Is the i7 8700K processor good enough for PT Native?

[chrismeraz]

I'd like to build a PC to use PT Native (not PTHD Native) under the following simultaneous conditions:

1. 96kHz sample rate
2. Buffer set to 64 samples
3. 16 backing tracks playing, 16 inputs recording, and 8 aux buses routing audio
4. A minimal number of plugins (maybe a reverb and a compressor)

My current computer is not cutting it. Would a computer with the newest and fastest i7 8700K processor be able to handle this for sure, or is it a bit of a crapshoot? If yes or no, why do you think so?

Obviously I'll build it with multiple SSD and NVMe drives, lots of RAM, etc. Thanks!

[64GTOBOY]

I think in order to run 96 at 64 the bottleneck would be hardware/drivers not the processor. Why 96? Would guess you would be better off with HDX and Avid hardware to go 96 @64 but maybe someone will chime in with better news.

[chrismeraz]

I am using Apollo as my interface. A/D/A latency (round-trip) is 1.1ms at 96kHz, and double that at 48kHz, so that's why I'd like to run at 96. Financially speaking, I can't afford HDX (I can't even afford HDN).

The hardware (Apollo) can handle it. What problem are you thinking could be caused by drivers?

[TNM]

why do you need the buffer at 64 if you are using apollo? 1,1 ms at 96khz is if you use apollo console only, not monitoring through pro tools itself..

So why not say 128 buffer? The output latency of the apollo firewire at 128 is low enough to play VI's,and if you are monitoring external signal through the console.. i just see no reason to work at 64 samples.

128 buffer in pro tools makes all the difference to 64.

But yes, the 8700k will scream if put together correctly.. you can even overclock it easily, disable all power saving from intel.. it will be very steady and may in fact be just fine with 64 samples.

What your sig doesn't say is your current processor, the one that isn't cutting it..

[chrismeraz]

Originally Posted by TNM

why do you need the buffer at 64 if you are using apollo? 1,1 ms at 96khz is if you use apollo console only, not monitoring through pro tools itself..

So why not say 128 buffer? The output latency of the apollo firewire at 128 is low enough to play VI's,and if you are monitoring external signal through the console.. i just see no reason to work at 64 samples.

128 buffer in pro tools makes all the difference to 64.

But yes, the 8700k will scream if put together correctly.. you can even overclock it easily, disable all power saving from intel.. it will be very steady and may in fact be just fine with 64 samples.

What your sig doesn't say is your current processor, the one that isn't cutting it..

I'm currently using an i3 3240.

As for Apollo, I am not satisfied with the workflow for punching in, nor for creating headphone mixes. So if I use Apollo as my A/D/A, there's a 1.1ms round trip latency, plus the latency of monitoring through PT at 64 samples (at 96k that's 0.7ms) equals a total latency of 1.8ms. This is acceptable.

I tried 128 samples (2.5ms total latency) - it is workable, but sounds a little funny, and isn't stable on my current rig. 256 is stable but the total latency (3.9ms) is too much. It no longer feels natural in the headphones for the musicians.

I don't want to use LLM because I need a few effects and buses on while tracking.

So, is anyone currently doing this with PT Native at 64 samples of buffer?

[The Weed]

If you're in their shipping range, talk to pro-tools-pc.com. While more expensive than a build-your-own, they guarantee it will run Pro Tools and support their products extremely well.

You could also pose your question in the i7 Thread.

Just noticed your using an i3, so yes moving up will make a difference.

[TNM]

Originally Posted by chrismeraz

I'm currently using an i3 3240.

As for Apollo, I am not satisfied with the workflow for punching in, nor for creating headphone mixes. So if I use Apollo as my A/D/A, there's a 1.1ms round trip latency, plus the latency of monitoring through PT at 64 samples (at 96k that's 0.7ms) equals a total latency of 1.8ms. This is acceptable.

I tried 128 samples (2.5ms total latency) - it is workable, but sounds a little funny, and isn't stable on my current rig. 256 is stable but the total latency (3.9ms) is too much. It no longer feels natural in the headphones for the musicians.

I don't want to use LLM because I need a few effects and buses on while tracking.

So, is anyone currently doing this with PT Native at 64 samples of buffer?

You are wrong.. You can not monitor *through* pro tools with the apollo at 1.8ms.. you are simply guessing..

it's more around 5ms for the firewire apollo at 64 samples.

I will point you to the chart at gearslutz with the exact number.

The apollo firewire has hidden safety buffers so it's not just as simple as saying the adda plus the buffer chosen in pro tools.

Now, from your processors, the 8700K is going to be such a huge difference you will be THRILLED .. My advice is yes to the processor. I believe pro tools PC guy will say the same thing.

If you are comfortable building your own system you do not need to buy a special one if you want to save money.

I know for a fact the gigabyte boards work great with the 8700k and there is also one with in built thunderbolt 3 that is known to work 100% with apollo if you ever decide to upgrade (will give you more uad plugin instances but the audio driver still goes through firewire unless you get a proper blackface apollo).

Anyway i hope whatever you decide that you are happy!

Yes you are right about the punching in with console, but once again Avid have purposely done this, and pro tools is the only DAW with the issue, so people can buy their hardware to do things seamlessly.

I have never tried to look for so many reasons to stay with a DAW as I do with pro tools.. I really do.. I love it *that* much.. but things like that are getting to the point of totally exasperating me also. It's like they do it on purpose to screw with people who don't want to use their very noisy overpriced interfaces. They are driving people to other DAWs and they just don't get it or don't care. I am the biggest pro tools fanboy and apologiser out, and it drives even me batty lol.

With Cubase or S1 (can't recommend Logic since you are on windows), punching with console is seamless with auto muting and sound being audible at all the right times without intervention.

Anyway, 8700, with a nice noctua top of the range dual fan air cooler if you, like me, don't like liquid cooling, will be quiet and can be overclocked stably and give you great performance..

Considering what i can do on my comparatively (really) crappy imac, i am certain you could track 16 channels at a time at 64 buffer with native effects, but I think heavy Vi's will still be a problem at 64 buffer IF you already have a busy project playing back when you need to record the VI. If no VI's, you are solid.. 64 all the way for sure. But it will NOT be 1.8ms.

Now unless you are doing something different, and not actually monitoring through pro tools effects but actually doing a direct asio kind of monitoring which off hand I don't know how to do in PT (i know how to in cubase only) then that's a different thing. But I can guarantee you if you are going through the PT mixer with aax native FX it is not 1.8ms.

I will be right back with the exact figure for you.

[TNM]

Ok at 44K the figure on the USB3 apollo twin is 8.2ms RTL at 64 buffer.. that's with usb3. It's around 4ms at 96k.

This is going through the DAW.

Pro tools adds an extra input buffer.. pro tools has higher latency monitoring through the daw than any other host.. so.. i m pretty sure from memory, at 64 samples and 96K the apollo firewire is 5ms through the DAW, so i will guess around 5.5 with pro tools due to the extra input buffer. I just can't find the exact topic I am looking for right now. But i'll do it, do not worry.

PS you do enable LLM in pro tools when you use the apollo console though right? That will at least stop any comb filtering when punching.

Unfortunately, tritone digital never updated mute tone and their website disappeared off the face of the planet with a we'll be back soon message more than 2 years ago.. they are obviously kaput.. and they had a work around for the pro tools punching issue with a plugin that literally muted and unmuted the signal at the right time for you.. I have no idea why no one else will make such a thing now that tritone are gone.
I'd pay for it and i am sure any uad user would.

[TNM]

here you go

https://uadforum.com/apollo-arrow-in...-question.html

apollo firewire is 8ms at *32* sample buffer at 44/48k and 4ms at *32* buffer 96k through the DAW.

64 samples is higher again

Even UAD admit at that very forum that their interface is designed to use console and uad plugins and not a good choice for those wanting to monitor through the DAW.

The thunderbolt one changed things dramatically and it's usable monitoring through the daw at 32 or 64 samples.

Adding a thunderbolt card to your apollo firewire won't change anything as the audio interface part still uses firewire.

[feliponk]

Originally Posted by chrismeraz

So, is anyone currently doing this with PT Native at 64 samples of buffer?

I am using 64 when tracking with a Merging HAPI using Ravenna (AOIP), on an HP Z800 running Mountain Lion.