Propellerhead Software

Go Back   Propellerhead Forum > General Forum (read only)

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 2013-02-13, 10:24
MAGNET001's Avatar
MAGNET001 MAGNET001 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 47
about to get new laptop - can i get away with dual core?

My 2.53 ghz core 2 duo with 4 gb ram is not cutting it on my mid-2009 13" MBP. My my songs have tons of tracks and more and more Rack Extensions, as more and more come out and steal my money away. My songs get to the point of glitching (not purposely - haha) and slowing down or stopping. I've combatted it a little by bouncing each track out as an AIFF and opening a new song and uploading all tracks and doing final mix there - but those are like 15 GB files and my 320 GB hard drive can only take so much...

I am looking at the newer i7 MBP computers and have narrowed it down to either a 2.7 or 2.9 ghz dual core, or a 2.2 or 2.4 quad core. I'd like to stay 13" for portability which is why I'm considering the 2.7 dual, as the quads only come in a 15".

So, if I'm a guy running huge files with 10 minute songs and gobs of Rack Extensions that is just starting to max out his C2D processor, do you think I could get away with the 2.7 or 2.9 dual 13" ones? These are around 1000-1100$. Or should I just deal with the bigger size and go with the 15" quads for 1300-1500$. I have a nice TimBuk2 bag and the 13" fits so nicely in it!

No, I'm not getting a PC notebook even if it was a quarter of the price =p
__________________
Loading SoundCloud…

Last edited by MAGNET001; 2013-02-13 at 10:32.
  #2  
Old 2013-02-13, 12:49
djfm1983's Avatar
djfm1983 djfm1983 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 950
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAGNET001 View Post
My 2.53 ghz core 2 duo with 4 gb ram is not cutting it on my mid-2009 13" MBP. My my songs have tons of tracks and more and more Rack Extensions, as more and more come out and steal my money away. My songs get to the point of glitching (not purposely - haha) and slowing down or stopping. I've combatted it a little by bouncing each track out as an AIFF and opening a new song and uploading all tracks and doing final mix there - but those are like 15 GB files and my 320 GB hard drive can only take so much...

I am looking at the newer i7 MBP computers and have narrowed it down to either a 2.7 or 2.9 ghz dual core, or a 2.2 or 2.4 quad core. I'd like to stay 13" for portability which is why I'm considering the 2.7 dual, as the quads only come in a 15".

So, if I'm a guy running huge files with 10 minute songs and gobs of Rack Extensions that is just starting to max out his C2D processor, do you think I could get away with the 2.7 or 2.9 dual 13" ones? These are around 1000-1100$. Or should I just deal with the bigger size and go with the 15" quads for 1300-1500$. I have a nice TimBuk2 bag and the 13" fits so nicely in it!

No, I'm not getting a PC notebook even if it was a quarter of the price =p
Do you really think a .2 or .4 ghz is really going to make a big difference? Come on think about that again. If you really want more power you gotta go with more cores.
  #3  
Old 2013-02-13, 16:14
MattLeschuck MattLeschuck is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 30
Processor speed actually will make a difference even if its only a .2ghz increase.. Check out the benchmarks on the differences.. Also I would go with the quad core 15".. I recently did from a 13" duo core and was also concerned about portability.. I honestly don't really notice the difference when hauling it around.. Plus the extra screen space makes a big difference when mixing without a external monitor..the speed and power increase is huge! My sessions have been getting quite large now with RE's and such (lots of antidote) and I have had no problems.
  #4  
Old 2013-02-13, 18:53
jzquantum's Avatar
jzquantum jzquantum is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 364
Get the fastest quad core processor you can with the most ram you can afford. Processor speed and amount of ram make a difference in performance in reason in my experience.

I personally work on windows desktop which affords me to rebuild it with fastest processor and ram very easily and cheaply when my projects outgrow my computer technology.
  #5  
Old 2013-02-13, 20:08
MAGNET001's Avatar
MAGNET001 MAGNET001 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by djphathead View Post
Do you really think a .2 or .4 ghz is really going to make a big difference? Come on think about that again. If you really want more power you gotta go with more cores.

Well it's more then a .2 to .4 difference. It's more like a .3 to .7 difference.

I realize the extra cores are better, but I guess I'm wondering if the i7 2.7 with 8GB (since its slowest I'd get) is fast enough to handle this program when composing and playing live. My C2D is almost good enough but not quite.

It's going to be about a $400 difference and normally I'd just go with the faster one but I'm applying for grad schools and will be a horribly poor student again soon and don't want to touch my physical silver investments.

The screen size is a good point but I currently have made 3 desktops: the first for the SSL mixer, the 2nd for the rack, and the 3rd for the sequencer. I three-finger swipe back and forth to each of them seamlessly as I need them and so the 13" screen hasn't been a hindrance yet- since I basically have three 13" a screens. I have NO idea how anyone would use Reason 6 on a single-desktop, single-monitor, though.

Last edited by MAGNET001; 2013-02-13 at 20:11.
  #6  
Old 2013-02-13, 22:30
Rattmowe Rattmowe is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 169
My advice is to get the quad core. It might seem like you are saving money now, but you'll want to buy a new computer sooner down the line, the quad core will have more longevity, and Reason (along with most modern processor heavy software) makes very good use of extra cores. Software become's continually more computationally demanding and developers are focusing the development on using more parallel resources, not faster individual cores. In a 2 or 3 years quad core laptops will be the norm as will probably 6 or 8 core desktops, so you might as well get the quad. The 15 inch MBPs aren't heavy or bulky, I got a 2.6Ghz i7 MBP recently (non-retina), don't regret it one bit, my biggest projects don't even draw more than half the DSP meter.

In the end of the day, you could spend that extra $400 now and have a laptop that will last longer, or you could save it and spend an extra $1000 later when you need a new computer as Reason and RE's get more processor hungry. The way I see it, the quad core is the cheaper choice because as the whole software world concentrates on gaining performance from more cores, not higher clock speeds, your dual core will fall behind pretty quickly.

That's just my opinion of course.

Good luck with your choice.

"No, I'm not getting a PC notebook even if it was a quarter of the price =p" - this is my quote of the day, I like your thinking. The last thing you need is the mandatory 'spec/price comparison' from the 'PC advocate'. PCs are fine, but Macs are just..... better
  #7  
Old 2013-02-14, 03:00
slevin slevin is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 264
My advice is to get the quad @ 15" and deal with the extra size. It is better to have more and not want, than to have less and want more. Furthermore Reason performs better on a quad i7... it really does run like butter.
  #8  
Old 2013-02-14, 03:50
Stereoimagery's Avatar
Stereoimagery Stereoimagery is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 279
having more cores has nothing to do with the speed.

quad core processing isn't their for speed, its their for multithreading.
if you want speed, its always going by the clock speed of the core and the overall speed of the CPU
.2 & .4 always make a difference.

a dual core processor that has a cpu speed of 2.4GHz will always run faster than
a six core processor that has a cpu speed of 2.0 ghz.

The only advantage of the six core processor is it can handle more loads of work (hense the multithreading)

I would use a computer with a high CPU over multi core.
Im using a late 2011 macbook pro with the dual i7 core 2.8cpu with that intelboost up to 3.2 i believe.
And i've upgraded the ram to 6GIGs,

It is a good balance between CPU/RAM/Multi-threading and i'd recommend it over actual quad laptops
upgrade the ram though when you can to at least 6gigs and you shouldnt have a problem with big project files.

I rarely bounce my tracks to audio, and work heavy with effects & RE's,
so my CPU is always being pushed and i rarely have issues.
__________________
twitter: @_drstrangelove

Loading SoundCloud…
  #9  
Old 2013-02-14, 06:04
MrPaully MrPaully is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 236
I know you said you wanted a laptop, but could I just suggest a quad Mac Mini? Very fast for the price. Just thought I'd throw it out there.

Also those who are comparing a Core2 Duo to a Dual Core i7 seem to be forgetting the significant architectural differences between the 2 CPUs, not just the clock speed.
  #10  
Old 2013-02-14, 06:05
MrPaully MrPaully is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 236
Almost forgot. Regarding Hyperthreading, the last I heard reason doesn't support it.
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Selecting a processor for Record (intel pentium dual core.. or Intel Core 2 Duo) mozaic36 Phead User Forum (read only) 17 2009-11-09 15:49
Reason and Dual Core Processors? teelangsun General Forum (read only) 8 2006-10-07 14:56
Mac pro dual core intel..??????? pj360 Phead User Forum (read only) 3 2006-05-28 19:13
dual core question pyro808 Phead User Forum (read only) 20 2006-04-14 15:37
dual core pc chips VS single core chips scissorkixx General Forum (read only) 1 2005-10-12 09:19


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:32.