1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2.0Ghz quad i7 versus 2.5Ghz quad i5?

Discussion in 'Mac OS' started by ryguy76, Aug 6, 2011.

  1. ryguy76

    ryguy76 Member

    I'm looking to update my computer and am eyeing up the mac mini server (which is a 2.0Ghz quadcore i7), and wondering if money is better spent on that or the entry level 2.5Ghz i5 iMac. Both are only upgradeable to 8GB of ram which doesn't come into play. Are these comparable or is the 2.5 still able to process more?

    Thanks
     
  2.  
  3. georgelegeriii

    georgelegeriii Senior member

    You will find that speed is almost always the more important thing when using Logic (at least right now) due to Logic's method of using CPU's: it can only use a single CPU on any 1 VI when in live input, the mode it uses when recording a VI (VI virtual instrument).

    If you have the extra $$$ can you upgrade the CPU in the iMac to the i7 version? The thing is very fast and will give you better performance in the end. It's a $200 extra upgrade, but worth it in the end I think.

    The imac (21 inch current version) allows 16 gig of ram as well...
     
  4. ryguy76

    ryguy76 Member

    Thanks for the response. I need some clarification though. Let's say one VI was recorded already and a new one was being added. You're saying the prerecorded one be distributed across all cores, while the one being played would be solely processed by one of those cores. But playback after the recording of both would then share the load of both VI's?

    Thanks
     
  5. georgelegeriii

    georgelegeriii Senior member

    Like it said: only 1 CPU can be used for a live input... any other data, be it audio, effects, virtual instruments, will happen amongst the other CPU's available.

    One thing that is a good habit to get into: create an empty track (say a midi based track) and select that when not recording. That way the CPU isn't trying to use that track in live input mode, loosing one of you CPU's power for processing.

    Does that make sense to you?
     
  6. ryguy76

    ryguy76 Member

    I was hung up on the definition of "live input." I didn't know if prerecorded midi data counted as a "live input" because the performance is just "trigger" data until that track is bounced to audio.

    I think I'm clear now after trying a few things to see what was happening. I loaded a piano that taxes my current computer and recorded a processor intensive performance and watched the cpu meter almost clip while recording. As long as I had that track selected, playback was still only on one core and near fully taxed. Then I made a empty software track and selected it for playback and the piano load was more evenly distributed. Is that what you're were getting at?

    and to be clear, a "live input" is only defined by what is being played/performed as NEW incoming data, correct?

    Thanks George.
     
  7. georgelegeriii

    georgelegeriii Senior member

    On that particular track ONLY at that time.... Once you're done recording that track, then another track is selected, the newly selected track becomes the live input, and the older track spreads it's cpu requirements throughout all the CPU power/cores.
     
  8. ryguy76

    ryguy76 Member

    I completely understand, thanks George.

    Is there not a way to bypass having live inputs once all the tracking has been done, or do you just remember to select the empty track from project start to finish?
     
  9. georgelegeriii

    georgelegeriii Senior member

    Just keep it handy and remember to select it if you aren't recording audio or a VI.

    G
     

Share This Page