[auee]

Would a PC with a

Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor 8200 (2.33GHz | 4MB L2 cache | 1333MHz) and 4096MB DDR3 Memory, four modules

as opposed to one with

Intel® Pentium® Dual-Core Processor E2220 (Operates at 2.40 GHz | 1MB L2 cache | 800 MHz FSB) and 4096MB DDR2 Memory (2 x 2048MB)

be materially better for music playback and CD ripping and encoding? Is the better of the two sufficient for my purposes?

Thank you gentleman and ladies.

 

[craiglester]

Either one would be more than enough.. Quad core isn't really going to affect music playback a great deal. I'd use whatever is quieter. Spend the money saved on a better soundcard.

 

[auee]

Thanks. I will be using external DAC, so doesn't this make the sound card irrelevant?

 

[FallenAngel]

Both are grossly over-spec'd for music all of those unless it really matters to you whether you encode a song to FLAC in 10 vs 20 seconds.

As for using sound card with DAC, that only depends on the how you want to connect the computer to the DAC.

 

[auee]

I have the option of connecting the computer to the DAC via USB and optical. Does the sound card matter in either or both circumstances and how so?

 

[AudioPhewl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by auee /img/forum/go_quote.gif Would a PC with a Intel® Core™2 Quad Processor 8200 (2.33GHz | 4MB L2 cache | 1333MHz) and 4096MB DDR3 Memory, four modules as opposed to one with Intel® Pentium® Dual-Core Processor E2220 (Operates at 2.40 GHz | 1MB L2 cache | 800 MHz FSB) and 4096MB DDR2 Memory (2 x 2048MB) be materially better for music playback and CD ripping and encoding? Is the better of the two sufficient for my purposes? Thank you gentleman and ladies.

I'm using a 2.8Ghz Celeron, and noticed little difference when I moved from an AMD XP1700+. You could drop down to 800mhz and play music perfectly well whilst doing email and whatnot.

For CD ripping, the quad-core would let you encode 4 songs at a time, and would be quicker than the dual-core. If you go for the dual core, I'd recommend looking at the E5200 over the 2200 - it's a generation later, so has a higher clockspeed, double the cache, runs at a lower voltage, and runs cooler. It's also likely to overclock further if you're into such things.

2200 = ~£51
5200 = ~£56

It's worth 10% more IMO. I'm quite out of date with these things, but the basics remain the same...

~Phewl.

 

[Aleatoris]

for reference, my momma's 800Mhz Opteron (or something along those lines, I forget) can playback music without a hitch.

 

[euphoracle]

For reference, my Pentium 233MHz can play back music without a hitch.

edit: it's such a beast.

 

[craiglester]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AudioPhewl /img/forum/go_quote.gif For CD ripping, the quad-core would let you encode 4 songs at a time, and would be quicker than the dual-core. ~Phewl.

If you have a quad core aware encoder.. dBpoweramp has one for most formats..

iTunes is single threaded for example.

 

[ljokerl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by auee /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have the option of connecting the computer to the DAC via USB and optical. Does the sound card matter in either or both circumstances and how so?

The soundcard will not matter in either circumstance. You are transferring a digital signal to your DAC.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AudioPhewl /img/forum/go_quote.gif For CD ripping, the quad-core would let you encode 4 songs at a time, and would be quicker than the dual-core.

Is it even possible to get more than two cores active during ripping? I have a dual core. I don't believe I have ever had the encoding be a bottleneck during ripping. The slow part is reading from the CD, and that is the same speed whether you have a dual core or quad core.

A quad core vs. dual core would make a difference if doing a bulk transcoding operation and you are using a transcoder app that is multi-threaded (can use more than one core).

A more important consideration is finding a main board and peripherals (especially the network card/chip) that behave well for audio playback. Make sure there is nothing that is known to cause high latency and audio glitches. If you are going to use a USB DAC make sure the USB is known to behave well. For that I'd look around on a pro audio recording forum for PC specs that are known to behave well.

 

[AudioPhewl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ham Sandwich /img/forum/go_quote.gif Is it even possible to get more than two cores active during ripping? I have a dual core. I don't believe I have ever had the encoding be a bottleneck during ripping. The slow part is reading from the CD, and that is the same speed whether you have a dual core or quad core. A quad core vs. dual core would make a difference if doing a bulk transcoding operation and you are using a transcoder app that is multi-threaded (can use more than one core).

As you say, if it's threaded, then yes. Otherwise you'd need to run two instances to utilize both cores.

I don't have to worry about such things, as both my machines are single-core Celerons. It's a few years since I had a dual-processor rig...

~Phewl.