found some benchmarks here: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php atoms are way slower than the i series. i have 3 atom 330 boxes around the house with fanless power supplies. i do love quiet, and they were cheep, but they are about 4-5 times slower than my i5-2410M laptop when doing gentoo updates. still, i can read 8 channels of audio 24/96 from my 1010lt in ardour. i get reasonably small buffers for live stereo csound processing too. but no heavy lifting. k. On 05/30/12 12:58, Robin Gareus wrote: > On 05/30/2012 06:21 PM, Sciss wrote: > [..] >> thanks for the link and the info. so you think atom processors are >> fine enough? the latency actually doesn't matter in my case. i'm more >> worried that i'm going to through a lot of CPU heavy stuff on it, as >> this will run experimental software I wrote myself (and I won't have >> any time for performance tuning of the software itself). > Really hard to tell. esp. for audio applications. I also have no clue > how efficient supercollider is.. > > Are you using supernova to make use of multiple cores? > > As rule of thumb: Atom CPUs processing power is comparable to that of an > i3 of the same clock-freq. But most Atom chipsets lack some CPU features > - e.g virtualization support. Yet Atom != Atom and i3 != i3 ; it really > depends on the model. I suppose the only way to tell is to try.. > > What I really like about Atom CPUs for audio is that they can run fan-less. > > best, > robin > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-user mailing list > Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
