Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Laptop or Desktop?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Laptop or Desktop? - Page 2

post #16 of 92

valid point, but when has fan noise ever effect your music listening pleasures. Maybe if he was using gpu/cpu extensive programs, then that fan is going to be so loud hence degrade music time.

 

 

Edit: This is assuming that no one listens to music at a whispering level


Edited by smallmany - 3/14/14 at 2:33pm
post #17 of 92
Thread Starter 

Good points, all of you. But,

 

1. I need the extra RAM to make sure the player works with the music files in the RAM domain and does not need to access the HDD and therefore create noise. My files tend to be quite heavy at red book and 24-96, but I plan to get and also up-sample at 192K and their size will be increasing exponentially.

 

2. I cannot get around the idea of spending over $600 just in SSD's. There are other opportunity costs out there.

 

3. I've worked with my laptop so far without issues, but I'm guessing better SQ would be available with less fan noises (plus maybe some jitter getting in there).

 

4. I don't need portability for a dedicated music source and yes, my current DAC works fine over a 2.0 USB connection. I'm upgrading the DAC soon, though.

 

5. I need enough L3 cache to accelerate the I/O and protocol interactions stemming from real-time player operation (to avoid latency issues).

 

6. Let's just say 4 Gb RAM is barely enough, and lets assume a dual core Intel at just over 2.0 Ghz is enough processing power. I'm still missing on the L3 cache in this case.

 

7. Then there's the cost issue. Like someone pointed out, its significantly cheaper to go with a desktop other things being equal, which is the cost of portability and convenience.

 

What to get, then?.


Edited by Musica Amantem - 3/14/14 at 4:04pm
post #18 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by elmoe View Post
 

He won't need a soundcard if he has a USB DAC.

His point was a desktop you always have the option to upgrade down the road if you see fit. With a laptop you are stuck with the hardware you order. What happens when he gets a new DAC that doesnt have USB but optical only? SOL unless he has a desktop that he can swap cards in.

post #19 of 92
Thread Starter 

Ok, sound wise, which is better in equivalent conditions? If both produce essentially the same result, I can certainly use other criteria, but I need to make sure and take advantage of my imminent laptop replacement opportunity not to make a mistake. Thanks for the help.

post #20 of 92

Laptop...:popcorn: 

post #21 of 92
Thread Starter 

Ok, why?

post #22 of 92

Desktop. They are expandable, cheaper to build, if hardware goes bad easier to fix. Literally the only thing a laptop offers that a desktop does not is portability. If you need to move it laptop, otherwise desktop.

post #23 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by smallmany View Post
 

valid point, but when has fan noise ever effect your music listening pleasures. Maybe if he was using gpu/cpu extensive programs, then that fan is going to be so loud hence degrade music time.

 

 

Edit: This is assuming that no one listens to music at a whispering level

 

Fan noise is the #1 issue to deal with when building a computer based system... It raises noise floor and jitter big time and if you own a proper DAC it needs to be adressed.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musica Amantem View Post
 

Good points, all of you. But,

 

1. I need the extra RAM to make sure the player works with the music files in the RAM domain and does not need to access the HDD and therefore create noise. My files tend to be quite heavy at red book and 24-96, but I plan to get and also up-sample at 192K and their size will be increasing exponentially.

 

2. I cannot get around the idea of spending over $600 just in SSD's. There are other opportunity costs out there.

 

3. I've worked with my laptop so far without issues, but I'm guessing better SQ would be available with less fan noises (plus maybe some jitter getting in there).

 

4. I don't need portability for a dedicated music source and yes, my current DAC works fine over a 2.0 USB connection. I'm upgrading the DAC soon, though.

 

5. I need enough L3 cache to accelerate the I/O and protocol interactions stemming from real-time player operation (to avoid latency issues).

 

6. Let's just say 4 Gb RAM is barely enough, and lets assume a dual core Intel at just over 2.0 Ghz is enough processing power. I'm still missing on the L3 cache in this case.

 

7. Then there's the cost issue. Like someone pointed out, its significantly cheaper to go with a desktop other things being equal, which is the cost of portability and convenience.

 

What to get, then?.

 

1. You don't need that much RAM. Everytime you open a new file the HDD will need to be accessed and 2GB is plenty enough for a single FLAC file even at 24/192.

 

2. You're right, with how big your collection is (mine is even bigger so I get it), it's a waste of money.

 

3. Yep.

 

4. I doubt you'll be upgrading to a DAC without USB? Unless you go for something that's obsolete, which isn't the best idea.

 

5. Latency issue for music playback is inexistent, you don't really need a big L3 cache to avoid latency, especially if you're running a small XP installation and limited services/processes.

 

6. See above.

 

7. I don't know about convenience. Like I said if you own a smartphone, you use that as a remote control for foobar or other music players and it becomes a lot more convenient than having to walk around your house with your laptop or tablet.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by whitedragon551 View Post
 

His point was a desktop you always have the option to upgrade down the road if you see fit. With a laptop you are stuck with the hardware you order. What happens when he gets a new DAC that doesnt have USB but optical only? SOL unless he has a desktop that he can swap cards in.

 

Nobody buys a DAC with no USB input these days. And if he happens to, then he can buy a USB/SPDIF converter for ~100usd and still use his old computer just fine.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Musica Amantem View Post
 

Ok, sound wise, which is better in equivalent conditions? If both produce essentially the same result, I can certainly use other criteria, but I need to make sure and take advantage of my imminent laptop replacement opportunity not to make a mistake. Thanks for the help.

 

Once again, a desktop is cheaper to build and you have the option to eliminate fan noise, so for a music based server for your home where portability isn't an issue, a desktop is by far the better choice.

post #24 of 92

Quit recommending XP. Its been obsolete for years and in 3 weeks is no longer supported. If its going to have a network connection absolute bare minimum is Windows 7.

post #25 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitedragon551 View Post
 

Quit recommending XP. Its been obsolete for years and in 3 weeks is no longer supported. If its going to have a network connection absolute bare minimum is Windows 7.

 

XP is much more light weight and less resource demanding than win7, not to mention much more stable for server use. It uses less RAM and less CPU and for what he needs to do it is the best windows to use, it enables him to build a much cheaper machine without using an OS that requires more resources, thus cutting cost on RAM and CPU/motherboard. Why would the bare minimum be win7 for a network connection? XP works just fine for that. This isn't a gaming rig or even a media center, all he wants is music playback.

post #26 of 92
Thread Starter 

Great answers, thanks! I think I'm going with a desktop, after all.

 

Now, can I ask if an AMD APU A4-4000 3.0GHz Double Core /Vision Technology would suffice as a processor? I know these are warmer (larger) than Intel's and I also know Intel is better at computing but this last issue is irrelevant in this case. Can the AMD handle Win 7 at 64 bit without issues?

 

This would be convenient as I'm able to buy a STD setup that will accommodate everything else. Thanks!

post #27 of 92

Yeah that will work just fine for what you want to do.

post #28 of 92

>>>4. I doubt you'll be upgrading to a DAC without USB? Unless you go for something that's obsolete, which isn't the best idea.

 

Elmoe, the above is wild assumption. Legacy DAC is certainly not obsolete and not always a bad idea. My DAC doesn't have USB input too and it kicks all the USB dac I've heard including one I have. But its more like system synergy. Sorry fr the OOT but I feel that I need to chime in on your comment above

post #29 of 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by forbigger View Post
 

>>>4. I doubt you'll be upgrading to a DAC without USB? Unless you go for something that's obsolete, which isn't the best idea.

 

Elmoe, the above is wild assumption. Legacy DAC is certainly not obsolete and not always a bad idea. My DAC doesn't have USB input too and it kicks all the USB dac I've heard including one I have. But its more like system synergy. Sorry fr the OOT but I feel that I need to chime in on your comment above

 

Maybe so but you own a USB/SPDIF converter exactly because your non USB DAC is obsolete with your Computer based system. I don't mean obsolete in the SQ sense but in the practical sense, if you didn't agree why would you bother with a converter in the first place? USB capability allows for greatly reduced jitter, so yes, a DAC without USB in 2014 where we have developed rather cheap alternatives to soundcards for digital signal transport is absolutely obsolete.

post #30 of 92
Thread Starter 

Thanks again. BTW, I'm upgrading to an EMO Pro Stealth DC-1 DAC (after a lot of research and Dedicated Sources forum inquiries), which is a USB DAC as is my current one.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › Laptop or Desktop?