From the research I have been doing, talking to DAW builders, etc., it seems Xeon is not the best option for DAW. I was all set to move to a dual v4 xeon systems, and that appears not to be the best performance. Realtime performance seems to be more important than overall CPU muscle. Cant OC the xeon rig like an i7 system

As a result, I am building my systems with the new Broadwell E i7 6950x (10core), SSD's and 128GB ram on the new Asus X99-Deluxe II boards. Two of these systems will provide better performance than even a dual xeon, for about the same money. I have all the parts coming for the first one this week, so i will be able to comment more accurately in a week or so.

I do not run MIR, so maybe that makes a difference? Does MIR need healthy realtime power over overall CPU muscle, or is eveything you are doing VST and you can manage realtime performance with a larger buffer setting?

For my workflow, I would challenge the idea regarding Master computer not needing as much power as a VL slave...at least for my setup. I use Waves Mercury plugins on my main DAW, and they need plenty of realtime CPU power. My workflow is much more about layering, than a full mockup that I want to playback though MIR all together and tracking analog output alone on my main DAW.. So, the right answer probably has more to do with your workflow.

I also found it really helpful to spend a fair amount of time using LatencyMon and some CPU Affinity parameters on my old system. Removing the CPU sucking drivers and unneeded bloat went a long way toward doubling the realtime performance on my old i7 3930x rig...which will now be added to my VL slave farm.

Anyway, congrats on the project and the ability to reinvest in your future rig.

Very interesting William.

I am a novice at this still so forgive my continuous questions.

One more coming though!

Do all my slaves Machines have to have MIR installed on them? So like, is MIR going to be installed along with the VEP 5 on EACH Slave Machine?

Thank you in advance

Synetos,
Very Interesting point.

However allow me to give you my 2 cents. I will absolutely agree on the "kind of workflow you do" part. However, if what your point is true (that Xeon are actually worse than Broadwel E chips) it'd be nonsensical that all the big names and big professional rigs use all Xeon processors, both Macs and Windows PCs Workstation and Server class. For instance, I know for a fact that at Remote Control (Hans Zimmer company) The servers they use are all stacks of dual Xeons computers connected by fiber optics. They main machines, I am not sure, but if you have ALL your libraries on slaves, then your main computer needs simply the power to run your DAW and the features thereon, which are not demanding tasks at all, in you think about.

You see I work pretty much doing only mock-ups and scoring composition. I don't do tracking, I don't do live recording, except when I have a live instrumentalist in the studio and we capture some of it's ideas for the score, but then we go to the recording stage and record him properly. So My rig is ALL about mock-up, and for the size of my template (about 1200 tracks, not including the 5.1 and FX tracks) it's all about those 2 more cores and 4 more threads, because large templates are more multi-task demanding than high speed.

That's why I put the Broadwell-EP 12-Cores 3.0Ghz (which by the way is the same base clock speed of the Broadwell-E 10-Cores) in the main machine. I was quite confident that 3.0Ghz is fast enough for running Cubase 8.5 Pro and the synths I'm going to need to run from the main machine.

But maybe not, maybe I am indeed mistaken and I am totally open to be proved wrong on this. So I welcome any additional comment and reasoning, after all I don't want to drop stacks on a system that is not what I payed for, if you catch my groove.

Let me know your thoughts on this.

peace.

****UPDATE****

I made some big changes to the rig that I'd like to submit here. Let me know.


Master Computer (OS + DAW + Synths)

- Intel Xeon E5-2687W V4 3.0Ghz 12-Cores
- ASRock X99 WS-E
- 64GB ECC-Registered DDR4 2133Mhz
- Samsung 850 Pro 1TB SSD (OS Drive)
- 4x Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD (Synth Library Drive)
- Windows 8.1 Pro (Maybe Windows 10 Pro?)

x6 SLAVEs  Computers

- 2x Intel Xeon E5-2650 V4 2.2Ghz 12-Cores
- Asus Z10PE-D16 WS Dual CPU
- 128GB ECC-Registered DDR4 2133Mhz
- Samsung 850 EVO 120GB SSD (OS Drive)
- x8 Samsung 850 EVO 500GB SSD (All Strings Libraries)
- Windows 8.1

Note. Not all 6 slaves computer will have the same amount of RAM and SSDs. Only 2 will have 128GB RAM and only 1 will have 8 SSDs. The Strings Computer will be the one with the most RAM and more SSDs because I have more Strings libraries than the rest of the instruments.

I look foreward to your insights, guys.

Cheers

I really think it mostly matters based on your workflow, and what problem is trying to be solved.

I do at least 50% live studio recordings (vocals, guitars, etc), so latency has to be low to "play along" with the analog (or midi/VST) tracks already recorded. What you described for your work flow is a totally different approach.

What I dont like to do, because of the way I write and edit, is bounce my Midi/VST to analog tracks and unload the VSTs so I can record live without artifacts. Hence, i need a good amount of realtime CPU power and less concern with 1200 tracks. 

It seems to me that you are not so constrained by "realtime" tracking, but rather the ability to playback all the VST instrument parts together, before you record them to analog. That is a different problem than what i am up against. Your proposed solution seems more appropriate now.

On a different note...I am really happy with Windows 10 Pro. It runs much better than any Windows 8 build I ever had. If you use large monitors (I use a 32" Dell in 4k res) the scaling in Windows 10 works really well. That alone was reason enough to upgrade for me. I have not had any issues with VSL or VE Pro on Windows 10. Everything in my studio runs well on Windows 10.

Also...a really good dedicated network switch is probably something to keep in mind if you dont have one now.

Okay we are on the same page now! Great insights, thank you.

Yes I do use a bunch of monitors (I'm planning to anyways) The main one is a 40" 4K Phillips and then two 28" 4K Asus. Then I'll have two 25" on the far sides and a big 1080p 55" Dell as Footage screen up above in the center. 6 flippin monitors...Anyways, the 4K are simply for mere real estate since I don't game on this machine.

I kind of understrand why the scaling is better because it's all about DireXt 12, right? That makes sense.
I'll consider Windows 10 Pro heavily now. In Fact the version of Windows 8.1 Pro that I am purchasing has a free update to Windows 10, so worse case scenario I'll update and be done with it.

I need to do more researches on compatibilities with my hardware and my software, but I am pretty positive it won't create any problems. I am not using any fairly old hardware nor software anyways.

Thanks buddy.

A word of warning: You may wish to shy away from using the onboard  intel network adapters with Cubase 8.5 and Windows 10. My master is an Asus deluxe board and my slave is a x99WS. When I first got my network started I was getting all sorts of pops and fuzz from VEP slave. It was definitely not my horsepower. After much digging with latencymon and the intel forums, I found that it was my onboard network adapters that were freaking out with windows 10! I have managed to get it under control, as it does not affect the export quality, but it is something to be aware of. Unfortunatley I do not have access to chat with any system builders as to what drivers/network ports play well with others, especially on windows 10.

Thank you so much Piano Pete for your advice.

I actually changed that since I posted this and I am going with the normal ASRock X99 WS-E and then slap a 10G card adapter in there Intel X540 so no shared resources will effect the quality of the sound.

I totally agree.

Thanks

Piano Pete: I had the same issue with onboard nic. I downloaded latest driver from the NIC manufacturer (intel), rather than from ASUS support and it solved the issue. (that was a ASUS P9X79 Pro). 

I just built my new i7 6950x 10core (OC at ~3.8ghz) with the Asus X99 Deluxe II board. I did the same thing with the nic driver, even though I had no issues with the Asus provided driver.

I can say this much, I am very happy right now with my new rig. Using my old 3930x as a VEpro Slave with all my VST's. So far, a perfect marriage.

So My rig is ALL about mock-up, and for the size of my template (about 1200 tracks, not including the 5.1 and FX tracks) it's all about those 2 more cores and 4 more threads, because large templates are more multi-task demanding than high speed.

Please forgive my ignorance, as I'm reading through threads trying to figure out how to improve my ONE HP laptop i7 computer with 16 gigs of RAM now that I have Mir and Symphonic Cube.  I only compose my own chamber and orchestral music (there are samples on the orchestra forum and you can hear them at http://www.soundcloud.com/carovillano)

I have been able thus far to render my orchestral scores (with 25-30 instrument tracks from the Vienna Symphonic Cube libraries and Mir for reverb) without any processor issues, but the reason I am posting this, is to simply try to understand what on earth a 1200 track template looks like and how it works.  I'm a technology nube, but from a musical point of view, how does one create a work with 1200 tracks?  How does one keep track of those 1200 tracks?  Are you, for instance, creating a violin line and then layering it 50 times with different violin sound libraries?!  I just can't wrap my head around how a person would be able to "hear" 1200 tracks all playing at the same time.  Maybe, I'm completely misunderstanding how film music is produced and would welcome an explanation or link to a "simple" introduction.

Thanks!

Dave

www.soundcloud.com/carovillano (my VSL orchestral/chamber music works)

I was just wondering how this all ended up working out? 

I'm interested also to know if, when working mostly with VSTs libraries placed on the slave, is better to invest on a powerful processor to be installed on the slave or on the master?

If I have on my master a 3,33 Intel Xeon Six Core (Mac Pro), and I buy a slave computer with an i7 or i9 and 128Gb of ram to handle VSTs, will it be sufficient to work flowlessly on my master in Cubase with around 80-100 orchestral VST tracks?

I know this has been discussed a lot, but I never seemed to find a straight answer: powerful CPU on master, or slave?

Thanks in advance!  

Hopefully, others may chime in, but i'd say it just depends. Probably why you dont get a straight answer. Libraries are different, what you are doing, how big buffers are, etc. Lots of variables  come in to play.

Generally speaking, the DAW machine needs fast realtime processing. VST slaves need lots of cores and ram. 

It also depends on what you are running on the master. Are all the VSTs going to be on the slave? Are you running resource intensive plugins on the DAW master? 

I personally dont do any serious orchestral stuff, so my setup needs may be different than yours.

I have also found dedicated Network cards used to link DAW to Slaves is important. Dont run remote control software over the same NIC as you are running VEP. Little things like that can make a bif difference in stability.

If you are not resource contraint, then get as much CPU power as you can afford. With the cost of RAM being so high these day, make sure you really need 128GB. It may be better to spend the extra $6-700 on CPU.

Thanks a lot Synetos, super useful! 

I tend to run just a limiter or mastering tool like Ozone's on the bus....just to glue together the sound in very subtle settings....that might completely change after the composition phase is finished and I go in "mix phase".

Can I ask something else which bugges me? I'm sure this is a stupid noob question but....I was wondering....if I send automation messages from my master to VSTs in the slave through VEP (dynamics, volume, keyswitches, microphone volumes in spitfire libraries) will these automations be correctly recorded in Cubase, just like if VSTs were on the same computer of the DAW? 

Would you give me some advice on a good dedicated Network card? Perhaps one that can link together one master to 2 slaves. I might use an old iMac or a macbook pro as 2nd slave just for a couple of libraries if needed.

Do you think an i9 processor would be overkill? Or Xeons would be better, for any reason? I just started looking at new processors and I'm not very expert, I have still many google searches to do 😊
I understand the importance to invest now, to have something that can work well also in 5-7 years. So I'm ready to invest up to 1500-1700€ fora processor. I'm just very confused by the amount of models. Don't even know if for large VSTs templates is more important the number of cores/threads or the frequency.

"Dont run remote control software over the same NIC"...what is a NIC? Sorry, can't get the acronym meaning 😛

If I don't run remote control, I'll probably want to use a separate display for the slave, so to control all parameters of VSTs on a separate screen?

The idea to save some money on RAM to invest more in a CPU is a great one, as RAM can be added later. Thank you! 

Sorry for asking so many questions....I just thought to use VEP and 2 computers one week ago!

@Synetos said:

Hopefully, others may chime in, but i'd say it just depends. Probably why you dont get a straight answer. Libraries are different, what you are doing, how big buffers are, etc. Lots of variables  come in to play.

Generally speaking, the DAW machine needs fast realtime processing. VST slaves need lots of cores and ram. 

It also depends on what you are running on the master. Are all the VSTs going to be on the slave? Are you running resource intensive plugins on the DAW master? 

I personally dont do any serious orchestral stuff, so my setup needs may be different than yours.

I have also found dedicated Network cards used to link DAW to Slaves is important. Dont run remote control software over the same NIC as you are running VEP. Little things like that can make a bif difference in stability.

If you are not resource contraint, then get as much CPU power as you can afford. With the cost of RAM being so high these day, make sure you really need 128GB. It may be better to spend the extra $6-700 on CPU.

There are many variables in figurng out the best setup for your particular workflow. It was pretty much trial and error to come up with something that works for my setup and how I like to operate.

Personally, I would rather have multiple slaves machines running i9's than big beast running Zeons. Which is better? again, it depends...blah blah blah. :)

NIC= Network Interface Card

I have had good luck putting multiple NICs in my machines and then all my VEP connections are run thoug their own switch. Here is what I am running in my PC's.

• Intel Gigabit CT PCI-E Network Adapter EXPI9301CTBLK
• NetGear 5 Port switch (GS105NA)

I use RDP to control my machines from my main DAW, but I have it on its own network. I dont run anything else across my VEP network connections. I block the VEP app at the firewall level on the nics I dont want popping up when trying to connect a RACK instrument.

Another thought: While this forum is helpful, there are other resources much more active where these kinds of topics are discussed alot. VI-Control is one that I have learned a lot from just reading other peoples discussions on the same topics myself. There are many users of VEP on that forum. This forum is useful too, particularly with VEP issues. But, it can also have alot of cricket sounds at times when one is asking for suggestions. Just my experience. YMMV

https://vi-control.net/community/

So, I studied a little bit online, and tried to make a configuration for a Slave computer.

Do you think this system would be optimal for a Slave to be used with VEP and large orchestral templates?

Would these components cause any issue/incompatibility if used together? 

SLAVE CONFIGURATION:

Processor: 16 Core Intel® Core™ i9-7960X (2,8*GHz) 22 Mb cache

Motherboard: ASUS® PRIME X299-A : ATX, USB 3.1, SATA 6 Gb/s

RAM Memory: 128 Gb Corsair VENGEANCE DDR4 2666 MHz (8 x 16 Gb)

Graphic Card: 2 Gb NVIDIA GEFORCE GT 1030 - DVI, HDMI

Hard Disks:

Boot Disk: SSD EVO 1 To Samsung 860 2,5 SATA 6 Gb/s 

Libraries Disk: SSD EVO 4 To Samsung 860 2,5 SATA 6 Gb/s 

Power supply: CORSAIR 550W TXm SERIES™ 80 PLUS GOLD

Cooling: Noctua NH-U14S Performance

External Case: FRACTAL DEFINE R6 NOIR 

LAN Port: PORT 10/100/1000 GIGABIT LAN (Wi-Fi Not included)

Other Ports: MIN. 2 PORTS USB 3.0 ET 6 PORTS USB 2.0 back + MIN. 2 PORTS front

Thanks a lot again!

Seems like a nice box. I dont have any experience with the i9.

UPDATE:

I'm running some tests to understand where my current bottleneck is when playing lots of voices from many orchestral VSTs, from my current Mac Pro setup.

- I need to use a high buffer in the audio card to avoid the real time playing getting stuck.

- Kontakt "disk" light goes often to red. Almost always, in busy passages.

- In the mac's "activity monitor", the cpu usage stays under 25%, which seems good to me.

- The 20 Gb of RAM are almost entirely used as soon as I open a busy cubase project.

This makes me understand what follows, but please correct me if I'm wrong:

- I need to switch to SSD drives to avoid glitches and kontakt "disk" to go to red.

- Cpu seems to dojust fine for now

- I need more ram.

- Willing to add a slave system, the current Mac would be released from all the cpu and ram work with samples, so it should ran smooth, perhaps I should just use SSD as boot drive, and add a bit of RAM on it, but processor should be fine, if working mainly with samples?

What do you think? 

Thanks again.

Are you running VEPro on your MacPro? If not, that is where i would start and run it as local host to get all your VST's outside the Cubase processing space.

What is your audio interface?

My audio interface is an Apollo Quartet.

I still have to buy VEP, I don't use it yet! I'm looking forward to use it in master/slave configuration. All I'm trying to understand is if I can keep using my Mac Pro as master, and a new powerful pc as slave to load VSTs with Vienna, and if all of this setup will solve my current problems, or if there will still be a bottleneck caused by my processor on the mac pro (3,33 GHz Six Core Xeon dated 2012...)

Thanks