30 May
2012
30 May
'12
7:56 p.m.
found some benchmarks here:
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
atoms are way slower than the i series. i have 3 atom 330 boxes around
the house with fanless power supplies. i do love quiet, and they were
cheep, but they are about 4-5 times slower than my i5-2410M laptop when
doing gentoo updates. still, i can read 8 channels of audio 24/96 from
my 1010lt in ardour. i get reasonably small buffers for live stereo
csound processing too. but no heavy lifting.
k.
On 05/30/12 12:58, Robin Gareus wrote:
On 05/30/2012 06:21 PM, Sciss wrote:
[..]
thanks for the link and the info. so you think
atom processors are
fine enough? the latency actually doesn't matter in my case. i'm more
worried that i'm going to through a lot of CPU heavy stuff on it, as
this will run experimental software I wrote myself (and I won't have
any time for performance tuning of the software itself).
Really hard to tell. esp.
for audio applications. I also have no clue
how efficient supercollider is..
Are you using supernova to make use of multiple cores?
As rule of thumb: Atom CPUs processing power is comparable to that of an
i3 of the same clock-freq. But most Atom chipsets lack some CPU features
- e.g virtualization support. Yet Atom != Atom and i3 != i3 ; it really
depends on the model. I suppose the only way to tell is to try..
What I really like about Atom CPUs for audio is that they can run fan-less.
best,
robin
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user