Gaming Computer vs Mac

[Jac459]

I have both a desktop gaming pc and a Macbook pro 14 and I prefer using the mac for audio.

Also I’m not sure if it’s still the case but the nvidia drivers used to add a lot of DPC latency on windows.

If you get enough storage/ram from the beginning upgradability isn’t such a big deal. At least for me every time I want to upgrade the computer there’s already a new cpu socket and I have to replace most of the parts anyway.

Hello, I was having a Razer with a 2080 Nvidia and I don't remember having any issue once the Asio drivers propellerly set.

[donkey tugger]

He lives on a boat and, if what I’ve read is true, shits in a bucket.

As I recall he doesn't utilise the bucket for defactory purposes. He evacuates the bones bowels at work during the week, then on a weekend, by dint of some mystical self control (or starvation diet of very bland food..), doesn't shit at all.

His avatar pic checks out.

Touchin' cloth.

[spacepluk]

Also I’m not sure if it’s still the case but the nvidia drivers used to add a lot of DPC latency on windows.

Hello, I was having a Razer with a 2080 Nvidia and I don't remember having any issue once the Asio drivers propellerly set.

Good to know! Maybe they've fixed it since. I did experience it with a Razer Blade.

[PAK]

I'm not confusing anything

Hmmm. Hmmmmmmmm..

(RISC) It's even less relevant today than it was 40 years ago.

Where are all the x64 mobile phones Bones? Maybe they can fit 300w solar panels to them?

you can buy a 300W solar panel for well below $100, which will make up any perceived shortfall

(Looks up at clouds and shakes fist) ..I dunno about this Bones. BTW A 13900k is rated at 253W in turbo mode alone. Just the processor. Word on the street is this might even be a low estimate by Intel. Should I turn off turbo mode? Or can you recommend a desktop graphics card, memory, motherboard, ssd, and power supply which all operate at below 47W combined? Thx.

Australia is one of the 10 most expensive countries in the world for electricity, according to Statista.

Yes. It also mentions the UK's cost is double that of Australia. Unfortunately several agendas contribute to it. Suffice to say never under-estimate the UK's ability to screw its own populace whilst convincing them its for their own good.

Why is it OK when Apple does it but not OK when it's AMD.

Why do you think I think that? I don't particularly like Apple as a company. But there are sometimes things Apple does well. Even negatives, like the higher price margins, mean they're better able to jump to the front of TSMC's 3nm manufacturing queue.

I'd trust AMD a lot more than I'd trust Apple when it comes to being honest

You shouldn't. Remember when AMD advertised the first 8 core desktop CPU's (Bulldozer) then got sued (and lost) because they weren't actually 8 cores? Or just before ATi was bought by AMD, when they were found to be deliberately rigging their gfx drivers to detect and lie to benchmarks? Corporations aren't your friend Bones. No, not even Microsoft

(threading)
That's not the problem with Opsix and Wavestate.

It's not? That's strange. Dan from Korg says it is.

You need to post and tell him he's wrong Bones. Get to it. That post is over a year old now and still no fix.

The problem with Apple, though, is that they don't give you any options, you do things their way or not at all.

That's frequently true. But not always. There's advantages in expecting users obey. Example? Turn off their telemetry and it'll pretty much do nothing. In contrast, turn off Microsoft's telemetry and it'll treat you like malware and it may just throw a random tantrum and break something. There tends to be more command-line jiggery pokery to get Mac OS to do what you want. But, when you do that, in my own experience it usually leaves you alone more so than Windows - which increasingly seems to love resetting certain things. Not least where it pertains to using Microsoft Edge.. You do want to use Edge, right? What do you mean "no"?

they aren't going to f**k their users over like Apple does. They know we won't put up with it.

Them's fighting words Bones. Where else are you gonna go? Here, have some adverts in your explorer window. Me-thinks there is a disconnect between what you think Microsoft thinks about its users, and what it actually thinks. Though I will say all of those Steve Jobs management style books have a lot to answer for, in terms of corporate arrogance and clowns who now think it's their role, nay destiny, to dictate what people want.

38c per kWhr. I reckon $5 of that would have gone to my fridge

That's one tiny and/or efficient fridge. Or.. I guess people know the destination for some warm refreshments. I mean, if they're into that sort of thing.

I'd be more likely to make an appointment to see my doctor about my halitosis problem.

Don't worry Bones. I'm sure you're minty fresh.

[PAK]

That was the consumption per day, not per hour.

A computer using 0.15kWh per day is VERY low usage. Have you ever actually measured your PC's energy usage at the wall with a monitoring device?

If you're using an Intel NUC etc? Then maybe. But a 13900k idles between 20w and 50w alone. And, as discussed, Windows inability to manage power without screwing up realtime audio means an audio PC is likely to be nearer the higher end of that figure. Now add the graphics. Even what would be considered a mid-range desktop card, like an Nvidia 3060, pulls around 40w whilst idle. We're at almost 100W and we're only at two components whilst idle!! Ya think your numbers are off just a bit?

You won't be doing extremely heavy calculations on it 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It's a reasonable estimate and if you are a very heavy user you could multiply it by 2, or even by 3, but not much more than that.And that would imply that you do 10 hours of CPU intensive work every day, 365 days a year, which for most of you just won't happen.

Again, you're making a lot of assumptions here. Granted, that might "typically" be true, but you still appear to be consistently under-estimating the power usage of modern dekstop components, both whilst idle and at full load.

Since this is an audio forum, I'm very much approaching things from that perspective. As said, due to Windows power-management issues users frequently have these options disabled, which means idle loads tend to be higher than would typically be the case. Now add the fact that there are a disturbing number of plugins which generate full loads whilst idle. For example, Softube literally just launched a Prophet emulation which apparently does this.

What it means is that heavy loads, even at idle, are a common occurrence in audio desktop PC usage scenarios. Lots of people also leave their hosts open so they can go do something quickly without having to load everything back up etc. If you are that sort of user IE people who leave a system on for a long time, or does a lot of resource intensive computing, you need to be factoring energy prices into your costs these days. Buy yourself a wall power monitor and figure this stuff out. Many users tend to buy systems to last a long time these days, and these costs can mount a lot higher than you'd think over a period of years..

[2DaT]

Again, you're making a lot of assumptions here. Granted, that might "typically" be true, but you still appear to be consistently under-estimating the power usage of modern dekstop components, both whilst idle and at full load.

You are overestimating the power usage by a lot. I don't have a top of the line hardware (i5 12600 + 3060ti), but with all power savings off and running a daw with a few tracks I get: CPU:20W, GPU:25W. I don't completely believe software readings, but with all overhead I don't think it's above 70W. Under full load with prime 95 it does consume 120Watts, which isn't a whole lot for a torture test.

If nvidia will fix their drivers it will be another saved 15W and it's possible to save another 10W on a CPU by enabling back the energy saving stuff.

I did some testing with a power metering some time ago and it turned out that it's the monitors that consume a lot of electricity and not the PC itself.

My 2 27' monitors consume more than 100W. I don't think I should worry about my PC consuming a lot of energy if my monitors consume more than that. PC is very silent, except for the noisy HDD, which I will replace at some time, with 2TB SSDs NMVe getting cheaper every day. I think you can buy 2TB below 100$ with really fast models around 150$.

0.15kWh was an estimate for a MAC, for PC I used more reasonable 0.45kWh,it's not that much, but averaging over a year you shouldn't be consuming much more than that. Even if you triple that amount, it will save you only the 100$ per year, and if you are such an active user you probably need the extra power of PC.

[2DaT]

I've checked the consumption and it's 70W system total under the same conditions (no energy savings and a small load) from the wall plug and 2 27' monitors eat about 30W each (I thought it was more than that). If NVIDIA fixes their drivers and with power saving features enabled it would be possible to go under 40W for the full system. I wonder how much of it is the HDD? Probably about 10W.

I would like too see what MACs consume under the same circumstances. From the wall of course, not from the software.

[Jac459]

0.15kWh was an estimate for a MAC, for PC I used more reasonable 0.45kWh,it's not that much, but averaging over a year you shouldn't be consuming much more than that. Even if you triple that amount, it will save you only the 100$ per year, and if you are such an active user you probably need the extra power of PC.

Do you happen to have a benchmark of M2 Pro (or Max) vs the modern AMD and Intel ?
What is the equivalent and what kind of price is it ?
I wonder the same for laptops....

[T-CM11]

... and 2 27' monitors eat about 30W each (I thought it was more than that).

Screen power usage, mentioned in the specifications are usually (AFAIK) for a 100% brightness setting.
I have mine set to 15%.

[Jac459]

Do you happen to have a benchmark of M2 Pro (or Max) vs the modern AMD and Intel ?
What is the equivalent and what kind of price is it ?
I wonder the same for laptops....

I actually tried to answer my own question.

I am open to remarks as I am far from a PC expert.

I took Dell as my benchmark constructor (reputable, I think good quality, I guess comparable to apple).
I found the XPS 15 to be quite similar to the Apple MBP 15 in term of dimensions.

Configured like my MBP (16GB/1TB), it is 2600SGD (Singapore dollars) which is the equivalent of what I paid for my MBP.

In term of CPU, I got the I7 13700H. Very good overall perf in CPU benchmark at 30,000 points vs 26,500 points for Apple M2 Pro. Single core is better on Apple though (4,100 vs 3,700). Floating point math overall is exactly the same which is as far as I have heard what matters the most for Audio processing.

So basically, very slight advantage on PC for power. STRONG advantage on PC for choice. In the website of Dell I can upgrade to a touch OLED screen, I'd love to that on Apple.

One thing that was said here and doesn't seems to be true ==> options are cheap on PC... No they don't, going to 32GB RAM is 400 f**king SGD... Grand larceny as Apple. So you are stuck with do it yourself and be ready to void your warranty I guess (correct me if big PC constructors allow to open and change internals while maintaining warranty).

Where I think Apple totally destroy Dell is .... again the thermals. What I can see is max TDP for the Intel is a whopping 115W (I think it is even worst that the Razer I was having). Max for Apple is .... 34W... To be fair it won't use it always.... But in real life it is not my experience, I am spending much more time finalising a song that putting 2 - 3 tracks. Even with my M2 Pro, I am easily at 70% CPU usage when the song is all put up. Intel is similarly powerful so it will be the same 70% CPU (ie 115 f**king watts). So in practice, most of the time. I would have a portable BBQ, versus an usable laptop...


EDIT: I actually made a mistake on the MBP price... I actually paid 3,200SGD (I think I mixed with Euros). Basically, I tried to get better specs on the DELL laptop. With 3.2kSGD I still can't get an i9 (4300 SGD !!!!).
What I can do to be at exactly the MBP price is update the DELL GPU to get an RTX4050. For what I see on other benchmark, it seems to be similar to the GPU of the ... M2 Pro. GFX Bench 3.0 is better for "Manhattan" on one, "Aztec" on the other by a similar margin.

Nevertheless, it is still an advantage for PC because I am not "forced" to use this GPU (I don't give a s.... about GPU) while I am forced to with the Apple. I could for example upgrade to 32GB Ram and still be slightly below the MBP price. So basically, that shows that if thermals wasn't an issue (for example, people leaving in Norway ), PC would be the best offer.

[Pictus]

Also I’m not sure if it’s still the case but the nvidia drivers used to add a lot of DPC latency on windows.

This fix
viewtopic.php?p=8667750#p8667750

Latest example of happy ending
https://vi-control.net/community/thread ... st-5337295

[PAK]

You are overestimating

The idle numbers I quoted are widely reported, and I showed how to calculate energy costs down to the pence/cent. In terms of usage, I've had to repeatedly point out it varies by individual. People should measure their use and come to their own definitive answers suited to their own needs.

for PC I used more reasonable 0.45kWh,it's not that much, but averaging over a year you shouldn't be consuming much more than that.

If you're actually using a high end gaming system? Good luck with that! Better be limiting it to an hour of play per day! I was actually surprised to see a more mainstream tech Youtube channel (LTT) even referenced the current situation when they were reviewing Nvidia's video upscaling, pointing out that 4 hours viewing per day would cost (in the UK) $230 per year with upscaling. Thus making it cheaper to pay for a native 4k streaming service than to use it! See here: youtu.be/i_oLsQfRfOc?t=878

I would like too see what MACs consume under the same circumstances. From the wall of course, not from the software.

A Studio Ultra (AKA present worst case scenario) idles at 13W. There's plenty of Youtube videos with wall usage, though most are lower models and so will tend to idle at less watts. A quick search found this one youtu.be/HF_rMjjPoPs showing the Ultra (Confirms the idle wattage, draws around 130W in a Blender test - Forgot to add that's for both CPU and GFX enabled. DAW use would only tend to stress CPU).

[Jac459]

You are overestimating

The idle numbers I quoted are widely reported, and I showed how to calculate energy costs down to the pence/cent. In terms of usage, I've had to repeatedly point out it varies by individual. People should measure their use and come to their own definitive answers suited to their own needs.

for PC I used more reasonable 0.45kWh,it's not that much, but averaging over a year you shouldn't be consuming much more than that.

If you're actually using a high end gaming system? Good luck with that! Better be limiting it to an hour of play per day! I was actually surprised to see a more mainstream tech Youtube channel (LTT) even referenced the current situation when they were reviewing Nvidia's video upscaling, pointing out that 4 hours viewing per day would cost (in the UK) $230 per year with upscaling. Thus making it cheaper to pay for a native 4k streaming services than to use it! See here: youtu.be/i_oLsQfRfOc?t=878

I would like too see what MACs consume under the same circumstances. From the wall of course, not from the software.

A Studio Ultra (AKA present worst case scenario) idles at 13W. There's plenty of Youtube videos with wall usage, though most are lower models and so will tend to idle lower. A quick search found this one youtu.be/HF_rMjjPoPs showing the Ultra (Confirms the idle wattage, draws around 80W in a Blender test).

Except if you are leaving in winterland, electricity consumption isn't the only issue... All that generate a lot lot of power... I know my case is also not the common one, but in Singapore, AirCon are working most of the year... Having basically a heater working against the aircon is a real problem for me...

[Pictus]

(...)I know my case is also not the common one, but in Singapore, AirCon are working most of the year... Having basically a heater working against the aircon is a real problem for me...

IF you use a custom water cooler kit, can place the fans/radiator/pump
into another room or outside, even better when also cooling the GPU.
A LOT less heat in the room and super silent PC.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/89658/by ... index.html

https://www.aliexpress.com/i/1005004621515396.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004314190865.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004622032781.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale- ... ater+Block

[Jac459]

(...)I know my case is also not the common one, but in Singapore, AirCon are working most of the year... Having basically a heater working against the aircon is a real problem for me...

IF you use a custom water cooler kit, can place the fans/radiator/pump
into another room or outside, even better when also cooling the GPU.
A LOT less heat in the room and super silent PC.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/89658/by ... index.html

https://www.aliexpress.com/i/1005004621515396.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004314190865.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004622032781.html
https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale- ... ater+Block

Seems fun... Actually I have 2 gaming PC at home with leds everywhere and advanced cooling systems... But I am the one using a laptop (I just like the idea to have essential music production stuffs on the go).