Yes, no benchmark can represent all real-world scenarios. But that’s particularly true for DAW usage due to the variables involved. It’s very unwise, if building a DAW today, to base decisions on anything outside of benchmarks directly involving the intended host software you’ll use.Obviously Cinebench doesn't represent all real-world facets/scenarios.
Yep, that presents issues if someone wants an easy number they can look at. But performance variability, between hosts, is simply too large to do otherwise. Soundcards and plugin choice further impact both the performance and stability. Cinebench communicates nothing about any of this. Instead it suggests a 64 core Threadripper is the best choice. Which, as you acknowledge, may not quite be the case with audio
Benchmarks themselves can also be at issue. Cinebench 23 would’ve caused incorrect assumptions regarding any performance delta between Intel and Apple Silicon. Your v24 results range between between a 5.5% (14700) and 12.1% (14900) difference VS M2 Ultra. How easily might such a percentage be swallowed up by the many variables involved in a host running plugins?
Along with their ability to mislead someone assuming how much differences translate elsewhere, the over-focus on benchmarks has arguably resulted in other negative consequences. EG Many motherboards have recently used defaults which ran Intel’s latest chips out of spec. Better benchmark scores were, apparently, more important to these mobo companies than their customers system stability. Many 13th /14th gen tests will now benchmark lower - if users want a stable system.
Outperforms for what though? I use Cubase. Tests of plugin counts, sample rates and buffers etc, are something I might relate to. Software, which utilises resources as differently as Cinebench? Perhaps not so much.14700k outperforms M.2 Ultra (let alone 13900k, 14900k, and 14900ks).
On this point I'd mostly agree. Thunderbolt 4 (40Gb/s) reserves 8Gb for video so displays always work when connected. So you’re left with the equivalent of 6 PCIE3 X4 (24) lanes, spread across the 6 ports, not counting the 2 USB ports. That’d mean 6 SSD’s topping out ~2850MB/s each. A limitation? For raw video.. Maybe. But not exactly the biggest limitation for most peoples audio useWith Mac Studio, you're currently leaving a lot of drive performance on the table.
About the only feasible audio scenario might be loading 100GB+ orchestral templates into ram quickly, though other overheads would likely reduce the differences. But it’d be an interesting test for anyone in that boat, perhaps.. and maybe one of the few reasons (for now) why someone might choose a Mac Pro, over a Studio, if inclined to go in that direction.
Thunderbolt appeared to cause an awful lot of issues for Windows systems though. Hopefully USB 4 will fair better.
All I can say is Cubase 13, on Apple Silicon / Sonoma, has been the most stable version I’ve used in 20+ years, Windows or Mac. 
Statistics: Posted by PAK — Tue May 07, 2024 5:21 am