On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Jeremy Jongepier <jeremy(a)autostatic.com>wrote;wrote:
A 'case' like Kevin Cosgrove mentions in another mail. And air flow (had to
read that a couple of times, 'ear flow'? What's 'ear flow'? ;) ),
don't
forget about that no.
Hehe ear flow, should be air flow, right :) ha ha
On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)gmail.com> wrote:
You don't mention if you're comfortable buying components and building
the machine yourself.
That's one of the options, to build it myself. Looks like it is going that
way...
While you do ask about processor cores, and basically it's 'the more
the better' under Linux, understanding more about your music interests
might help. If you're recording acoustic music and see yourself adding
a bit of reverb, a touch of compression, that's one thing. If you see
yourself doing 64-track techno full of synths and lots of plugins
running live all at the same time well then that's probably another
thing entirely in terms of sucking up CPU power.
My recordings are not very heavy, but I also want to use my system for other
work, like packaging and working with debian live-helper and making some
custom Debian live cd's.
That would be hard to do for 500 euro I think. (I'm in California so I
have no idea how or where you purchase in your part of Europe)
Yeah, good chance it's gonna be more...
Anyway, I'm a fan of Asus MBs, either Intel or AMD processors. I used
to work for AMD but frankly right now it's pretty hard to beat Intel's
Core i5 & i7 offerings. I've got an i5-661, i7-920 and an i7-980x.
They are all quite nice at different price points and the i5 is very
energy efficient.
Thanks for the info. After some reading and discussion, the i3 or i5 seems
to be good options indeed.
After reading this:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2901/7 and considering my
budget
It looks like I better go for a i3 540 or something close to that, compared
to a i5...
Regards,
\r