Question for the technically minded...

I'm hoping someone can help me out with some general pointers on building a new machine for use with Hauptwerk. I work in IT, but I've spent the last five years programming (essentially) and am very rusty when it comes to spotting / identifying good hardware. I'm hoping that some of you may be able to help me update my knowledge a bit.

My aim, when I've afforded the upgrade to V4, is to build a new machine which will run Hauptwerk in perpituity. My plan is to get the system running, and then run it "off network" with minimum OS/other applications installed - Hauptwerk would be its only function. This is definitely a long-term (c. 1 yr maybe, perhaps longer) project, so feel free to mention "future" hardware.

The way I see it - and no doubt some new, stunning technological advance will prove me wrong a week after it's built - if I can build a computer capable of running sets like the PAB with all loops, attacks, releases etc - then the system should be good for whatever sets are released subsequently, since there are relatively few 100-stop instruments and a reasonably small chance of their being recorded for Hauptwerk.

I have various old hardware available in the way of graphics cards, sound cards (1010LT) and can construct systems from scratch quite happily - but I've lost track of the best mainboards, processors and memory available, and could do with some pointers. The PAB extended edition supposedly requires 8 cores and 32Gb RAM to run at its best - but what kind of processor/RAM?

Can anyone help?

For various reasons (not worth the old argument), this would need to be a PC system, not a Mac. I also run the Zwolle and PSZ sets, though I'm assuming they require fewer resources as my current system doesn't complain nearly as much as when I run the PAB.

With thanks in advance for any help you can offer,

Adam.

I'm hoping someone can help me out with some general pointers on building a new machine for use with Hauptwerk. I work in IT, but I've spent the last five years programming (essentially) and am very rusty when it comes to spotting / identifying good hardware. I'm hoping that some of you may be able to help me update my knowledge a bit.

My aim, when I've afforded the upgrade to V4, is to build a new machine which will run Hauptwerk in perpituity. My plan is to get the system running, and then run it "off network" with minimum OS/other applications installed - Hauptwerk would be its only function. This is definitely a long-term (c. 1 yr maybe, perhaps longer) project, so feel free to mention "future" hardware.

The way I see it - and no doubt some new, stunning technological advance will prove me wrong a week after it's built - if I can build a computer capable of running sets like the PAB with all loops, attacks, releases etc - then the system should be good for whatever sets are released subsequently, since there are relatively few 100-stop instruments and a reasonably small chance of their being recorded for Hauptwerk.

I have various old hardware available in the way of graphics cards, sound cards (1010LT) and can construct systems from scratch quite happily - but I've lost track of the best mainboards, processors and memory available, and could do with some pointers. The PAB extended edition supposedly requires 8 cores and 32Gb RAM to run at its best - but what kind of processor/RAM?

Can anyone help?

For various reasons (not worth the old argument), this would need to be a PC system, not a Mac. I also run the Zwolle and PSZ sets, though I'm assuming they require fewer resources as my current system doesn't complain nearly as much as when I run the PAB.

With thanks in advance for any help you can offer,

Adam.

Hi Adam.

I suggest that you take a look at http://www.overclockers.co.uk
You probably don't want to indulge in overclocking, but these guys test systems for reliability and speed when they are overclocked, so when you buy for normal use, you can rely on their suggestions.

Regards,

Alan.

Hi,

I think a Dual XEON 55xx and 96GB or RAM is just right for you.

Pax,

Thomas

Particularly if you're not in a hurry, you might wish to take a look at the following release schedule for processors that flesh out the Sandy Bridge offerings, especially for server grade processors (none available until December with the Sandy Bridge architecture). New processors are coming out November 14, December and March '13.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_future_Intel_microprocessors

Note that these utilize a new socket (of course).

This probably also indicates a release date of December for the revised Mac Pro.

[mdyde]

Hello Adam,

The way I see it - and no doubt some new, stunning technological advance will prove me wrong a week after it's built - if I can build a computer capable of running sets like the PAB with all loops, attacks, releases etc - then the system should be good for whatever sets are released subsequently, since there are relatively few 100-stop instruments and a reasonably small chance of their being recorded for Hauptwerk.

I think it would be unrealistic to assume that any computer would be future-proof indefinitely. Although the PAB is probably the most CPU-intensive sample set currently, as more computer power becomes available in future years there's little doubt that Hauptwerk and sample sets will take advantage of it to give greater realism, even if larger-specification organs aren't needed. Technology never stands still.

Also the lifespan of computer hardware is often not much more than about five years, so it's probably better to plan on building a system aimed at the next 3-5 years, then plan on replacing it with a new one.

I think it would be unrealistic to assume that any computer would be future-proof indefinitely. Although the PAB is probably the most CPU-intensive sample set currently, as more computer power becomes available in future years there's little doubt that Hauptwerk and sample sets will take advantage of it to give greater realism, even if larger-specification organs aren't needed. Technology never stands still.

Also the lifespan of computer hardware is often not much more than about five years, so it's probably better to plan on building a system aimed at the next 3-5 years, then plan on replacing it with a new one.

I quite agree. I suppose that I'm at a stage in life where things are going to take off in different directions in the next year or two - I'm recently married and my wife and I hope to be able to scrape together the money for a house in the next couple of years - so the next 12 months or so may be the last opportunity I get to buy a new machine for some time. Because of that, I want to get something which will perform very well for the sets I've got - I'm quite resigned to the idea that "this might be as good as it gets" for quite a long while in the sense that I won't be able to keep up - financially - with the advances in technology. Though my current machine runs the PAB on it's minimum settings, and just about keeps up with the long release tails of Zwolle, it would be nice to be able to run them well and set that as my benchmark - even if that's as good as it gets for the next 5-10 years or more. The quality and performance of Hauptwerk and the few sets I own is more than good enough for me now and whilst I want to be able to continue to enjoy the benefits of future versions of Hauptwerk and sample sets, if you said you were shutting it all down and retiring to Barbados tomorrow, I'd congratulate you on the vast quantity of happiness you've brought to me and so many others, and be very happy with the setup I've achieved to date.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm looking to spend what's necessary now or in the next year or so, and then try to make it last the 3-5 years you describe.

Particularly if you're not in a hurry, you might wish to take a look at the following release schedule for processors that flesh out the Sandy Bridge offerings, especially for server grade processors (none available until December with the Sandy Bridge architecture). New processors are coming out November 14, December and March '13.

Thank you for this - I really struggle to follow Intel "numbers" now. I remember the good old days when it was a questions of type and clock speed, bu alas, no more. Are you or anyone else able to set out a rough heirarchy of what's fast/new and what's slow/old so that I could have an idea of which categories / sockets / types of chips I should be looking for? I've previously used AMD chips, but everything I read suggests they're falling behind, so I want to go for Intel this time.

I suggest that you take a look at http://www.overclockers.co.uk
You probably don't want to indulge in overclocking, but these guys test systems for reliability and speed when they are overclocked, so when you buy for normal use, you can rely on their suggestions.

Thank you for this - I'll send them an email and see what advice they can offer. They seem to focus on gaming systems, as you'd expect, so I expect a Hauptwerk machine would be a bit of a custom build for them. If they come up with anything helpful, I'll post it here for others in my position to read.

Thank you all for your help and suggestions - any further advice / suggestions will certainly be appreciated. It's hard building a picture of the hardward market after so long a break with it!

Adam.

[mdyde]

Hello Adam,

Are you or anyone else able to set out a rough heirarchy of what's fast/new and what's slow/old so that I could have an idea of which categories / sockets / types of chips I should be looking for?

Generally speaking, the current and best-performing Intel CPU generation is called 'Sandy Bridge', so that's probably the one to go for:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge

For maximum Hauptwerk performance on Intel CPUs: the more physical cores the better (the most important factor), the more recent the CPU architecture (e.g. Sandy Bridge) the better, the higher the clock speed the better, and the greater the amount of CPU cache the better. HyperThreading should also be beneficial to Hauptwerk v4 to a fairly small extent.

For single-CPU computers the Sandy Bridge (='2nd generation') i7s should be very good:

http://www.intel.com/en_UK/products/processor/index.htm
http://www.intel.com/en_UK/consumer/products/processors/compare-processors.htm?select=desktop

For dual-processor ('workstation') systems the picture is a little more complicated because, as I understand it, Intel has delayed launch of the Xeon E5 (=Sandy Bridge architecture) workstation CPUs until early 2012:

http://www.macrumors.com/2011/10/28/apples-processor-options-for-early-2012-mac-pro-begin-to-firm-up/

Hence currently the only option for dual-processor CPUs is the previous-generation Xeon 5000-series. They should still give extremely high performance and allow dual-processor computers to have up to 12 physical cores in total, but personally I'm waiting for the release of the E5s (which will allow up to 16 cores) before upgrading my main computer (Mac Pro).

Martin,

Thank you for that synopsis - it was extremely useful and much appreciated. I will base my research on the chips you describe and those released early next year.

From a Hauptwerk perspective, if I've understood this correctly, you would probably (I realise we can't know until they're released) rate the older chips with 6 cores, over the newer ones with 4 cores? I expect that an older 6-core chip might well be cheaper than the newer quad-core chip - particularly where Xeons are concerned form the prices I'm seeing.

Just to clarify, would you expect the difference in extra cores to exceed the improvement of the better and newer architecture / power consumption / cache / higher clock speeds, so that for a given amount of money, an older processer with more cores might perform as well or better than a newer processor with fewer? Or is the difference not so clear-cut? Since theres no prospect of buying anything this year, I can afford to wait, but it would be useful to hear your opinion on whether the number of cores factor is only 1.2 times as significant as - say - clock speed, or whether its five, ten times as significant?

Many thanks for your advice - it is very valuable.

Regards,

Adam.

I suggest that you take a look at http://www.overclockers.co.uk
You probably don't want to indulge in overclocking, but these guys test systems for reliability and speed when they are overclocked, so when you buy for normal use, you can rely on their suggestions.

Thank you for this - I'll send them an email and see what advice they can offer. They seem to focus on gaming systems, as you'd expect, so I expect a Hauptwerk machine would be a bit of a custom build for them. If they come up with anything helpful, I'll post it here for others in my position to read.

Thank you all for your help and suggestions - any further advice / suggestions will certainly be appreciated. It's hard building a picture of the hardware market after so long a break with it!

Adam.

Hi Adam.

I was not suggesting that you have Overclockers build a PC for you. If you want that, you could try http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk
Overclockers sell tried and tested products and will usually tell you what will work well with what.

I concur with Martin, Sandybridge is the way to go. The Intel i7 will have the speed marked after its type number.
It's not just the processor speed you should be concerned with. It's also essential to use low latency memory at the maximum speed your motherboard/processor combination can handle.
I personally prefer Asus motherboards and have also had much success with SSDs. Another pitfall is processor fans and PSU fans. You need to choose carefully to avoid a noisy machine. We recently built 2 PCs for customers and they are sooooo quiet and very fast with no glitches.
Also, be aware that as you are most likely to use Windows 7 64 bit, there are limitations in some versions and for full use of memory over 16Gb, you'll need Windows 7 Ultimate.

Regards,

Alan.

[mdyde]

Hello Adam,

From a Hauptwerk perspective, if I've understood this correctly, you would probably (I realise we can't know until they're released) rate the older chips with 6 cores, over the newer ones with 4 cores? I expect that an older 6-core chip might well be cheaper than the newer quad-core chip - particularly where Xeons are concerned form the prices I'm seeing.

Just to clarify, would you expect the difference in extra cores to exceed the improvement of the better and newer architecture / power consumption / cache / higher clock speeds, so that for a given amount of money, an older processer with more cores might perform as well or better than a newer processor with fewer? Or is the difference not so clear-cut? Since theres no prospect of buying anything this year, I can afford to wait, but it would be useful to hear your opinion on whether the number of cores factor is only 1.2 times as significant as - say - clock speed, or whether its five, ten times as significant?

It's impossible to give accurate guidelines without actually benchmarking systems built with each candidate combination of CPU and motherboard, but with all other factors kept constant, I would guess that the following might be very, very rough rules of thumb:

- Successive new CPU architectures often give about 10-20% better performance than their equivalent previous models.
- Performance scales nearly linearly with clock speed (e.g. a 3 GHz CPU is likely to give almost 1.5 times the polyphony of an otherwise-identical 2 GHz CPU).
- Performance scales a bit less than linearly with numbers of physical CPU cores because there are additional overheads and bottlenecks involved in synchronising the cores and sharing data between them. E.g. a very rough estimate might be that an 8-core computer might give 1.7 times the polyphony of an otherwise-equivalent 4-core computer. We know Hauptwerk scales well up to 8 physical cores, and more almost certainly won't hurt, although we haven't yet optimised for more than 8 cores, so I can't say exactly how much benefit additional cores would bring beyond 8.
- You really want at least 1 MB of CPU cache per physical core, but more (e.g. 1.5 MB or 2 MB) will certainly be beneficial and desirable. Exactly how much I can't say, but I would guess the additional cache might give a performance benefit in the region of 10-20% over an otherwise-identical CPU.
- From customer feedback, I think you might expect a 5-15% polyphony gain by having HyperThreading, although its main benefit might be that it allows other operating system/background tasks to run concurrently with Hauptwerk more easily (since non-Hauptwerk applications are likely to use different parts of the CPU and thus lend themselves to running via HyperThreading simultaneously with Hauptwerk (which most heavily uses the CPU's SSE/SIMD floating point units for its audio engine) quite efficiently, potentially benefiting Hauptwerk indirectly by reducing risks of audio glitches, latency, etc.).
- Power consumption has no effect on performance - only on your electricity bill and the environment!

Hope that helps to some degree.

Martin,

Again, that's extremely helpful. I will continue my research into components based on those numbers (I recognise they're rough approximations) etc and try to come up with a draft specification over the next month or so.

I realise this has probably been covered elsewhere - indeed, I saw the AMD processors thread in this forum - but do you have any system vs polyphony benchmarks publically available, or know of anywhere they can be found?

Many thanks for your continued assistance - I will try to stop being a burden on your time and make this the last post for now.

Adam.

[mdyde]

Hello Adam,

I don't have any AMD CPUs here. Here are some forum topics on the subject:

http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=7601
http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=8960&p=64923
http://forum.hauptwerk.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=9424

In general, I think it's fair to say that the current higher-end Intel CPUs are likely to significantly outperform the current higher-end AMD CPUs, although of course cost is also potentially a factor.

Martin,

Sorry on two counts - firstly for saying I wouldn't post again, and posting/taking up your time, and secondly, for not being clear. I had meant that I had seen the AMD benchmarks, but given I'm after an Intel system, I wondered whether you had any available for Intel processors? I'm sorry that I didn't word the request in a helpful way.

Thank you again,

Adam.

[mdyde]

Hello Adam,

I don't think I have any particularly meaningful Hauptwerk performance benchmarks comparing the various current Intel CPU models readily available, I'm afraid (probably the only way we could give accurate performance figures would be to buy and test all of them, which unfortunately isn't something we have the resources to do).

However, Tom's Hardware often has lots of useful CPU benchmarks:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/review/Components,1/CPU,1/

Highly threaded, floating-point and integer arithmetic benchmarks (especially floating-point) are probably the most relevant for Hauptwerk, e.g. PhotoShop plug-ins and WinRAR compression.

Inspired Acoustics started a PC performance database for Hauptwerk users to contribute to in 2009, but only four people seem to have contributed to it so far, and it hasn't been updated since 2009, so it's a bit out-of-date now:

http://www.inspiredacoustics.com/wiki/index.php/Hardware_configuration

Martin,

Thank you again for your help - it is appreciated. I will take a look at the sites you suggested.

Adam.