MOTUnation.com

jb wrote:Btw I sent for a price quote on the Amfeltec, they're asking these specifications for the order, I have a 4,1 Mpro, so it would go in the #2 slot,they ask:
"Please specify the size of the PCIe upstream adapter: x16, x8 or x4"
so 16 right?

" Please specify the size of the PCIe bracket: full size or low profile"
I take it's full right?
if anybody can confirm that would help.thanks!

Yes, x16 and full size. The 16 lanes is what allows the four m.2 cards full bandwidth. Each m.2 SSD is a four lane device. So, 4 lanes times 4 = x16. Or rather x16 = 4 lanes for each x4 m.2.

Super...thanks for your help Steve, can't wait to try that setup.

HCMarkus wrote:Another way to transition is to go PC or Hackintosh (which I like to think of as a MacFaux).

MacFaux is a grey area, so I'll stay away from that. But can you elaborate, or point to useful sources of info on PCs? I hear all the time that I can get a lot more power for the same price, and the need to constantly reinstall everything is a thing of the past.

But when I delve into it, I find:

- pricing out a PC with the same specs as a nMP or high end iMac (on paper at least), results in a price in the same range (and more than a used MacPro)

- numerous articles say you need to be careful with the parts used, and how well they integrate to get the near real time performance needed for audio with lots of VIs. Most of these tell me, for these reasons, not to get a stock PC like a Dell, but to get a custom built DAW system. That adds another 1-2K to the price.

As Apple so clearly moves away from its former place in the "pro" market segments, I'm quite willing to have my next Mac be a PC. I tried out DP on a lower end PC, and it was fine, but obviously not larger projects.

But I'm not seeing a clear path yet. Maybe its just as easy to get a new Mac and run Windows on it? (Dvorak reported a few years back that the Mac was the best computer for running Windows)

bayswater wrote:

HCMarkus wrote:Another way to transition is to go PC or Hackintosh (which I like to think of as a MacFaux).

MacFaux is a grey area, so I'll stay away from that. But can you elaborate, or point to useful sources of info on PCs? I hear all the time that I can get a lot more power for the same price, and the need to constantly reinstall everything is a thing of the past.

But when I delve into it, I find:

- pricing out a PC with the same specs as a nMP or high end iMac (on paper at least), results in a price in the same range (and more than a used MacPro)

- numerous articles say you need to be careful with the parts used, and how well they integrate to get the near real time performance needed for audio with lots of VIs. Most of these tell me, for these reasons, not to get a stock PC like a Dell, but to get a custom built DAW system. That adds another 1-2K to the price.

As Apple so clearly moves away from its former place in the "pro" market segments, I'm quite willing to have my next Mac be a PC. I tried out DP on a lower end PC, and it was fine, but obviously not larger projects.

But I'm not seeing a clear path yet. Maybe its just as easy to get a new Mac and run Windows on it? (Dvorak reported a few years back that the Mac was the best computer for running Windows)

Start here. Very expensive though. You could build one based off their designs and cut corners where needed.

https://www.visiondaw.com/store/pc/main.asp

Steve Steele wrote:Start here. Very expensive though. You could build one based off their designs and cut corners where needed.

https://www.visiondaw.com/store/pc/main.asp

Similar to the sites I've visited, and might actually be one of them. The pricing ends up about the same as a similarly equipped Macs. Would these systems run DP noticeably better (meaning more channels, effects and VIs)?

bayswater wrote:

Steve Steele wrote:Start here. Very expensive though. You could build one based off their designs and cut corners where needed.

https://www.visiondaw.com/store/pc/main.asp

Similar to the sites I've visited, and might actually be one of them. The pricing ends up about the same as a similarly equipped Macs. Would these systems run DP noticeably better (meaning more channels, effects and VIs)?

Depends on the size and content of your template.

Depending on the system, I would think they'd have a good chance at doing very well. The Apple fanboy in my hates to admit that - after all thee years, still having trouble letting go.

I'm not the person to ask, but I get the feeling that DP runs perfectly on OSX, but maybe faster on Windows. Am I wrong about that anyone?

It's also kinda sad that HP is making some serious Xeon PC workstations these days and Apple, while probably working on the follow up to the nMP, it won't be in the same league as the Z series HPs. However, those aren't necessarily spec'd for audio and they are expensive. Maybe a custom built PC will be cheaper, but when most of the cost is the Xeon itself, a good audio workstation is going to be expensive no matter what OS you use. I haven't seen any evidence to the contrary. An i7 is limited to 8 cores per PC. A Xeon based workstation.. I've seem 72-core PCs. I'd still go with a Xeon. When you get into those Han Zimmer-sized templates, nothing but a Xeon will do.

That being said, if I were looking at one of those systems, I'd probably do it myself (I think I know enough to save some money), but I'd also look at the performance of my current MacPro builds and see how they spec out pound for pound.

The problem, sadly, is OSX. A generalized UNIX OS will never be the speed king for audio production systems. A UNIX based system that's built from the ground up (like the old BeOS) would have been an ideal system for what we do, but Apple's X version just ain't the fastest. Window's audio kernel is faster I'm told. Maybe someone else can help me out concerning the latest numbers on this. I read it was around the time of Windows 7 that MS got serious about recoding Direct X and the audio kernel and it turned out to be quite fast.

However, with the mega speeds of SSDs, the ability to have tons of RAM, and 12+ core systems available, combined with the built in multi-mic optimization of a lot of new generation sample libraries (Spitfire, Orchestral Tools, etc), the slight handicap of OSX is probably negligible to most people. With a system like this, with everything loaded into RAM, and plenty of CPU cores which DP (and all the others) take quite good advantage of, I don't know if the OS makes a huge difference. But maybe DP does run snappier on a PC.

For the next year or two, I believe my system is a great low cost solution, but after a couple more CPU generations, and if Apple keeps building weaker and weaker pro level PCs, it might be tough to justify a Mac only multi-computer rig. Some people think it is now. I'm just not ready to move to the dark side even if it's just for a slave that I'll rarely have to interface with.

Actually I'd run a PC slave. My friend is dying to build one, so who knows, I may do that soon. Sorry I can't answer more. I rarely have had to use Windows.

Steve Steele wrote:

bayswater wrote:Similar to the sites I've visited, and might actually be one of them. The pricing ends up about the same as a similarly equipped Macs. Would these systems run DP noticeably better (meaning more channels, effects and VIs)?

--- snip --- Actually I'd run a PC slave. My friend is dying to build one, so who knows, I may do that soon. Sorry I can't answer more. I rarely have had to use Windows.

You answered plenty. Thanks.

Yeah, the slave approach with VE looks like a winner; OSX and DP on main Mac and as many Ethernet-linked slave PCs as may be required.

Personally, even running a single CPU (W3680) Mac Pro, I am doing very significant pop projects without any problem. More Horsepower needed? It's all about the VIs.