[Eric Lambert]

We can look at benchmarks to show what the computer is capable of, and we've seen plenty of these, but they doesn't tell us much about our particular ProTools rigs, and that's where the confusion enters. It doesn't matter if we're talking about the Studio, or the previous MacPros, or iMacs, etc... There are people who keep a myriad plugins (some of them grossly outdated) and use multiple videos and heavy VIs and lots of other CPU-intensive tasks, and there are those who do basic audio-only editing/mixing. While they might see identical benchmarks, their real-world experiences will be drastically different.

The only way to test your particular machine in your particular workflow is to test your particular machine in your particular workflow. We can all say that the Netflix session is the testable standard, but that's not exactly "real-world."

The best test I've found is a session of mine which is particularly taxing. It's one that requires care (large buffer) just to open and run. It's, essentially, the largest I'd create under normal circumstances, barring new plugins that consume drastic amounts of CPU.

I get the 1,000 track thing, and how that might satisfy a certain curiosity, but I don't find those pressure tests particularly helpful in my day-to-day. I commonly use video, I typically have a lot of VIs, lots of MIDI, lots of audio, and I favor some power-hungry reverbs and synths. The 1,000 tracks don't reveal much about how these sessions will operate.

The only way I'm going to know how capable a Studio is today, prior to Native support, is by getting one and trying it. But I'll be installing side-by-side my current machine, which allows me to decide which to stick with for the near future.