@keith: interesting setup, but which file you tested? test or cpu bench?
the above applies to “CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns”
haven’t tested the other one.
Now, I would love to see how new Intel-apples perform.
@keith: thanx! 
As I have a P4 Northwood as well (2.8 Ghz), I am interested into a system similar to yours as well… it seems the perfomance will be improved very clearly. Though I never reached the limits when producing with Renoise and I am very confident with my P4… anyway… worth to think of it…
@cie
definately.
the C2D family of CPUs (be it the conroe or the allendale) is very capable and i am more than content with the “bang for the buck” ratio, even if i spent the most money ever for an upgrade (i needed almost everything new: motherboard, cpu, ram, graphicscard) since for the first time i literally feel that it’s considerably faster, in whatever respect one may think of.
songs that were already forcing me to reduce the ASIO latency from my standard 16 to 50ms(!), in order to avoid cracking, popping and a laggy screen-update on my former P4 3.8ghz, are now chilling at around 35% CPU load and yelling for more.
furthermore i’ve noticed, that the CPU headroom has increased.
on my former system, i merely go beyond the 60% CPU load barrier withoit getting audible artifacts and slow downs… now that barrier seems to be around 85%.
so for the best “bang for the buck” upgrade, let me recommend you the following:
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (2x1.86Ghz, Allendale Core => 2MB L2 Cache) Price: ~160 EUR
Motherboard: Asus P5B Deluxe Wifi (Intel P965 Chipset ft. ICH8R) Price: ~170 EUR
RAM: 2x1024MB CellShock DDR2-800 CL4 Price: ~263 EUR (ram prices are pretty high currently 
)
the remaining components needed to make up a whole system are not that crucial for a nicely running C2D system, but i’d recommend getting a good PSU for reliable operation at least (made by Tagan, for example).
short story about the components:
the Asus P5B Dlx is THE motherboard if you want to get high FSBs like >450mhz.
some crazy people even managed to get it stable at around 600mhz FSB, but that’s just crazy and not viable for everyday use.
at the same clock, it’s not performing as good as motherboards equipped with the i975X Chipset, but these tend to max out at around 430mhz FSB, so for CPUs featuring a low multiplier, like the E6300/E6400, the P5B is the way to go and it’s of course also cheaper than those, featuring intel’s flagship, the 975X.
the E6300, has a multiplier of 7 (x266 = 1.862Mhz) and is known to be the best overclocker among all C2D, percentage wise.
a 450mhz FSB is really not an unlikely thing with the mobo+cpu combo, even on air with rather low core voltages.
and you’d end up with a whopping 2 x 3.15Ghz CPU, for comparatively little money.
the P5B deluxe will also be rather future-proof, as it will support the upcoming (november this year) Kentsfield Quad-Cores by intel.
if you still have the time, you might wanna wait until the kentsfield get released, since conroe/allendale prices are expected to drop by large amounts due then.
Renoise version: 1.8.0 B4
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading enabled in bios) ASIO ECHO INDIGO I/O
Echo indigo i/o asio-settings:
buffersize:__________64 samples__128 samples__256 samples__512 samples__1024 samples
latency:____________2 ms________3 ms________6 ms________12 ms________24 ms
cpu load: (fluctuates)_58.1 - 58.8___54.4 - 54.7___51.5 - 51.7___49.7 - 49.8____48.9
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading disabled in bios)
buffersize:__________64 samples__128 samples__256 samples__512 samples__1024 samples
latency:____________2 ms________3 ms________6 ms________12 ms________24 ms
cpu load: (fluctuates)_58.2 - 58.9___54.4 - 54.8___51.7 - 51.8___49.8 - 50.0____49.0
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading enabled in bios) ASIO4ALL
buffersize:__________64 samples__128 samples__256 samples__512 samples__1024 samples
latency:____________2 ms________4 ms________7 ms________13 ms________24 ms
cpu load: (fluctuates)_60.3 - 60.7___55.8 - 56.0___52.6 - 52.7___50.9_________49.8
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading disabled in bios)
buffersize:__________64 samples__128 samples__256 samples__512 samples__1024 samples
latency:____________2 ms________4 ms________7 ms________13 ms________24 ms
cpu load: (fluctuates)_60.2 - 60.9___56.2 - 56.6___53.0_________51.5_________50.3
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading enabled in bios) DIRECTSOUND ECHO INDIGO I/O
Directsound echo indigo drivers (without hardware buffers)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________51.6
Directsound echo indigo drivers (with hardware buffers checked on)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________51.0
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading disabled in bios)
Directsound echo indigo drivers (without hardware buffers)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________52.1
Directsound echo indigo drivers (with hardware buffers checked on)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________51.5
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading enabled in bios) DIRECTSOUND onboard soundcard REALTEK AC97
Directsound realtek ac97 (without hardware buffers)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________54.9 - 55.5
Directsound realtek ac97 (with hardware buffers checked on)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________53.8 - 54.5
CPU LOAD TEST (with hyperthreading disabled in bios)
Directsound realtek ac97 (without hardware buffers)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________55.2 - 55.7
Directsound realtek ac97 (with hardware buffers checked on)
latency (lowest possible) :5 ms
cpu load:______________54.2 - 54.7
Some conclusions;
-
In the case of this cpu load test.rns, the settings with hyperthreading enabled seem to have a very slight improvement in performance over the settings with hyperthreading disabled.
-
In the test with echo indigo’s directsound drivers & the onboard soundcard, checking the “use hardware buffers” box also shows slight improvement with less cpu load (can these harware buffers be tweaked?).
-
Echo indigo asio drivers pwn teh asio4all v2 in latency & cpu load.
-
Echo indigo directsound drivers pwn the onboard soundcard drivers.
-
I need me one of those core duo 2 blahs for christmas.
-
I can’t copy text from a text editor without f****ing up the layout on this messageboard.
(some info filtered out of sisoft sandra)
Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.60GHz - speed : 3.62GHz
Prestatie Rating : PR4811 (geschat)
Cores per Processor : 1 Unit(s) Threads per Core : 2 Unit(s)
Interne Data Cache : 16kB Synchroon, ‘Write-Through’, 8-way set, 64 byte line size, 2 threads sharing
L2 ‘On-board’ Cache : 1MB ECC Synchroon, ATC, 8-way set, 64 byte line size, 2 lines per sector, 2 threads sharing
Motherboard:
Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. 8I915P Duo
Systeem BIOS : Award Software International, Inc. FA
Chipset 1 Model : Giga-Byte Technology 82915G/GV/GL/P/PL/GL Grantsdale Host Bridge/DRAM Controller
‘Front Side Bus’ Speed : 4x 201MHz (804MHz data rate)
Total memory : 2GB DDR2-SDRAM
Memory Bus speed : 4x 134MHz (536MHz data rate)
Video Systeem:
Adapter : RADEON X600 Series
Adapter : RADEON X600 Series Secondary
Harddisk: Maxtor 6B300S0 (279GB)
Soundcard
Apparaat : Echo Indigo io
OS:
Windows Systeem : Microsoft Windows XP/2002 Professional (Win32 x86) 5.01.2600 (Service Pack 2)
Using Renoise 1.8 Beta .
<-SYSTEM->
LG S1 Express Dual. (Laptop)
CPU: 2.0Ghz Core Duo.
RAM: 1GB
Sound Card: On board Realtek Sound Card.
Video: Mobility Radeon x1600
ASIO4ALL
test.rns
*ASIO4All latency 4 ms (buffer size 128 samples) CPU LOAD peak at 53% No crackles.
CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns
*ASIO4All latency 24 ms (buffer size 1024 samples) CPU LOAD peak at 52% No crackles … perfect sound.
*ASIO4All latency 4 ms (buffer size 128 samples) CPU LOAD peak at 76% No crackles … perfect sound.
DirectSound
test.rns
- Directsound latency 5 ms. CPU LOAD peak at 56% No crackles.
CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns
- Directsound latency 5 ms. CPU LOAD peak at 72 % No crackles … perfect sound.
Increasaing the latancy even up to 50ms didnt do anything at all. still 71%
That’s my result. =)
**Edit-- Added DirectSound Results
Athlon 64 2800+ @1.9ghz
Asrock K8S8X
1.5gb PC3200 @400mhz
Emu 1820m
Geforce 6200 256mb
Asio@48khz
Test.rns
02ms @ 11.2% max (Runs very smoothly)
CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns
50ms @ 50.1%
13ms @ 59.2% (starting to slow down a little,when switcing menu’s)
05ms @ 69.5% (slows down quite a bit,but the tune stilll plays at its proper timing,no crackles nothing)
Anything below 5 and wierd noises start appering and it starts to struggle alot more.
Pretty good for a 4 year old machine!
(Who needs a Dual core hehehehe)
Well, looking at the results so far, it seems an Intel dual core setup comes up trumps, but the Emu cards are obviously playing a big part in keeping those overheads down too. I won a Conroe (& Vista Premium certified) motherboard, and along with a pay rise, so I think it’s time to do a proper second performance build! Even on my current setup, I’m going a little too high for comfort on the CPU usage now :-S
Athlon 64 2800? Is that a socket 754 chip, or are you underclocking for passive cooling?
Cpu Load bench:
Test setup:
Dual core E6600
Asus p5wdh deluxe
Onboard soundcard:
44100 at 5ms Direct X
cpu load 35%
Havn’t had time to move my soundblaster x-fi from my old computer to my new yet…
I get cracks at 96000 with lower than 10 ms…
Cpu at 77%
he’s actually overclocking it by 5,56%.
nominal clock => 1.8Ghz.
actually, the results do only differ by 1-2% when using the same latencies with onboard audio & directsound.
the EMU cards are great, especially for their price, but they don’t do miracles either. 
@splajn:
nice setup.
now push that puppy a little bit further 
Shit, all these fine numbers makes me wanna buy a new PC. I’ve been extremely happy with my machne as far as stability and lownoise-fans goes but I’m starting to hit the limit more and more when creating music. This thread will come in handy when I’m ready to make a buy.
Yes im OC it a little 
The main advantages i get with my 1820M is the pro tools convertors and all the ins&outs,it sounds so sweat,plus the DSP FX sound better then most VST FX IMHO,the disadvantages with most onboard audio is they dont support asio and dont sound too good,but there is a few asio ones.
with the “Cpu load” rns
I peak at 51% on 1.8
and on 1.9 i peak at 34%
core 2 duo 6400 @ 2,13Ghz, 1gb ddr2, cheesy onboard soundcard, asio4all
The multi-core-support in 1.9 seems to work just fine
CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns
Renoise 1.8: 27.8%
Renoise 1.9: 18.9%
test.rns
Renoise 1.8: 22.5%
Renoise 1.9: 14.0%
And this is my system:
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 overclocked to 3.0Ghz (FSB 1333)
AUDIO: M-audio Audiophile 2496
GFX: Nvidia 8800GTS 640MB
RAM: 4GB Corsair DDR2 800MHz
MOBO: Asus P5N32-E
Could you post the single CPU result for 1.9 as well? To be really fair…
Right click the CPU meter in 1.9 to set the number of Audio CPUs.
Yes of course 
Here we go:
CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns
Renoise 1.8: 27.8%
Renoise 1.9(2 CPUs): 18.9%
Renoise 1.9 (1 CPU): 35.1%
test.rns
Renoise 1.8: 22.5%
Renoise 1.9 (2 CPUs): 14.0%
Renoise 1.9 (1 CPU): 23.3%
thats quite impressive.
time for me to go shopping 
I cant load the CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns… whats wrong?
Edit: problem solved!
Here’s my system performance running on a dual core laptop
System:
Laptop: Acer 5633WLMi
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo T5500 @ 1.66GHz
Memory: 1GB DDR2
Graphics Card: Intel 945GM Express
Sound Card: Realtek ALC883 on-board sound card running ASIO4ALL
Sound Card Latency: 160 samples at 44100hz
CPU_LOAD_BENCH.rns
Renoise 1.8 final: 57%
Renoise 1.9b1 (2 CPUs): 38%
Renoise 1.9b1 (1 CPU): 67%
TEST.rns
Renoise 1.8 final: 44%
Renoise 1.9b1 (2 CPUs): 28%
Renoise 1.9b1 (1 CPU): 46%