Please help rating older I7-3770 processor's "power" for PT12

[dvdr]

Hi

I have a 5 year old computer, running Win7Pro, 2 SSDs (one for Win, one for data), equipped with a Intel Core I7-3770 (4x 3.40 GHz/8MB) and 8GB RAM.

Test-wise, I worked on it with a 96/24 30-track project, using plugins from Waves (including NLS), Brainworx, Slate and MCDSP. No virtual instruments. Even when "freezing" the two most plugin-heavy tracks and disabling NLS, I am reaching the limits of the machine.

Mind helping me please rating this computer's specs, whether this is a processor and/or a RAM-limitation and what ways of upgrading you see? Or do I have to buy a new machine - in that case, please include a processor suggestion for being on the "safe side".

Thanks in advance!

[take77]

Do your particular projects require a 96kHz sample rate?
If you're decided about using what you have for a time, I would suggest using a sample rate of 44.1kHz or 48kHz max.
There's an upgrade in performance for your older machine right there.

If, or when, you decide to upgrade (and are on a budget like me), I recommend seeking out last year's 3rd quarter PC models on eBay.
I recently bought a never used machine that was manufactured in Sep of last year for half the price of a 2017 first quarter model.
It's equipped with all I really need when working solo at 44.1-48kHz.

[JFreak]

Let's not get into sample rate discussion, keep the posting on topic.

On a side note, the general consensus is that while theoretically everything can be said and done in 48k, some plugins work better at 96k so therefore some claim "more open sound" mixing with higher sampling rates. For tracking, 48k is just fine.

[dvdr]

Thanks so far for the answers - yes, please, no sample rate discussion: I mentioned it, because the sample rate is important to understand the load/demands on the processor.
And, if ever possible, please include a concrete model type or core-number/speed for the processor. I figure in "last year's 3rd quarter", tons of different computers were built, with tons of processor variations. Thanks for the effort of answering, but that does not really help me figuring out, what exactly I will need - no offense ment!!!

[take77]

I just meant that the processor would be rated at higher power with a lower sample rate working with what he has.
Just trying to reassure that his older machine does in fact have power using a lower...[discouraged two words].

Good points Jfreak. You're always a mentor to me. :)

[JFreak]

Originally Posted by take77

Good points Jfreak. You're always a mentor to me. :)

Glad that I can be helpful

[take77]

If that's your benchmark, then it sounds like you have your results.
And it sounds like you can do quite a bit. Just not as much as you'd like to.

Want more on that machine? Then either be willing to consider sample rate as a factor in your personal use or upgrade to a machine that puts these kind of concerns behind. Sounds like you are in latest generation i7 "extreme" realm for sure.

That way you don't have to do bench experiments and can get on with making music to your hearts content.

Sorry my offering was off point and not of much help in this regard.

[take77]

Originally Posted by take77

If, or when, you decide to upgrade (and are on a budget like me), I recommend seeking out last year's 3rd quarter PC models on eBay.

That was meant as a general basis for your own research based on what kind of configuration you'd like out of the numerous models available online.

I think ya got to my post before I had edited it to plural.

[RiF]

Does PT's system usage meter show all CPU cores maxed out when you say "reaching the limits of this machine"? Or do you see other issues like pops and clicks without maxing out the CPU?

My Pro Tools computer has an old Core i5-750 overclocked to 4GHz which is about 2/3 of the speed of your i7-3770 and I worked on projects as large as 100 tracks full of plugins (no instruments, no freezing). But that was on 44.1KHz.

And of course we need to talk about sample rates, because 96K puts more than double the load on the CPU as 44.1K (not counting plugins that do internal oversampling anyways and do not benefit from going up to 96K).

Plus, if you run at 96K vs 48K, a say 1024 sample buffer will run empty more than twice as fast as well and this will cause an interrupt of the system to fill up the buffer to or from the audio interface twice as much. This will put quite some strain on your whole system (from CPU, chipset, busses and audio interface) that can cause all kinds of issues like pops and clicks before the CPU even starts to max out.

[dvdr]

Thanks for all you answers - that makes me dig deeper into the issue.

As for 96/24: since this is a given project, I can't change much about it - this is, what was given to me as stems and I need to work with it as is.
Your further comments do "resonate" and I will consider them, thanks!

Later today, I will have the time and look at the processor-load and the system usage meter. Hopefully, you might be as helpful as until now and give me some more suggestions on how to treat this project. Right now, it maxes out with the error message to "disable some plugins" - haven't we all entcountered that at times ;-) ?

@Take77: as I said, no offense ment!!! I should have explained about the given fact of the 96/24 beforehand to not lead you on a wrong track.
Let's put it that way: I am looking for enough horsepower to not run into problems with occasional projects like the abovementioned.