Thunder k8W or Tiger K8W

RA · Post by RA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:22 am

Hi Guys,

i was looking around for a good upgrade for my system.
After browsing a lot I decided for the Tiger K8W, but since i ws still
looking for the best bargain, I ran upon a thunder k8W with memory
which matched my budget.

But now for you professionals....what's the best choice then. I have Pulsar 1 and a Scope card. I'd like to keep them both running...so would the thunder's
PCI-X also run the PCI boards....?

Or other issues here?

Thanks in advance for reaction,
Cheers,
Ray

RA · Post by RA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:00 am

Of course i did some more research meanwhile.....

And CW manuals state that the Scope Card would be
PCI rev2.2 compliant.....

What does this mean? Does it mean this:
-PCI rev2.2 compliant
-32 bit 33/66Mhz PCI adapter for both 3.3V and 5V environments
?????

Cause that would mean that a scope card could run on a
downclocked PCIX at 3.3V.

Any experiences or anything?...

Tnx Ray

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 10:47 am

no, you can't run the scope card @ 3.3v signalling.

why do you want to run an expensive server board when there are so many high quality boards that work perfectly and are reasonably cheap?

a core2 processor and an intel d965ry or d965lt are inexpensive and work flawlessly.......

RA · Post by RA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:06 am

Of course a few reasons.
1st: I stepped away from Intel some years ago, and I like it.
Friend of mine has intel P4, and had CPU-lockups with 60-70%
load in cubase. Xpsp2 solved it, but i don't want sp2.
2nd: Performance...the opterons are good proc. And with
this Thunder there's also the issue of memmory and processor
updates in future. I can go up to 16 GB ram....it has 8 mem slots.....

But i'm not too lame to check the boards specs etc, which i will do now...

thanks, more reactions always appreciated.
Any more advices not to go opteron?

Thanks gary.
Regards,
Ray

RA · Post by RA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:14 am

Btw Gary another question

Also the wiki states that PCI rev2.2 is 3.3v compliant.
Did you/or anybody actually tried it, or did you get any reactions on this
from Creamware(which i doubt

) or somewhere documentated.

I know the creamware cards are tested to 37.5 mHz Pci, not that
i want to overclock

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 11:43 am

the 'cut' position in the PCI slot interface tells that it's a 5V signaling device, the FPGAs and the DSPs support both 5V and 3.3V levels (faik)
would you volunteer by cutting a 3.3V 'mark' into your Scope card and place it in the respective slot ?

the DSPs have their own crystal, so there's few to overclock...

cheers, Tom

RA · Post by RA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:04 pm

Hi Astro,

Now there's a big point, didn't think of that....

Found this which got me questioning....page7:

http://www.digi.com/pdf/prd_msc_pcitech.pdf

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:14 pm

core2 w/ a d865ry or lt will perform perfectly and plenty well. it will be cheaper than the amd solution and i can assure you will do every bit as much work, to hell with specs that don't reflect real world needs.

sp2 works great, only those with a pirated os or software need fear it. core2 is light years better than the p4s anyway and the computers i have built with p4s are "everyday it works" machines, dependable enough for live use.....i have never built an amd machine that is as stable as the all intel machines i've made(for audio apps anyway), although plenty have had flawless results from amd.

RA · Post by RA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 4:57 pm

I hear you Gary.

But i've been around somewhile too, and have a ROCK-SOLID
AMD ATHLON running here which never let me down...had some
issues with a larger hdd, but it actually was a new battery that
solved that problem.....whatta you know.

I also do some other work with audio/photo/video. The work involves working
with hundreds of computers which are also used for audio/video and some
dedicated pc's....All Intel, all official software, and I've seen a lot of problems there too....

Too bad of your bad experiences, cause my own system, as said,
rock solid, has always done the job. And I'm sure there are other AMD
users here which succesfully ran their systems....

Ofcourse I checked your proposal MB, and working it would cost me more
than this thunder/tiger MB. Since I use some heavy plugs i could therefore benefit the good mem-bandwith, use multi-proc for my audiosoftw, and you
know CW likes a lot of memory. And I already have two opterons 250's.
Only things that holds me is this one PCI slot which would rule out pulsar1...

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 7:30 pm

no doubt amd is perfectly good. please don't misunderstand me. of course, for high-end audio cards, amd is not so good and the problem has never been the processor itself. the problem is alway a chipset one. currently, the best amd chipset, nforce4 is really not that great for audio. there have been numerous complaints inthe RME forums as well as here about that chipset, and of course, via's problems are legendary. many users have found that amd dual core processors don't always play nicely with scope cards(must be used single core).

all these things said, there are plenty of amd cpus and via chipsets with scope cards that really run well. i don't want you to think that they absolutely won't work.......

of course, a properly set up computer running an amd processor, in general, can and should be expected to be a very good performer. my only caveat is that the needs of all systems are not the same. a system that functions as a server or a gamer rig will not stress the same resources as a daw with a scope card. a poorly setup(or used and administered) intel machine or even a poorly treated *gasp* mac will be flaky for sure, so i don't think that brand name itself is the key.

one thing's for sure, i can almost build two computers with core2 and d865ry motherboards for the price of the tyan, your 2 opterons could buy them.(well, cpu and motherboards anyway..)

just chatting it up and exagerrating a little at the end, the two intel processors and motherboards would actually be about $140 more than the two opterons were worth.....

enough bashing about though, looking quickly at both, i'd say the tiger looks like the best(and only) choice. i would expect such a pricey motherboard to work very well indeeed.

RA · Post by RA » Sun Jan 07, 2007 5:59 am

Hi Gary,

Thanks again for your reaction, and I don't get you wrong....

And your feedback i appreciate a lot.

The thing is, I made a good bargain on the Opterons....
at 130,= a piece, and can buy a Thunder board with 3 Gig
reg mem for just 400 eur(total pack). Tiger is 250 without mem.....

So would the Tiger be the best choice then....I could buy just the memory
from that guy....Cause the THunder would cost me more or less the same as
the Tiger....

After this i'll stop nagging about it

BTW I really hate RME, that's really crap stuff. I know a lot of people run okay with it, but the studio I work at with more than one RME 2496(or what's it called) is popping random locks....and I'm sure it has to do with either the RME's or this Pentium4 MB, the USB or whatever.....No, still happy with my CW! Multiple cards only works for me with Scope.

Ray Out for now.

Edti: found this on steinberg opteron vs other setups.....
http://www.steinberg.de/fileadmin/redak ... h_Info.pdf

dawman · Post by **dawman** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 8:51 am

Please, by all means buy the Opterons, they are a good deal for the money. Let us know how they work w/ SFP. Your purchase will help keep the Intel Core 2 Duo chips @ an all time low price. I always welcome the purchasing of AMD CPU's, too bad they can't seem to get their chipset partners to run as good as Intels. But that is an all in one house approach that always works.

Post by **garyb** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 12:57 pm

yeah, that's an old pdf. no core2 benchmark there...

really, i hope you rig runs great! i'm sure it will.

RA · Post by RA » Sun Jan 07, 2007 1:11 pm

Hmmm, thought the dual pentium was kinda the same.
But it doesn't matter. Thanks GaryAstro for the advices.

I've decided for the Thunder cause i think it's a good deal.

I'll come back and let you know how it runs....I'm also not a
benchmarker, so that would just be real-life experience

Thanks guys,
Ray

Post by **garyb** » Sun Jan 07, 2007 6:06 pm

one pci slot. to save maybe $100...

do you even like your $2000 worth of sound cards? are you building a computer for running a studio or....?

sorry, i really don't understand. i'm sure you have a plan, i'm interested in how it turns out. i'm sure it'll be good regardless.

you know, those two opterons would buy the rig i suggested. since you can mix in scope, you should have plenty of cpu for vsts...

sorry for being so forward..

RA · Post by RA » Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:17 am

Hi Gary,

I can leave out Pulsar1....It's just Pulsar1.....So it's not
that BIG of an issue. And I use mixing too little of Scope.
Cause it's slow in handling(with a full mixer) And I don't
like the crap of multiple saving.....I have a great template which I can use
for stuff, and on and off I add small things in Scope.....

Too bad the XTC is absolutly f*cked up.....To run really good, without too much hassles about latency etc.....

Are you Intel-saleman....hehe....sorry for me being to forward....

Cheers Gary.....
And yes, i love my CW card.....

Post by **garyb** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:09 am

nope.

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:59 am

RA wrote:...It's just Pulsar1.....So it's not
that BIG of an issue ...

well, I've been surprised recently about the quality of NI's FM8 - but I've been fairly disappointed a couple of months back with their Guitar Rig (demo).
So I thought I might have been fooled by an outdated version, downloaded the latest GR2 and took an hour or two off trying it with a bass and a guitar.

To make it short, some usable 'sounds' but what a sh*t - whatever I dialed, it all had the very same basic soundprint, overbloated with few substance.
They 'emulate' a ton of different gear and all sounds identical. LOL.

it was a true relief to play the 2 instruments through the Pulsar 1 again (I have 3 of that kind, to keep it straight and simple)

Just a good eq, stock distortion, modultion fx and compressor, Echo 3 for the delays and the STW verbs for space.
I have a (extremely twangy) G+L Strat, and a fairly 'vintage' jazzy, warm, but also well 'driveable' 335 copy.

The Pulsar (software) kept the individuality of the instruments, while GR2 forced them under it's sound scheme, which may work great for (one special) FX-guitar in a dance track, but is far from bringing out what makes your axe your axe

but it's a bit outdated...

cheers, Tom