn't look great for me. I'm not going to build it myself but instead going through a local shop. They offer the following i9 CPUs:

Core i9 10900X 10 cores @ 3.70GHz (max turbo @ 4.50GHz, all-core turbo @ 4.30GHz), 19.25MB cache
Core i9 10920X 12 cores @ 3.50GHz (max turbo @ 4.60GHz, all-core turbo @ 4.30GHz), 19.25MB cache
Core i9 10940X 14 cores @ 3.30GHz (max turbo @ 4.60GHz, all-core turbo @ 4.10GHz), 19.25MB cache
Core i9 10980XE 18 cores @ 3.00GHz (max turbo @ 4.60GHz, all-core turbo @ 3.80GHz), 24.75MB cache

Which version should I get? Is it worth splurging for the 18 cores at expense of some speed? I can't find any DAWBench stats for the new line of i9s. Looking at DAWBench stats for the 99xx series, it looks like the more cores you get, the more VIs you can run even if you take a hit on core speed.

Any help would be appreciated.

More cores are more of a benefit with video. Those are some pricey CPUs. I'd rather put my money into something else. Never a fan of Intel's Extreme series since they usually require a different board that's usually not replaceable.

[jonljacobi]

Until you see some testing, it's all just guesswork. There are a couple of threads over at KVR about this and it's confusing as all get out with no real solid answers because this stuff is too new for many reports to have surfaced. Without knowing your workload, or recording habits there's no way to really say which is the best bargain.

Hopefully, users with experience with the newer hardware will chime in here, or Youtube, or elsewhere. Best.

[oratowsky]

In general, If you have more channels with smaller effect chains on each channel, it will be more advantageous to have more cores. If you have fewer channels but each channel has lots of plugins, then you will be better off with a higher clockspeed per core.

There's also a myriad of other bottlenecks and quirks unique to digital audio. https://youtu.be/GUsLLEkswzE

I feel like among those processors, however, the 12 or 14 core will be very high performance and value compared to the 18core, especially if it's cooled really well, since at turbo clock they're more similar.

[nautonnier]

Thanks all.

I should have put my typical flow in the original post but I was trying to keep it short (I tend to ramble).

So far, my workflow is:
- electronic/industrial music
- some light tracking (mostly single instruments/vocal tracks recorded individually) where the audio is then processed. I don't typically have a need to play live with low latency as I sequence my outboard gear and track them one at a time.
- mostly VIs (Drum Racks, Kontakt libraries such as Output and Heavyocity, ZebraHz, Diva, and a couple others) processed individually using plugins from FabFilter, NI, iZotope, the usual suspects
- each "type" of track (bass, synth, vocals, drums) is grouped with maybe some processing on the group such as "glue" compressor
- each of these groups is sent to an analog summing Dbox which is then recorded as stems.
- I typically send these stems for final mixing and mastering

Until you see some testing, it's all just guesswork. There are a couple of threads over at KVR about this and it's confusing as all get out with no real solid answers because this stuff is too new for many reports to have surfaced.

Exactly. I would love to see some data but I just haven't been able to find any.

[cskracer]

There are a few test results out there. Not against the 10 series Intel Extreme and it was done when the 3900X was the best Ryzen out there. AMD released higher performing CPUs that are a lot better than the 3900X as well - but they cost a lot more.

http://www.scanproaudio.info/2019/07/12 ... ic-number/