Buying Core i7 macbook.

[leedsquietman]

This is like the guy in East Germany in 1989 who said 'Don't wait for the Berlin Wall to come down and the country to re-unify, meaning you can buy any car of your choice. You can have a TRABANT right now !'



Make music - yes - but also use your brain and apply some common sense !

[Tarekith]

So Tarekith, you're happy with your dual core but think about what you could achieve with a quad core - 30 instances of Omnisphere, 10 versions of RMX, Zebra and half dozen synplants at a reasonable CPU load. And all the fella has to do is hang on a few months to get that power for around the same price ... it's just a no brainer, IMHO.

You're telling me that session run on a laptop? This is what I mean, if you need that much power, you'd be crazy to get a laptop in the first place and should really be looking at desktops. I'm all for more power like I mentioned earlier, but you easily get stuck in that next upgrade game. Of course 4 cores will let you run more than 2 cores, but then so will 8 cores, 16 cores, etc. No need to fall into that trap.

I still don't think Apple is going to be going quad core in the laptop anytime soon regardless.

[leedsquietman]

No, that session didn't run in a laptop, but with a quad core i7 it would probably be possible. As you said, it wouldn't be possible on a dual core.

There are quad core Imacs, which pretty much run on the same technology as laptops and people are raving about the quad i7 Imac, so it shouldn't be too long before the technology comes to the Mac laptops. PC laptops have had quad core i7 for ages, it's time Apple caught up.

[3dot...]

This is like the guy in East Germany in 1989 who said 'Don't wait for the Berlin Wall to come down and the country to re-unify, meaning you can buy any car of your choice. You can have a TRABANT right now !'



Make music - yes - but also use your brain and apply some common sense !

yeah
common sense =
buy what's available.. not what's NOT AVAILABLE YET

in regardsd to making music..
common sense says record on a 4track...but...
NEVER POSTPONE !

maybe I'm weird in the head...but
waiting for apple to release a quad-core laptop does not seem like common sense to me

[leedsquietman]

yes, you're weird in the head

Whatever - spend the money, then weep in a few months time when the quad core will likely be available, and devalues your new purchase by about 30% - the OP already has a computer he can be sketching out ideas ready to be fleshed out when his buys his new machine.

[3dot...]

doesn't matter... as long that trabant is taking me where I need to go...

[3dot...]

also... you seem to be attributing too much power to the quad over the dual-core..
that's a simple mistake..
a 4 core system does not perform x2 better..

[leedsquietman]

No, but it performs SIGNIFICANTLY better at least when the tools are optimized for it.

If you'd ever ridden in a Trabant, you would realize it might get you to go where you need, after breaking down several times, causing mass pollution with it's 2 stroke lawnmower engine and might not get you up a steep hill, it sounds like a washing machine strapped either side of your head and is as comfortable as sitting naked on a nest of scorpions, but yes, you might get from A to B

[Machinesworking]

No, that session didn't run in a laptop, but with a quad core i7 it would probably be possible. As you said, it wouldn't be possible on a dual core.

There are quad core Imacs, which pretty much run on the same technology as laptops and people are raving about the quad i7 Imac, so it shouldn't be too long before the technology comes to the Mac laptops. PC laptops have had quad core i7 for ages, it's time Apple caught up.

Good god, that fucking session runs on a Pro Tools HD system! WTF are you comparing that with native set ups for?
Plus if you at all dealt with high track counts and CPU cycles for any length of time over the years you would know a few things about how multi core machines work, and how most applications (I'm looking Live's way here) don't efficiently use multiple cores in their single application. Not to mention the fact that you yourself are using a 5 year old computer, yet bitching about how Macs which you don't use, aren't using the latest chips??? Trolling much?

Personally with multi core systems, I would much rather take a machine with a higher single CPU cycle that was a dual core over a lower CPU cycle quad, this is painfully obvious stuff when you're talking about music software IMO, unless you're running simultaneous applications that aren't rewired on the same machine, you're not going to get very efficient use of quad core machines. Sorry man, but it's still a wash IMO. Live, and other DAWs all run into all kinds of situations where a single CPU will stack too many of the processes and BAM! cracks and pops. I would love this not to be the case, but so far, in real world daily use, quads and above unless just mad powerful 3.0Ghz. desktops don't massively outperform duals like they should. There's also a price to be paid for quads on each CPU. Duals get about a 75% cut so a dual 2.1 machine in the best conditions can handle about 3.1Ghz worth of data. I have no doubt that a quad is going to suffer that even worse.

The point is, you're talking out your ass here, mixing HD systems with native is a major asshole move on your part, you're far too knowledgeable not to know you're doing a bullshit move there.

[nathannn]

^your sig says you use a "macbok"

nothing to do with the thread just lettin you know...


anyways.. i was reading on the logic forums that the new i5 & i7 macbook pro's are getting a lower track count than the older core 2 dou macbook pro's.
this really makes me want to wait for an update to the macbook pro.

also mac rumors says the macbook pro is at mid life cycle and the imacs are due for an update soon..

so im waiting..

i have this ole laptop til then.

[leedsquietman]

I use a SIX year old machine (3.2 Ghz P4 w/ 2GB ram and win XP) and an 18 month old Core2Duo machine (2.2 Ghz w/ Vista Ultimate 32 and 4 GB ram) actually. I know people with the new dual core i7 MBP and while they are happy with it, at least one or two bought the machine without realizing it wasn't quad core (yes, facepalm on their behalf).

Arrgghhh. Whatever, the point I was making was why spend a significant amount of money on a machine which will be replaced in the very near future with something considerably more powerful at roughly the same price? If this was YEARS away then I understand the 'just get on and make music' but the likelihood is it won't be too long, given PCs have had 4 core i7 laptops for many months.

The session I quoted was mostly for track count purposes, to illustrate that there are people who require more than the typical minimal techno crowd, which Live seems to cater for en masse. That the pictured session came from PTHD was neither here nor there, you could easily run a Logic or Cubase or Live session with that load on a powerful laptop, a quad core desktop would certainly handle that load (I can handle 65+ stereo audio tracks on my C2D), so a quadcore i7 laptop should be able to manage a load in that ballpark, if not quite so high.

Patience is a virtue.

[machine+1]

I got a new 17 i7, custom spec. Showed up with a defective logic board & optical drive. Took 2 weeks for Apple to fix and return, under warranty.

Post repair, I like it a lot. Handles everything I need it to do with ease, CPU to spare. The most significant thing for me has been how quiet it is. Even when I push it fairly hard, I cannot hear the fans at all. For the first time I can record with open mics and mix tracks with the computer in the room. This has been a total game changer for me. Coupled with the SDD, this thing has been dead silent.

I have some kind of issue with full screen video not running smoothly. Might be a graphics card switching setting?

[Machinesworking]

That the pictured session came from PTHD was neither here nor there,

Nope sorry, if you're going to call people fanboys and try to outsmart them on the internet, you really can't be taking any shortcuts to make your point. FAIL big time old boy!


Again, my point stands, quad machines are not living up to potential much the same way that G5's only allowed for more RAM, but didn't give you instantly a 64 bit OS and all the benefits of that, the software wasn't there. From what I've seen you get some benefit from quad chips, but absolutely nothing like the supposed benefits. This is true IMO with 64 bit OS, unless you NEED 16GB of RAM in a session (running Kontakt or VSL libraries etc.) it's going to be an unstable environment compared to 32 for quite a while. I would be OK with that in a desktop, but not a laptop, hence I don't care at this point whether a laptop is quad or dual, or 64 bit ready.

Realistically the best thing to do is to go with yesterdays technology, not tomorrows. IE don't jump on USB 3, 64 bit, quad/octo chips in a laptop, or any DAW upgrade as soon as it comes out, unless you like to troubleshoot issues. I would and will wait until the quad chip users are reporting awesomely equal use between CPUs in Live etc. until then, it's a wash IMO.

Plus if you can't make music on a 400mhz. machine then you suck at life. <-seriously.

[locojohn]

This is like the guy in East Germany in 1989 who said 'Don't wait for the Berlin Wall to come down and the country to re-unify, meaning you can buy any car of your choice. You can have a TRABANT right now !'

The car on the picture is "Zaporozhets", not "Trabant". The short name for it was "Zapor", which means "constipation" in Russian.

Andrejs

[leedsquietman]

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/ ... 30,00.html

If Machines had been an East German in 1989 just prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall, this is the car he would have chosen *as it was available* instead of waiting a few weeks to buy a Volkswagen, Audi or BMW. Don't bother about new fangled technology, like 4 stroke engines, just get in the game ....

numpty ...