Seems I could get maybe 7% better Cubase performance on a new Windows 11 i9 11900 machine? UserBenchmark: Intel Core i7-7700K vs i9-11900īased on 638,084 user benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-7700K and the Core i9-11900, we rank them both on effective speed and value for money against the best 1,369 CPUs. I want to open these same projects on a more performant system. Especially now all my Waves plugins and Spectrasonics instruments are cross-platform and M1-native.Ĭubase big projects seem to grind to a halt on my Windows PC, even with RAM and CPU to spare, lots of freezing and unloading channels, and a low latency audio interface (RME) with a max buffer. I have an M1 Mac Mini with 16Gb RAM that I would love to compare with my Windows i7 7700K 4.2Ghz (overclocked to 4.5ghz) with 64Gb RAM if Cubase was M1-native. That cycle was broken last year due to the new license management system.
Cubase 11 release date update#
If Steinberg releases apple-silicon-native Cubase, the equation changes, because the performance of the new Mac CPUs is so much higher, and Intel and AMD can’t compete? Cubase 12’s one year anniversary is coming up in 2 weeks, so I’m wondering: Cubase updates were like clockwork in the past few years, with a new update coming in mid November once every year (before that it was in December). (Apple makes the best laptops, most agree, but i’m just talking about desktop here for a minute.) Right now self-built Windows PC is my primary desktop platform because performance vs cost is better. With one licence, I run Mac (laptop) and Windows (desktop) versions, and move projects between them. One of Cubase’s biggest competitive advantages is being cross-platform. Obviously.īut wouldn’t be cool if Cubase, as one of the major Mac DAWs already, could keep up with last year’s technology advances on the Mac platform?Īnd wouldn’t it be extra-cool if it was a free half-point update, like most of the major developers on that platform have done? Agreed, PC users don’t need apple-silicon-native Cubase.
0 kommentar(er)
