Magnus, I would recomend AMD over Intel. Intel's big-little can make problems even under Win11. Yes, one may switch e-cores off or use Lasso SW (or like), but why to risk the problems and need to handle them.

Another dissadvantage of Intel is that they have clockspeed way over optimum (in fact Intel sells something what could be considered as overclocked CPUs....). That means CPUs take double to triple TDH.... Intel's consume aproximately double the power of corresponding AMD. That means that Intels need better and more expensive cooling....

As Ramses said, if not in hurrry it may be good to wait for AMD Zen5. It should add at least 20% computing power. Probably more... Also, it will have much stronger AI support. AI coprocessor may be handy in future for audio processing.

It does not seem, Intel will have good CPU for few comming years. If they manage to make chips on currently developed 18A node, than maybe good CPU comes again....

I am not Intel hater, most of my computers I use have Intel CPU, but for music I have built AMD based miniPC, 8C/16T that has computing power somewhere between M1 Pro and M1 Max, few years ago.

That is not right. At least not for AMD CPUs. It is partially true for Intels...

IPC (instructions pe cycle) rise quite a lot with each CPU generation, so CPU makes more work even with the same CPU clock.

AMD increases mainly IPC, not so much clock. That is the reason, why it needs half of energy for the same task comparing to Intel.

> Is Win 10 the way to go for a DAW pc?

Yes, I think it is the best as of now.

As with every Windows version after Windows 7, it's always just a deterioration of the EULA to the detriment of the user.

The new security features of Windows 11, which slow down the computer so much that even such good and performant 8-core processors, like the one I use, are now just sluggish crutches, are simply a bad joke.
You can still bypass this by using Rufus though, to create a tweaked installation media to disable this security feature and to make installation on older systems possible where also other installation prerequisites are not met like e.g.: TPM and if I remember right also secure boot (I am still using legacy boot which is much easier). You only need secure boot if you have a boot partition over 2 TB. On the other hand, when using Rufus you have not a standard installation, and you never know how long these workarounds will continue to function.

That's why I consider it the more sensible approach not to use Windows 11 in the hope that supply and demand will prompt a rethink at Microsoft. And it appears that many people are not satisfied with Windows 11. The installation numbers reflect this and Microsoft is fully aware of it. Therefore, they announced a while ago, they want to integrate AI copilot into Windows 10 as well. Surely to our all benefit (cough, cough...). My fear is, that even more user data are then concentrated at Microsoft. Therefore, I prefer to use AI platforms only by using the browser.

As for Windows 11, all I can say is that it has become a perpetual construction site in the GUI area. First, unfortunately, many features were removed, then re-implemented, and the Start menu still isn't up to the standard it used to be.

What I also find very annoying are the new administration menus. The intention was to tidy things up here. Nice idea. But unfortunately, this hasn't been successful. The menus are way too cluttered, and every so often you have to scroll through 2–3 pages just to find what you're looking for, which is just poorly done.

Additionally, the font used is too large, and a lot of space is wasted. That's why I still use the old administration menus, which I at least know and where I don't have to constantly search for where something has been put, because it seems like they're constantly changing things around in there.

So, the best recommendation I can give is to still use Windows 10 for the time being to install Windows 10 Pro.
But this is my view on things, tastes and opinions are different.

And then the following applications to give it a shape...

- Installation of O&O Win10 Shutup to deactivate certain things that violate privacy or cost unnecessary performance (mini apps)
- StartIsBack++, for around €5 you get a very good implementation of older versions of Startmenue with a lot of customization options
- 8GadgetPack, if you like gadgets as much as I do.

While we are at it: an excellent, uncluttered gadget package is available from Orbmu2k:
https://orbmu2k.de/
You can't use everything from 8GadgetPack, many Gadgets are simply to colorful and feature overloaded, for example the performance related stuff (CPU, GPU, network). But at least it brings back the gadgets for now.

EDIT: Such articles demonstrate how Microsoft is "playing with GUI/startmenue".
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Windows- … e-1445411/
By installing StartIsBack++ your PC is at least more consistant in the look&feel and in the workflow.
Otherwise, every Windows Update could deliver you new surprises.

ramses: Thank you again for even more valuable input, particularly concerning Win10 vs 11. I had no idea Win 11 was so restricted/constraining on performance. I am very happy with Win 10, so let's hope a future build will be compatible with it.

Thanks you also for the links: I will check out especially Win1 Shutup, since I think it would mean some performance gains. I am not too concerned about tracking etc, unless it hampers my pc performance. (To answer a question in your first post, I am not using my pc for gaming, only work and daw.)

vinark: Thanks for checking up on OC. My cpu is clocked at 4.00 GHz.

All the best to you both,

Magnus

Thanks Kubrak, for explaining about the lack of that core support in Win 10. So if we are to avoid both Win 10 and 11, what should a poor guy do?

Best,

Magnus

Kubrak, just a question.
Are you 100% sure that Intel performs worse than AMD in the field of DAW?

Unfortunately, I don't have the opportunity (money/time) to test this and I try to correlate the information I read to the best of my knowledge and belief.

I don't have the link anymore, but I found a product from a company that uses benchmarks simulating DAW load, and Intel performed damn well in these benchmarks, even surpassing AMD in some disciplines.

Also, in the Steinberg forum, there are people who are very satisfied with Intel performance.

In the end, it also depends on the application, how many cores are optimally supported.

The thread director is on the CPU. AFAIK there are two different versions and only Windows 11 can work optimal with the 2nd version of it. Maybe I forgot something, but I think that was one of the points.

I think, just because the Windows 10 or 11 process scheduler occasionally directs something to the wrong core on an unadjusted system doesn't necessarily mean that Intel CPUs are inherently bad.

Because there are plenty of ways, which I've posted here before, apparently to solve the problem of audio applications not landing on P-cores. https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.ph … 20#p216420

Yes, AMD is currently doing well and works energy efficient. But that doesn't necessarily mean that Intel performs poorly in a DAW workload and is completely unusable.

I have a little the impression that you may be exaggerating the matter a bit without having had such a system yourself and tuned it accordingly.

I wouldn't be too pessimistic about it and would try to find a competent company that offers AMD and Intel systems to find out the specific advantages and disadvantages of a particular audio application.

Purely from gut feeling, I still prefer the design of the Intel CPUs, not really sure that AMD really performs well in all scenarios. There are two points I think: a) there is no shared cache, data has to be transferred between these "clusters" of 4 CPUs that are put together on the wafer, b) for the CPUs with the 3D cache only half of the cores are able to access it. And this is for me a strange design.

Why I think, lets perhaps see what Zen5 brings. Maybe it cleans up the design for such high performance CPUs which have this 3D cache.

Maybe we can both agree on this "simple fact", for me it has never been so hard to decide whether I would prefer Intel or AMD. I tend to be more attracted by AMD at the moment, but there are so many "rumours" that Intel is somehow still better in terms of BIOS, Chipset and such things. Earlier AMD systems were also known to have bad USB3 implementation if I recall correctly.

The other thing .. tricky to find a company for a turnkey system that you could really trust what's the best system for this or that kind of DAW ...

If energy consumption is key for you ... then maybe there is an easier answer, then you have to choose AMD or you need to start undervolting Intel CPUs like some of the people in the gaming area do. They reduce the high energy consumption but still keep enough of the performance of the CPUs.

Thanks, that was the link that I lost.

Ramses,
it depends on SW, if Intel's big-little is treated really well or not in audio applications. Leaving core scheduling on Win is asking for trouble...  So, if SW used is aware of big-little and approaches it well, than no real problem. Application handles it somehow. Most probably well.

But not all programs/plugins seem to work well. I still hear complaints on Native Instruments forum. And maybe I am remembering it wrongly, but it seems to me that even MC "complained" about big-little, but maybe it was more about Apple Silicon than big-little...

But simply, big-little brought problems to x86 realtime app. world. Sooner or later things will iron up and all time critical applications will work flawlessly.

If one knows, that given Intel works fine in DAW he uses, drivers he uses and so on. Just fine. AMD's may have other disadvantages as you have mentioned....

Concerning consumption.... Besides electricity bill, it is easier to cool  CPU with TDP 130 W that takes, say, up to 170 W, than CPU with TDP 200 W, that takes up to 500 W.... One also needs better motherboard, stronger PSU. And it is not so easy make it reasonably silent.... But Ok, one may set BIOS to force CPU consume less and for shorter time...

Concerning tests, vinark posted....
AFAIK things depend on memories used, OS used, and BIOS settings. So, those tests give certain picture, but may have different results with different memories, settings, or using different DAW.

Well, I told you now multiple ways how it is possible to pin applications to P cores.
With Bitsum Process Lasso this can be done very comfortably and even more.
Even bind energy profiles to certain applications.

Regarding people complaining on forums (NI; etc). Are you sure they set it up right?
You should orient better on the people who make something possible and are able to produce good builds.

Times didn't change much .. even before big/little there were people who get it done properly and some fail, because of various reasons and be it, that they used the Windows installation from factory which is quite often bloated and not working good at all...

Therefore, we have companies specialized on building PCs and workstations for audio and video processing and also to build certified setups for certain vendors applications.

His final question was

> Him: So, what should I stay clear of? And what should I be looking at?

Kubrak, I am simply suggesting a more differentiated approach so that the pros and cons are clear.
You paint it too much in black and white.

> You: I know one can tame things using Lasso and so on. But why to do it? It should work out of the box.

It is not new that systems need to be customized for audio if you have a more challenging audio workload.

Wow, guys! I am following your discussion with interest, even though I am not constantly participating. I had no idea that the situation was so complicated in Windows land at the moment. Ten years ago, when I specced my current pc, basically what you had to do was to ensure there were no known issues between mobo chipsets and your sound card.

I can see why AMD may be the wiser choice right now, I am however unclear on what OS to use. Luckily, I am in no pressing hurry. I would like, though, to have something new within a year. My current system is really struggling to keep up with my new-fangled fascination with Acustica Audio.

All the best to everyone who is contributing to this discussion!

Magnus

I'm sorry if you have the impression that someone has stepped on your toes.
You may have taken something the wrong way.

This isn't a battle. All I'm asking for is a slightly more differentiated approach and not to paint too black as far as Intel is concerned and not to simply ignore my finding how big/little problems can be solved.

A lot also depends on the application. In the DAW benchmarks, you can see clearly that the Intel CPUs don't perform that badly.

Although userbenchmark has a bad reputation (according to reddit comments), do you know perhaps what this remark has to say (under conclusions)?
https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/I … 4151vs4133

"So if you were thinking about getting the 13th gen i9 then the 14th gen is a no-brainer since it offers flawless performance for both gaming and productivity tasks. This is especially true since AMD's "equivalent" 7950x3d is haunted by software bugs and "features" such as needing to have Xbox game bar open 24/7 and having their motherboards overvolt and kill the CPUs."

I stumbled accidentally over this platform, am not sure, how good the information is therein.
Therefore, question to you, whether you know something about it.

What is perhaps also quite interesting is that Audionetworx, the company in the field of turnkey systems for audio and video processing (based on consumer hardware) still seems to offer Intel PCs for audio and video production. At least there is currently not a single AMD system in the product range. There used to be an AMD Threadripper, but not anymore.
https://www.da-x.de/de/audio-computer/a … steme.html
If you look at some articles from magazines 2-3 years old, they show, that Intel systems still seem to have an advantage in being able to efficiently handle a high DAW load with small buffer sizes without the ASIO load escalating.

And it might be that there is still some beef behind it. Otherwise, it does not make really sense, why they do not offer AMD-based products. In the end, they are also there to generate business for them.

I wanted to add this information to this discussion as I regard this as an interesting indicator plus the information from vinark's link, what Intel wasn't that bad in some disciplines (but not with the intention to have a fight on it, that would be silly).

Ramses, for me OK, I haven't felt ofended and like. I just wanted to avoid possible AMD x Intel, Win x Linux, PC x Mac flamewar. It never leads anywhere. There is not to add much to the topic on my side. That is all, what I wanted say.

vinark: yes, good question and a poignant reminder. Originally, I was thinking of something built around an i9 13900K cpu, if I can afford it. Generally speaking, I am aiming for something which will last me another 10 years, and which will not struggle with projects loaded with Acustica Audio plugins, like my current system actually does. So I would like a major leap in processing power, ideally much more than doubling the performance I have today.

Best,

Magnus

Vincent, you are correct. Low latency is not important. I don’t use vstis. 512 would be great but 1024 would be more than acceptable. ATM I am at 4096 with quite noticeable lags in meters etc, and Asio guard maxing out.

Magnus