Ableton Forum

Hi, i've been saving for a while and originally i was going to get the Ableton Push 2, but more recently i've been thinking of saving for a new PC first.

My first question is about the multi-core support in Ableton Live. I have been looking to go for a new Intel-based system and Intel have both Quad-Core as well as Hexa-Cores. The Quad-core is clocked slightly higher and is faster in apps which use a single core, however the Hexa-Core performs better in applications designed for multi-core.

So would a 6-Core (Hexa) be more efficient in Ableton than a Quad core (due to two extra cores) or is it more about the Clock frequency for determining speed?


Also my current PC has only 8GB of RAM, however i am using alot of plug-ins especially large Kontakt Instruments which eat a ton of my available memory. So i wonder if 16GB would be fine or if i should go all the way up to 32GB.


Final question: I'm considering using two SSD drives on my pc, one for Operating System + frequently used programs and i the second SSD to store my VST & Sample packs. Would having Live on one HD and my sound collection on another be any slower than having it all on the one HD?



I know its alot of questions, but i'm just trying to get an idea of how i can get the most performance out of my new PC when using Ableton Live.

I was curious about this myself after seeing your post so I dug around a bit.

First thing I found is that Live does support hyperthreading so more cores will help.

https://www.ableton.com/en/help/article ... threading/

However the next thing I found is that it appears that it only uses one core per track.

https://www.ableton.com/en/help/article ... -machines/

So if have a lot of plugins on one track it loads up that particular core more - which means a higher clockspeed would help you out.

Which is better? Pass. Depends on how you use Live I guess. If you have lots of tracks but not much in the way of plugins on each track more cores is probably better. If you have fewer tracks but use lots of plugins then higher clockspeed is probably better. If you have lots of tracks and lots of plugins you need both - which probably isn't a revelation to anyone.

Personally when I built my latest my machine a few months back I bought an i7-4790K which runs at 4ghz and has four cores. It seems that all of the 6 core CPUs that are out there at the moment run significantly slower clockspeeds - between 3 and 3.5ghz.

On the SSD front I don't think having Live on one and your library on the other hurts performance. That's how I have mine setup.

32gig of ram is way too much, youll never use that much.

Adding an SSD to your system is the most notable upgrade you can make regarding speed. I have 8 gigs of ram with live on an SSD an Ableton opens and is readyto go in under 3 seconds..

I also have all of my samples and libraries on the same SSD, no problems. In fact this is the way my computer tech advised me to do it, because I have the space available on my SSD. If you want the browsing and previewing of samples to be lightning fast then put everything you can on the SSD, as long as you dont fill the SSD up, I try to keep it at least 30% empty.

if you dont have intel then that would also be a good upgrade ( I have the i5-4690, 4 cores) but six cores isnt needed, if money is an issue and youre looking for the best bang for your buck upgrade then go with an SSD. Load live, your OS, your plugins, and anything else relevant to production on there- while leaving at least 30% empty.

frankswift wrote:Hi, i've been saving for a while and originally i was going to get the Ableton Push 2, but more recently i've been thinking of saving for a new PC first.

My first question is about the multi-core support in Ableton Live. I have been looking to go for a new Intel-based system and Intel have both Quad-Core as well as Hexa-Cores. The Quad-core is clocked slightly higher and is faster in apps which use a single core, however the Hexa-Core performs better in applications designed for multi-core.

So would a 6-Core (Hexa) be more efficient in Ableton than a Quad core (due to two extra cores) or is it more about the Clock frequency for determining speed?


Also my current PC has only 8GB of RAM, however i am using alot of plug-ins especially large Kontakt Instruments which eat a ton of my available memory. So i wonder if 16GB would be fine or if i should go all the way up to 32GB.


Final question: I'm considering using two SSD drives on my pc, one for Operating System + frequently used programs and i the second SSD to store my VST & Sample packs. Would having Live on one HD and my sound collection on another be any slower than having it all on the one HD?

I know its alot of questions, but i'm just trying to get an idea of how i can get the most performance out of my new PC when using Ableton Live.

Processor
More GHz = more VST load stability
More Core = more track count stability at higher resolution

i7 6700 is good for 8-24 tracks 512 to 1024 latency - a decent mix of VST/VSTi and decent track counts at 48k/24 - might choke on some HQ Convolution Revebs
i7 6700k is good for 8-32 tracks 128 to 512 latency multiple instances of more CPU hungry VST/VSTi and decent track counts 48k/24 - might choke on more HQ convolution reverbs
i7 5930K is good for 24-64 tracks 64 to 256 latency decent mix of VST/VSTi and high track counts at 96k/24 - might chose on many HQ convolution reverbs
i7 5960X is good for 32-96 tracks 16 to 128 latency multiple instances of CPU hungry VST/VSTi and ridiculous track counts at 96/24 - might chose on very many HQ convolution reverbs



For Most Basic Low Track Count Applications
Any i5 4xxx 5xxx or 6xxx series will do at 48k/24

For Most Electronic Music and Recording Applications
Get 6700 for working at 48k/24 projects
Get 5930k for working at 96k/24 projects

For Most Orchestral - Maga Sample Library applications
Get 6700k for working at 48k/24 projects
Get 5960x for working at 96k/24 projects
Get Dual Xeon at 2.8GHZ for massive (150+ track template) applications at 96k/24.

CPU COOLING: Keep CPU below 80 degrees (c) for optimal performance.

* * * 5960x OC single core performs better than 6700k OC single core performance on many benchmark applications * * *

RAM
Almost any ram rated at 1666+ or faster will do. 4x8GB sticks handles better than 2x16gb sticks. For Sample Library Heavy and Video Edit applications, get sticks with cooling vents attached.

8GB - most basic applications
12GB - 44/16 Sample Libraries 20-40 tracks
24GB - 48/24 Sample Libraries 35-60 tracks
32GB - 96/24 Sample Libraries 50-80+ tracks

reserve 2-4GB for OS operations.

* * * ALWAYS LEAVE at least 15% ram free to reduce or eliminate page swapping (page swapping usually introduces cracks and pops during playback) *
* * * Load 100% of sample into ram gives better access performance than stream from disk * * *
* * * Dedicate airflow to ram when using lots of samples to prevent overheating * * *


HDD / SSD
OS Performance
- Any M.2 or 2.5 SSD will work

Audio Stems
- Any 1TB-4TB 7200 RPM will work

Sample Libraries (EWQl, SoundIron, Kontakt, Hollywood Symphonic Libraries etc)
- Intel 750 PCIe x4 gives you BEST POSSIBLE performance
- Samsung 850 Pro is recommended as well for 2.5" form factors
- M.2 SSD is typically faster than 2.5" form factor

* * * Use caution for M.2 SSD as it gets HOTTER quickly than its 2.5" SSD counterpart, when M.2 gets hotter than ~70 degrees (c), it usually throttles, AVOID throttling on M.2 as much as possible as it may introduce glitch audio performance.
* * * DO NOT MOBO RAID-0 SAMPLE LIBRARIES as it severely degrades 4k random access time performance, EXCEPT if you have a LSI RAID CARD which gives best RAID 0 performance over mobo raid-0 * * *


GPU
- Any NVIDIA or AMD card with 2GB+ will work
Your GPU card can handle multiple instances of convolution reverb plug ins to reduce CPU strain.

OS PERFORMANCE
- USE OpenHardWare Monitor for realtime CPU, RAM, DISC, GPU, and Temp(c) performance readout while working on your project.
- TURN OFF ANTIVIRUS/MALWARE REALTIME SCANNING

Audio Interface
View the following Interface Latency chart
http://www.dawbench.com/audio-int-lowlatency3.htm

MOTU/RME are top performing low latency interfaces
Get MOTU or RME PCI Interface if you want glitch free 16 to 32 buffer performance

Try no to connect to hub if you want lowest possible latency
* * * USE Short Cable + Dedicated PORT closest to mobo for best performance * * *

miekwave wrote:
i7 5930K is good for 24-64 tracks 64 to 256 latency decent mix of VST/VSTi and high track counts at 96k/24 - might chose on many HQ convolution reverbs

…
GPU
- Any NVIDIA or AMD card with 2GB+ will work
Your GPU card can handle multiple instances of convolution reverb plug ins to reduce CPU strain.

The i7 5930k sure looks interesting. Thanks for the tip. I'd like to go 8-core though, if I can manage.

What GPU cards are supported by which convolution plug-ins? I've suggested this basic idea to Ableton in 2013 and they said it wouldn't work for Live, at least not at the time.

Stromkraft wrote: The i7 5930k sure looks interesting. Thanks for the tip. I'd like to go 8-core though, if I can manage.

What GPU cards are supported by which convolution plug-ins? I've suggested this basic idea to Ableton in 2013 and they said it wouldn't work for Live, at least not at the time.

CUDA, NVIDIA or ATI

GPU is not natively supported by Ableton, but there are 3rd party GPU VST developers.
* * * Do not run games in the background * * *

Any NVIDIA or ATI GPU should work, it doesn't need to be an expensive Gaming Card (but gaming cards will let you host dozens more convolution reverbs).


Two Platforms:
http://gpuimpulsereverb.de/ ($49)
http://www.liquidsonics.com/software_reverberate_le.htm ($56)

Both are excellent products but LiquidSonics has more features.

but first install the capability checker to make sure your GPU is compatible
http://gpuimpulsereverb.de/demo/

Also these are 32-bit VST so you need to bridge them back into Ableton.

These are great to put on multiple tracks without taking CPU.


8 Core CPU
5960X is the most expensive and only 8 core i7 offering on the market and you can OC it up to 4.2GHZ at 75 degrees with good Corsiar cooling or 3.5GZ with good air cooling without hiccups. Be careful not to sustain over 90(c) for mroe than 20 minutes because it will hurt its lifespan.

Get this proc if you intend on using hundreds of voices at 96k/24 at low audio latency, otherwise save $400 to $600 for one of the other 6 core (i7-5930K) or 4 core (i7-6700k)options.

miekwave wrote: http://www.liquidsonics.com/software_reverberate_le.htm ($56)

"GPU Edition: Status Notes
Zero latency mode is not supported by the GPU Edition due to a combination of factors including the mechanisms involved with transferring data to and from the GPU being much more efficient with larger blocks, a current requirement to run CUDA VST plug-ins in a separate thread (making larger block processing more efficient) and the lack of coherency in buffering schemes used by various different VST hosts complicating the above issues. It may become more practical to implement this feature in future using newer GPU architectures."

Ah, well, It was stuff like this Ableton told me. GPU Impulse Reverb sounds more optimistic. I was hoping for support from Native Instruments or Waves, but I suppose I'd have heard about it.

I think a 6-core may be the most practical, so I'm going to plan for that. Thanks for your suggestions on this.

Thanks for the replies guys, they are a big help ?

IMHO the two best procesor for price/performance value are the i7 4790k and the i7 5820k.

The 6700k platform (MOBO and DDR4 RAM) is quite expensive for the small gains over an i7 4790k, if you are going to spend on that MOBO and DDR4 better get the 5820k with 2 more cores.

I think the small gains you get with the 5930k over the 5820k are not worth the money, better overclock the 5820k.

login wrote: I think the small gains you get with the 5930k over the 5820k are not worth the money, better overclock the 5820k.

I see good ratings on it too. It's also available today in my ususal shop and 5960k coming early january here. So it's a good alternative it would seem. What about heat if you choose over-clocking?

Stromkraft wrote:

login wrote: I think the small gains you get with the 5930k over the 5820k are not worth the money, better overclock the 5820k.

I see good ratings on it too. It's also available today in my ususal shop and 5960k coming early january here. So it's a good alternative it would seem. What about heat if you choose over-clocking?

Well you are going to use an aftermarket cooler anyway, the one form intel sucks.

Stromkraft wrote:

login wrote: I think the small gains you get with the 5930k over the 5820k are not worth the money, better overclock the 5820k.

I see good ratings on it too. It's also available today in my ususal shop and 5960k coming early january here. So it's a good alternative it would seem. What about heat if you choose over-clocking?

Always use liquid cooling if you OC more than 10%. If you only have fan cooling then do not OC more than 10% otherwise you risk frying your mobo.

I'm no expert, but I run the following with zero problems, and perhaps this could help your decision making:

i7 [email protected] - conservative Overclocking (I agree the small gains for the processor just above it is way too expensive, especially if you can simply overclock)
I cool this with a Corsair H80i GT AIO liquid cooler (zero maintenance required)
32GB ram (overkill for Live, but I multitask Maya,Zbrush,Photoshop..still overkill but...meh)
Samsung 850 500GB EVO SSD
GTX 980ti (again, overkill for Live)
old Edirol UA-25 interface at 24bit, 48khz, 128 buffer

I run multiple instances of Bazille and CPU-intensive modules in Zebra (no multicore support yet) patches, around 8-12 tracks usually, some instances inside drumracks too (should really start printing those to audio but I like automating my loopy presets alongside one-hits etc)
A lot of Satin all over the place.
3 x Convolution Reverb Pros.
Almost all tracks have EQ8 and stock Compressor or Glue
Some Saturators and Amp, the latter great for giving stuff a bit of bite when needed at low Wet settings
Around 6 audio tracks usually.

It runs like a dream. I have no idea how many tracks/VSTs I'd need to create to cause audio dropouts, but I cannot be bothered.
When running heavy sets the CPU stays around 42 degrees Celcius.

tedlogan wrote: It runs like a dream. I have no idea how many tracks/VSTs I'd need to create to cause audio dropouts, but I cannot be bothered.
When running heavy sets the CPU stays around 42 degrees Celcius.

Da** You... enabler!

Of course, adding a cooler eats away about 40% or so of the money saved not getting a faster processor from the beginning.

heh...well. That cooler only cost me 69 pounds (no pound symbol on this bloody keyboard). Even if I didn't overclock I'd add it.

the 5930 is an extra 167 pounds and is only 200mhz faster with a stockspeed of 3.5 instead of 3.3 with the 5820k. The former has more motherboard slots also etc which I will never need.
now the 5960X (8 cores at 3ghz) is an extra 400 pounds on top of that, or 567 more than the 5820k.

an AIO liquid cooler with 5820k overclocked, is clearly the winner to me, or rather for what I require.