add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

4690k vs. 4790k For Audio Recording/Production

JJnotstrike

64 months ago

Hey guys,

I've already planned out a new HTPC gaming rig, but now I'm looking at planning out my new rig for my home recording studio. I stopped recording professionally so to speak, but for my own projects, I still have the same demands as far as the software workload is concerned.

I know for gaming, the I5 hits the sweet spot for performance/value. However, is it worth it to really spend the extra bucks and go with the i7 for specifically home recording applications? My last studio rig was based on a 27" i7 iMac, so it's hard to really see the comparison myself. If any of you guys are recording enthusiasts and have a better idea of which route is better, let me know!

Comments

  • 63 months ago
  • 6 points

Wait wait, HOLD ON. Ignore anybody who tells you to buy an i7. They might be right, but they have NO IDEA what they're talking about. Why?

Because nobody has a clue what software you are using.

The difference between an i5 and an i7 is multithreaded application performance, and for content creation software this is 100% software-specific.

Anyone who just has a knee-jerk reaction and recommends you an i7 is blowing steam out of their ***, because even if they end up being right, they have no clue WHY they are right, because they don't know what software you're using.

Those people are giving you uninformed advice and are completely irresponsible. I completely agree with Warlock, your best bet is to check with your software's website for specific information. Asking around on something as case-by-case as this only allows people to give you bad info.

  • 51 months ago
  • 0 points

Wait wait, NOW YOU HOLD ON. Ignore anybody who tells you to get an i5. They WILL be wrong, But they have NO IDEA what theyre talking about. Why?

Because you don't have a clue how music production programs work.

Any one who just has a ball-kicking reaction and recommends you an i5 is s**ing bricks out of their a, because they are wrong and they have no clue why they are wrong, because the people who actually produce music know what they are talking about and most likely tried out other DAWs so they could tell you from experience.

Those people giving you uninformed advice are completely irresponsible. I completely agree with Warlock, your best bet is to check with your software's website for specific information. Asking around on something as case-by-case as this only allows people to give you bad info.

Now you would know that i almost copied you word for word but i gave it a little twist of what i would say if i was the person saying what you just said. Why? I did it because if you really produced you would know that music production does multitasking in real time, meaning you'll need a lot of threads especially if you record a lot of tracks. It doesn't matter as much if the programs supports hyper threading it matters that the cpu can have mulitple threads so that it can handle those cpu taxing VST's, plugins, sounds libraries, as well as plugins within the mixer, etc while simultaneously handling the jobs of the program it self. Music production requires alot of muilitasking. In music production the main thing that matters is the cpu and your soundcard. Plus Most of the DAW makers of today support hyperthreading so you dont really have to check which daw supports hyper threading.

1..Fl studio(most famously known for using it the most/best.) 2.Ableton 3.Reaper 4. Pro tools 5. Logic Pro X 6. Reason(at least the latest version does) 7.Bitwig Studio, and more

As you can see the minimum that youll need is an i5 but if you want to record and do other intensive operations like that then the Core i7 All the Way. So in conclusion, If you dont know anything about music prodcution, just ask or reasearch lol.

  • 51 months ago
  • 1 point

Okay, thanks. I don't pretend to know anything about music production. Which is why I don't pretend that I know anything about music production. Your conclusion is parallel with mine regardless.

  • 51 months ago
  • 1 point

Thanks and i agree that our conclusions are parallel to each other because i simply copied exactly what you said and twisted it to fit my points lol. When you siad get the i5 you were right, UP TO A CERTAIN POINT. When you record and your tracks run out of threads the music production application piles the tracks on top of each other on the cpu and eventally you will start to get clipping(when the audio goes in and out its really annoying). This all will change once you get an 8 thread processor and up.

  • 51 months ago
  • 1 point

You based everything you've written up to this point on this idea that I told the guy to get an i5. I never did. So I'm not sure what you mean by "up to a certain point".

I just told him to shop for what benefits his specific software the most, which could lead to an i7 or i5 depending. That doesn't mean I told him to get an i5.

  • 51 months ago
  • 1 point

http://youtu.be/GUsLLEkswzE

I recommend you set aside 28 mins and watch this video.

  • 51 months ago
  • 1 point

Umm "Wait wait, HOLD ON. Ignore anybody who tells you to buy an i7. " Just because you might not have told him DIRECTLY to get an i5 it was certainly a derogatory term to get an i5 because you're sure as hell not going to tell him to get an i3 or heck, even a pentium!!!lol. I know what you meant im just clarifying terms lol.

  • 64 months ago
  • 4 points

Check with the software website. Depending on software used and editing type, hyper-threading may not increase performance or in some processes, actually slow it down. An old article which provides the basics why, SoundOnSound

  • 64 months ago
  • 2 points

The i7 would be a better option than the i5 because of the hyper threading. To save some money you could also get a XEON (an i7 without igpu) or get an AMD FX-8350.

  • 63 months ago
  • 1 point

I second the Xeon, though I noticed you have selected K processors, so that may not be an option since the Xeon isn't good with overclocking (if I heard correctly, assuming it supports it at all).

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

Interesting thread but it seems to me there is some oversimplification going on here with comparisons between the i5 and i7 processors.

I am looking to purchase a new laptop and I'm leaning towards an Asus model (15.6" Laptop Intel Core i7, 8 GB, 256GB SSD with Windows 10) and the Dell model (15.6-Inch Laptop 6th Gen Intel Quad-Core i5-6300HQ Processor up to 3.2GHz, 8GB DDR3, 256GB SSD Windows 10) but I though this part of the review on the model I'm looking at interesting:

'The latest generation of Core i5 processors performs more or less like the Intel i7-4712HQ which has a Passmark score of 7635 today (minus the hyper threading of the i7), helps improve battery life (of 6-cell lithium ion battery) so you can have it unplugged longer despite having a Thermal Design Power of 45 watts. This means that the Inspiron i7559-763BLK’s performance comes closer to Core i7-powered systems that cost slightly more, like the Dell XPS 15, the 17-inch ASUS X755JA-DS71and the gaming MSI GT72 Dominator-406'.

The Asus model with the i7 processor had this in it's review:

'The Intel Core i7-6500U is a dual core processor, that promises stable performance, it receives ~4300 points CPU Mark points which is quite decent for a notebook (apparently most laptops average 3000 points these days). This combination of components and features is potent enough to install Photoshop, run a virtual machine, with a guarantee that the system will handle pretty much of anything thrown its way. If we get nitty, the K501UX lags behind the Dell Inspiron i7559-763BLK with a whopping ~7500 CPU Mark, thanks to its sixth generation(Skylake) Intel Core i5-6300HQ Quad-core processor.

It is not surprising to see the ASUS K501UX with its Core i7 processor can be eschewed by the Intel Core i5-powered Dell Inspiron i7559-763BLK. Simple, while the K501UX comes with a dual core CPU clocked with hyperthreading, the Inspiron i7559-763BLK surges forward with a true Quad-Core that is higher clocked with turbo. Nevertheless, the difference will begin to be felt if only you plan on pushing your system to the extremes, but for general use the ASUS K501UX remains a good contender just like its other siblings the ASUS Zenbook UX305LA and the less expensive ASUS F555LA-AB31'.

Again, I'm leaning towards the Dell but, more importantly, the reviews imlpy that, in this instance, the i5 processor can outperform the i7.

Thoughts?

  • 64 months ago
  • 0 points

I did a 4790K for my dad's studio build, but you would probably be fine with an i5. As pegotico notes, a Xeon is also an option if you plan on getting a separate GPU. But I'd definitely stick with Intel.

  • 45 months ago
  • 1 point

18 months ago

Also I would suggest you make your own thread

  • 64 months ago
  • 0 points

The i5 should work fine for you, but i dont know a whole lot other than most people that i know that do that stuff use mac pros and powermac G5's

  • 64 months ago
  • 0 points

+1 E3 Xeon! Get plenty of RAM and a good ssd. You'll have yourself a great audio workstation.

[comment deleted]
[comment deleted by staff]

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube