Page 1 of 2

Using Quad-Core Q6600 with Creamware

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 2:54 pm
by aimprod
Hi People,

I seem to recall seeing somewhere that people where having issues with duo's and Scope cards, but now of coarse cannot find that thread!

I'm just about to buy this: http://3xs.scan.co.uk/ConfigureSystem.asp?SystemID=671 upgrading to Q6600 and 4 Gig ram running XP Pro, unless someone has had issues here. I've got a couple of weeks before doing the deed as I'm waiting for the next interest free CC to come through :D

I'm so out of touch as I've not had a system running for 4 years for one reason and another, so it's a big jump from 98 running Cubase VST to Nuendo on XP.

I've sort of had it running on the laptop though it lacks ram, but things seem to have moved on just a bit.

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 3:52 pm
by garyb
core2 duos work great. i seriously doubt you'll need 4gb ram. 2gb should be all the machine can really use, the 1gb in the configuator should be sufficient. xp home is probably all you need as well.

the p35 chipset is untested with scope afaik, but most intel chipsets work flawlessly. what's with the soundblaster soundcard?

Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 7:35 am
by AndreD
The P35 chipset works fine with scope.
I´m using the ASUS p5k, nerver used an abit mainboard..

The Q6600 is also fine with scope :-)

Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:24 pm
by alfonso
AndreD wrote:The P35 chipset works fine with scope.
I´m using the ASUS p5k, nerver used an abit mainboard..

The Q6600 is also fine with scope :-)
Thx Andre, but if you can some more info:

1) 3 cards work fine?

2) Masterverb test?

:)

Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 1:43 pm
by aimprod
They where using the Asus P5 with this system until a few weeks ago, the advantage with the Abit board is the faster FSB speed -1333 on the Abit.

A few people have suggested using 4 gig of ram with XP pro can cause more problems than it solves, does anyone here have any experience, the rather greedy AAS string studio and adictive drums being my main RAM concerns.

Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2007 2:23 pm
by dawman
I would take GaryB, and Andre D.'s advice, as they constantly upgrade and build DAW's for Scope.

Personally, I would get the quad, as they are cheap, but DDRIII has no advantage yet, and these items will drop 50% in price within 9 months. By that time DDRIII will have matured, and who knows maybe SonicCore will have Vista drivers, and 4GB's of RAM might be usable in the big sequencer apps, or samplers.

Then again if it's a Scope only DAW, a 965 Intel board w/ an E6600 would be a very cheap way to go, as well as stable.

I use 865, and 965 based DAW's, and have no issues other than human error based ones. Which I excell in.

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:07 am
by AndreD
alfonso wrote:
AndreD wrote:The P35 chipset works fine with scope.
I´m using the ASUS p5k, nerver used an abit mainboard..

The Q6600 is also fine with scope :-)
Thx Andre, but if you can some more info:

1) 3 cards work fine?

2) Masterverb test?

:)
up to 9 mv pro, will test a 3 card setup later.
(pulsar 1 + scope pro)

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:09 pm
by AndreD
I´m sorry but my gc eats up one pci-slot and I have no other card around.....
http://www.gainward.com/en/product/prod ... p8491.html

Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2007 10:09 pm
by ScofieldKid
I'm pretty hesitant about the multi-processing capabilities of XP. Both Shayne and myself spent quite a bit of time debugging apparent issues with AMD X2 CPU's. My ultimate conclusion on that experimentation was that there were enough difficulties with XP and with the way some software vendors are interacting with the XP API's during multi-processing, that it will produce a less stable platform than a single proc. This is not a comment on the Creamware Scope platform, but more targetting at other applications you might also be running simultaneously, such as a sequencer or multi-track recording software, or something else.

That being said, I would probably recommend the same as everyone else. You are hitting the sweet spot with the Q6600. But in case you didn't notice this recent post: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/in ... spx?i=3038
An E6750 or E6850 looks like a pretty awesome CPU as well. And I would expect those are going to be readily available very quickly now.

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 5:29 am
by endre70
I have just bought the P5Kdeluxe. ( also with Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHz and 4g Ram). Received it today but cant test it with my scope system as I am away from from my studio for 2 more weeks. But reading the manual I am a bit concerned about IRQ issues. Seems like the PCI slots shares with SATA 1 and 2 and various other essential bits. But then again; I have never quite understood the ASUS IRQ sharing form... Can anyone confirm or explain?

Endre70

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 12:18 pm
by ScofieldKid
( Ah, I hadn't noticed that the Q6600 had dropped down to $300. Wow. That's awesome. Some realworld on the B3 v. G0 stepping here. Really looks like a wash: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... html#sect0 I've been looking at the Abit IP35 Pro, just because the PCI slots are arranged a little more to my liking.)

Page 2-19 on your ASUS P5K DELUXE manual has the default IRQ assignments for the motherboard. Looks like #9, #10, and #11 will get used by default.

Please let us know how well that combo works!

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 2:38 pm
by dawman
It's actually better than that @ www.newegg.com



Final Words
Despite theoretical showings on paper, the 1333MHz FSB appears to do very little for performance even when feeding four of Intel's fastest cores. The Core 2 Extreme QX6850's performance is nothing to scoff at, but given its price tag we'd strongly recommend one of the cheaper quad-core offerings. With the Q6600 coming in at $266, it's tough to resist.

Our Q6600 recommendation really highlights the major focus of this story, and that is the escalating price war between AMD and Intel. Once Intel's price cuts take effect next week, it's going to be difficult to recommend any AMD CPUs above $150. We're still working on our low end CPU comparison, and we suspect that AMD is more competitive at the lower end of the price spectrum, but what we've seen here today doesn't look good at all for the mainstream segment. In order to remain competitive, AMD would either have to knock about $50 off its X2 6000+ price or count on Phenom making up the performance gap at the same price point.

It's tough to resist upgrading or building a new system today because of the tremendous value this last round of price cuts has given us, especially when you take into account that both Penryn and Phenom's respective launches remain largely unknown. Clock speeds, pricing and dates are still up in the air, and for once our recommendation isn't simply to wait and see what happens.

If you need a new system or CPU upgrade today, the chips are ripe for the picking.


This is about half of what I paid. I thank the lord for AMD.


www.anandtech.com

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:41 pm
by aimprod
Gentlemen, thanks for your input, I can't believe I've actually struck lucky with my timing for once, mind you if it was 2 months ago I would no way have been looking at the Quad at it's old price.

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 4:14 pm
by dawman
Don't remind me. I didn't expect AMD's whitepaper to shake up Intel so much.

One good thing though. When I upgrade, I rotate now, so it's not so bad.

I have learned after a few beatings to chill and wait.

Check out these audio benchmarks which show the quad placing 2nd and 3rd, but the winners are 1000 USD and above priced Dual Quads, etc.

www.adkproaudio.com

The Q6600 is the smart move. But I would keep it cheap until the memory speeds on DDRIII are 30-40 % faster than DDRII. You don't want to fall for that DDRIII thing yet. Let it mature first, as prices on that will surely drop.


Bloody Lucky You,

Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 11:57 pm
by ScofieldKid
Well darn, on the Abit IP35 Pro, the firewire might have an issue.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/0 ... ip35_pro/7
I might contact Abit about this.

On the ASUS, if you do any overclocking, one review says make sure to do this to keep the PCI locked:
"Our Asus representative informed us regarding the PCI lock issue. According to the R&D department, by setting "PCIe Spread Spectrum" in the BIOS to 'Disabled' will automatically engage PCI locks to be 33.3MHz."

I do like, on the ASUS, that they have a PCIe based network port.

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 3:11 am
by endre70
ScofieldKid wrote: Page 2-19 on your ASUS P5K DELUXE manual has the default IRQ assignments for the motherboard. Looks like #9, #10, and #11 will get used by default.

Please let us know how well that combo works!
Thanks, and I will.

But I am wondering how to understand the next form on the page ; The "IRQ assignment for this motherboard". Thats where I see potential issues...

Endre70

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:00 am
by hubird
endre70 wrote:But I am wondering how to understand the next form on the page ; The "IRQ assignment for this motherboard". Thats where I see potential issues...
mmwaahh...
:lol:

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:08 am
by garyb
we know, hubird.
you'd rather someone else already thought about it before you buy it all put together. :)

there are levels to those charts. as you add devices, sharing occurs. if you have turned off most unneeded ports you'll likely be ok. at what level does the chart show sharing? first, second or third? if it's first, don't use that slot unless you have to. i have had to allow sharing with a sata controller in the past and the machine ran just fine, so it's not to end of the earth, necessarily.

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 11:32 am
by endre70
Thanks Garyb! Here's a picture

I guess horizontal A would be what you call 1'st layer and onwards...?!

If this is the case, then with my 2 scope cards setup the best thing would prob be PCI slot 1 and 2 (turn off Lan and hope Sata controller 2 dont give any hassle). And then 'praying to the aliens"...

oohh almost forgot..Hub...Thnx for your insightful input :wink:

Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 1:37 pm
by garyb
that's correct.