Hello,
I am using now a PC with Pentium 4 with Fedora 7 and Csound 5.08 - i386.
It is time for me to change my computer for a more up-to-date and powerful
computer.

I read on csound dev forum:
“It is always possible to run two or more instances of Csound at the same
time in multi-CPU machines.”

So what is the best in term of Csound rendering speed?
A 2 core, a 4 core or a 64bits processor?

The x86-64 version of Csound 5.08, is already downloaded from sourceforge by
many users.
If some Linux users are reading this message, It will be kind if they can
reply with hardware data as mother board, processor, memory… and which Linux
they are using.

Thanks
Rene 


-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Best-hardware-for-Csound--tp16739952p16739952.html
Sent from the Csound - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Brian Redfern wrote:
> Which again wouldn't likely make a difference as I bet most media apps 
> work the same way, so at best maybe the os knows how to use an idle 
> processor, but I don't know of any multi-core optimized sequencers.
> 

There's a strong chance there aren't any (to use above two cores). I 
have just acquired Logic 8 Pro, which is great fun, but on the dual-core 
iMac here it is clear that all the audio is on one core and the gui is 
on the other (no surprises there). I suppose a quad  machine would allow 
Logic and Csound to run comfortably together.

How to use multicore and concurrent processing for audio is (or should 
be!) a significant research question (implementation questions; how can 
one get an 8-core mac Pro to use all 8 cores, devote 4 cores to one 
plugin, etc); but our attempts to get funding have so far fallen on 
stony ground  - not an important enough topic, apparently. Heaven only 
knows what we will be able to do with 80 cores - probably much the same 
as we are doing with two.

In the meantime, getting lots of memory will be at least as important as 
getting lots of cores. So if it is a toss-up between 2 cores and 4GB or 
4 cores and 2GB, I would go for the former.


Richard Dobson

Generally it is the OS that splits the threads of a program between processors.
I have not seen yet any library functions that do that for you (at the top 
of my
head I remember someone mentioning something), or at least I can't think of
any POSIX code that does it.

Could anyone say otherwise?

Victor

At 09:10 17/04/2008, you wrote:
>Brian Redfern wrote:
>>Which again wouldn't likely make a difference as I bet most media apps 
>>work the same way, so at best maybe the os knows how to use an idle 
>>processor, but I don't know of any multi-core optimized sequencers.
>
>There's a strong chance there aren't any (to use above two cores). I have 
>just acquired Logic 8 Pro, which is great fun, but on the dual-core iMac 
>here it is clear that all the audio is on one core and the gui is on the 
>other (no surprises there). I suppose a quad  machine would allow Logic 
>and Csound to run comfortably together.
>
>How to use multicore and concurrent processing for audio is (or should 
>be!) a significant research question (implementation questions; how can 
>one get an 8-core mac Pro to use all 8 cores, devote 4 cores to one 
>plugin, etc); but our attempts to get funding have so far fallen on stony 
>ground  - not an important enough topic, apparently. Heaven only knows 
>what we will be able to do with 80 cores - probably much the same as we 
>are doing with two.
>
>In the meantime, getting lots of memory will be at least as important as 
>getting lots of cores. So if it is a toss-up between 2 cores and 4GB or 4 
>cores and 2GB, I would go for the former.
>
>
>Richard Dobson
>
>
>
>Send bugs reports to this list.
>To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe 
>csound"

Victor Lazzarini
Music Technology Laboratory
Music Department
National University of Ireland, Maynooth

I can only concur.  I'm not sure that it would be desirable to have this sort of 
control anyway.  I think you'd probably get better results by simply tweaking the 
scheduler.

John W. Lato
Sarah and Ernest Butler School of Music
The University of Texas at Austin
1 University Station E3100
Austin, TX 78712-0435
(512) 232-2090

Victor Lazzarini wrote:
> Generally it is the OS that splits the threads of a program between 
> processors.
> I have not seen yet any library functions that do that for you (at the 
> top of my
> head I remember someone mentioning something), or at least I can't think of
> any POSIX code that does it.
> 
> Could anyone say otherwise?
> 
> Victor
> 
> At 09:10 17/04/2008, you wrote:
>> Brian Redfern wrote:
>>> Which again wouldn't likely make a difference as I bet most media 
>>> apps work the same way, so at best maybe the os knows how to use an 
>>> idle processor, but I don't know of any multi-core optimized sequencers.
>>
>> There's a strong chance there aren't any (to use above two cores). I 
>> have just acquired Logic 8 Pro, which is great fun, but on the 
>> dual-core iMac here it is clear that all the audio is on one core and 
>> the gui is on the other (no surprises there). I suppose a quad  
>> machine would allow Logic and Csound to run comfortably together.
>>
>> How to use multicore and concurrent processing for audio is (or should 
>> be!) a significant research question (implementation questions; how 
>> can one get an 8-core mac Pro to use all 8 cores, devote 4 cores to 
>> one plugin, etc); but our attempts to get funding have so far fallen 
>> on stony ground  - not an important enough topic, apparently. Heaven 
>> only knows what we will be able to do with 80 cores - probably much 
>> the same as we are doing with two.
>>
>> In the meantime, getting lots of memory will be at least as important 
>> as getting lots of cores. So if it is a toss-up between 2 cores and 
>> 4GB or 4 cores and 2GB, I would go for the former.
>>
>>
>> Richard Dobson
>>
>>
>>
>> Send bugs reports to this list.
>> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body 
>> "unsubscribe csound"
> 
> Victor Lazzarini
> Music Technology Laboratory
> Music Department
> National University of Ireland, Maynooth
> 
> 
> 
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe 
> csound"

It is possible on linux:
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6799
Windows has similar functions but not OSX.

Martin

>From: Victor Lazzarini 
>Reply-To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
>To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
>Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Best hardware for Csound?
>Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 14:45:37 +0100
>
>Generally it is the OS that splits the threads of a program between 
>processors.
>I have not seen yet any library functions that do that for you (at the top 
>of my
>head I remember someone mentioning something), or at least I can't think of
>any POSIX code that does it.
>
>Could anyone say otherwise?
>
>Victor
>
>At 09:10 17/04/2008, you wrote:
>>Brian Redfern wrote:
>>>Which again wouldn't likely make a difference as I bet most media apps 
>>>work the same way, so at best maybe the os knows how to use an idle 
>>>processor, but I don't know of any multi-core optimized sequencers.
>>
>>There's a strong chance there aren't any (to use above two cores). I have 
>>just acquired Logic 8 Pro, which is great fun, but on the dual-core iMac 
>>here it is clear that all the audio is on one core and the gui is on the 
>>other (no surprises there). I suppose a quad  machine would allow Logic 
>>and Csound to run comfortably together.
>>
>>How to use multicore and concurrent processing for audio is (or should 
>>be!) a significant research question (implementation questions; how can 
>>one get an 8-core mac Pro to use all 8 cores, devote 4 cores to one 
>>plugin, etc); but our attempts to get funding have so far fallen on stony 
>>ground  - not an important enough topic, apparently. Heaven only knows 
>>what we will be able to do with 80 cores - probably much the same as we 
>>are doing with two.
>>
>>In the meantime, getting lots of memory will be at least as important as 
>>getting lots of cores. So if it is a toss-up between 2 cores and 4GB or 4 
>>cores and 2GB, I would go for the former.
>>
>>
>>Richard Dobson
>>
>>
>>
>>Send bugs reports to this list.
>>To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe 
>>csound"
>
>Victor Lazzarini
>Music Technology Laboratory
>Music Department
>National University of Ireland, Maynooth
>
>
>
>Send bugs reports to this list.
>To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe 
>csound"