No two systems are alike, so this is no guarantee, but on my Lenovo Legion blah-blah I went from 192 samples to 64 samples just by using the right powerplan (I use throttlestop for this).
Tomorrow I’ll check whether my system is on that list by chance. (Maybe, just maybe, it is also not suitable according to that list. That would raise some questions)
I bet your audio interface device driver had some impact on this
Yes, I wondered whether 32gb was more in the realm for sample libraries. As a keyboardist I’ll be using a number of these.
It really is a minefield trying to ensure the specs are adequate. I’m looking at spending up to $1500 for the most solid and light machine. That DSP site does look really helpful though, thanks.
I meant DPC site…
Don’t underestimate how good physically modeled plugins can sound, and they don’t use any samples
For example
Pianoteq for acoustic piano (endorsed by Steinway) and clav
Lounge Lizard for Rhodes Wurly
No luck…
Besides the 16GB of RAM, which could be limiting, depending on how much use you’d make of sample based VSTi’s, this CPU can be boosted up to 4.7GHz, but has a base frequency of only 2.3GHz which is not so very much.
Maybe you should better go for some small form-factor desktop PC with an appropriate CPU (and memory).
This is sadly the new trend for mobile CPU: more and more cores, but lower and lower base frequencies… I am currently trying to replace my dying laptop and am struggling to find one with at least 32Gb and a base frequency close to 3GHz… a real problem!
There are several threads regarding what “base frequency” means in practice now (Turbo 3.0, I think). I thought there was some suggestion that in handing audio (GP) these chips often run as much as needed well above their base frequency.
A bit different than “always”, which is more appropriate for real-time requirements…
The base frequency of my cpu is 2.5 GHz, but with the use of throttlestop it always runs at 3.7 GHz or higher (depending whether the temperature is high enough to fry eggs or not), so I do not see too much trouble in the lower base freq. The e-cores however impose a greater risk, because Windows tends to assign these to processes that do not have the focus (for example a second instance of GP). In threads I’ve found on the internet the workarounds are to associate only p-cores with your processes or to run your processes as administrator.
I also came across a piece of code that would make a process itself announcing that it wants p-cores.
Because I don’t have a modern cpu myself (yet), I cannot verify these solutions
Unfortunately, the more cores running, the more heat produced. If it is better forour audio app to run only one core at high frequency, having these multiple cores doesn’t really help. This is yet another concern for the musician, who will have to restrict certain cores in favor of others, so as not to cause the CPU to overheat and guarantee a high frequency for the audio application…
I’ve been a big fan of the Microsoft Surface Pro ever since they came out . Small foot print, light and easy to move around. I currently have a SP 8 with i7 with 16gig ram and 512 SSD. I am very happy with its performance.