# Does i7-5820k support 128 gb memory?



## sunnymusic (Jan 3, 2016)

I'd like to build a slave PC for supporting 128gb memory.

It's for EW Hollywood series, Berlins Str/WW, LASS and etc.

I've read some topics regarding i7-5820 officially doesn't support 128gb ram but nowadays it does after asus board's bios update.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2938...s-pc-with-128gb-of-cutting-edge-ddr4-ram.html

But nobody around me uses 128gb full ram. So I'd like to get feedback finally from you.

I'd like to build like below.
Could you check if the PC's configuration has any problem?

*CPU*: i7-5820k
*Board*: ASRock X99 Extreme4/3.1
*Memory*: Samsung ddr4 16gb x 8 (=128gb)
*SSD*: Samsung evo 256gb

*Power*: Micronics Classic II 600W +12V Single Rail 85+
*Graphic*: Galaxy GALAX Geforce GTX750 Double Shot D5 1GB
*Cooler*: Colermaster Hyper 103

Any feedback would be much appreciated!


----------



## chimuelo (Jan 3, 2016)

As long as your pair it with a Xeon chipset.
Not 100% sure but believe Asus ASRock and Supermicro have such designs.
Pretty damn expensive though.
I just dropped 500 on 4 x 16GB DIMMs.


----------



## jsp21 (Jan 3, 2016)

The ASRock X99 Extreme 4 should top out at 128gb RAM. Also, don't cheap out on the PSU, do get a good one for that 5820k!

If you're not in a hurry, I'd wait till the next batch of 6th gens from Intel due soon. They'll be Broadwell-E (X99 chipset) and they top out at an awesome 10 cores.


----------



## vrocko (Jan 3, 2016)

Check this out.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2938...s-pc-with-128gb-of-cutting-edge-ddr4-ram.html


----------



## Aeonata (Jan 4, 2016)

sunnymusic said:


> I'd like to build a slave PC for supporting 128gb memory.
> 
> It's for EW Hollywood series, Berlins Str/WW, LASS and etc.
> 
> ...



You have to be careful with the Samsung Ram. The i7-5820k does not support ECC Ram. That's why I went for the Xeon E5-1650v3 (which is about 650$). I use the AsRock Extreme 4/3.1, paired with an EVGA 650GS Power Supply, Noctua NH-d15 (single Fan, be careful, this cooler is very big!), a passive Asus EAH5450 graphic card and a couple of ssds. Works like a charm! This beast boots so fast that it's almost impossible to enter the BIOS, haha.


----------



## jsp21 (Jan 4, 2016)

There's little benefit to using ECC RAM for this line of work.


----------



## gsilbers (Jan 4, 2016)

yes it does supper 128gb ram. try a search, we've been dicussing a lot about this latley.


----------



## chrysshawk (Jan 4, 2016)

This might just be me, but radeon has always been more stable and with lower dpc than geforce in my experience.


----------



## rgames (Jan 4, 2016)

sunnymusic said:


> It's for EW Hollywood series, Berlins Str/WW, LASS


Isn't that around 40 GB?

What "and etc" are you using that needs another 88 GB?

Also, be aware that a single machine has a voice count limit that has basically no dependence on RAM. You can load up a bunch of libraries but you'll never be able to actually *use* most of them at any given time. So keep that in mind.

For the price you'll spend on a 128 GB machine I bet you can get two 32 GB machines. Those two machines will vastly outperform the one.

rgames


----------



## Lawson. (Jan 4, 2016)

rgames said:


> Isn't that around 40 GB?
> 
> What "and etc" are you using that needs another 88 GB?



If he's like me, he's loading every articulation of every instrument in every library. HS and HB alone are already ~25GB.

I don't USE every track, but it's really nice to have the options all ready to go.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jan 4, 2016)

rgames said:


> Isn't that around 40 GB?
> 
> What "and etc" are you using that needs another 88 GB?
> 
> ...



I thought that 64GB would be enough for me even lowering DFD settings but I started to get close to running out of ram so I went back to using my slave with 32GB. My template is mostly EW and Spitfire and the part it takes up about 50GB with the DFD at 30kB which is half the default. 

I think for the same price you might be able to actually get 2 64GB machines if you look at the parts on the recent thread by Chimuelo.


----------



## pmountford (Jan 4, 2016)

Im tempted with a 6600 on an Asrock m/b which looks like it can be overclocked to 4.5ghz even though its not a K cpu. Paired with 4x16gb it seems pretty cost effective as a slave.


----------



## rgames (Jan 4, 2016)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> DFD at 30kB


I've found that 6-12 kB works for nearly everything if you're running from SSD on a PC. There are a few True Strike instruments where I needed to bump it up to 18 kB for some reason. 30 kB is really high for SSD.

So that'll save you 5-10 GB right there. Then you're down around 40 and I'm still left wondering what you guys are doing with 128 GB RAM  I don't use much Spitfire, though, so maybe their scripting requires larger buffers. But I run Albion 1 completely purged and it runs fine at 10 ms total buffer (sound card + VE Pro) in my template on my i7 laptop.

I just re-checked and my EWQL Strings/Brass/WW/Perc (all diamond) in VE Pro are at about 18.1 GB reported by Windows and 15.6 GB reported by PLAY. I don't have every patch loaded but I'd say I have 90% of them loaded, though at only one mic position. So let's say you want two mic positions for all the libraries. Well, now you have voice count problems on one machine, but that still only puts you at 36 GB. And the extra patches that I don't have loaded will probably add another few GB. So I'm guessing 40 GB for a pretty maxed-out PLAY orchestra.

Then, with 6-12 kB pre-loads in Kontakt and VSL, I still can't figure out how you would get anywhere close to 128 GB. You could load up EVERY mic position for EVERY library but then your voice counts are through the roof and you can't run a meaningful project on one machine, anyway (unless everything you write is a four-note spicc pattern). So, yeah, a mystery to me 

Maybe it's a Mac-PC thing. Whatever works...!

rgames


----------



## chimuelo (Jan 4, 2016)

Server Operating Systems are optimized code.
ECC RAM is used with large CPU Cache for extreme efficiency.
DAWs are barely optimized compared to Workstation and Server apps.

We are better off using brute force and consumer coded apps on consumer/gaming hardware.
The question is where do we stop...32 or 64GB Machines?

I just upgrade HS and bought HB.
I will know soon enough if my investment for using these apps in real time was a sound investment.

Supermicro has created a very user unfriendly BIOS but with amazing combinations of server technology and gamer style overclocking on a motherboard using much higher quality hardware meant for 24/7 operation.

Polyphony is a main concern of mine.
Right now my rig runs a cheap CPU faster than a 6700k using less watts.
Total success.

Will report back on how well our sloppy coded apps work.


----------



## rgames (Jan 4, 2016)

Lawson. said:


> If he's like me, he's loading every articulation of every instrument in every library. HS and HB alone are already ~25GB.
> 
> I don't USE every track, but it's really nice to have the options all ready to go.


But you're going to have to bounce tracks if you load up enough to require 128 GB on any one machine. In which case, what's the point? Wouldn't it be better to get multiple machines if the cost is the same?

Let's say you need 96 GB to load up ALL mics for ALL of your libraries (I still find that hard to believe...). You have two choices:

Case A:
You load them all up on a 128 GB machine. If you do that, you won't be able to play back even a full string section because of voice count limitations (again, unless the music is *really* simple). So you'll have to bounce tracks - one pass for strings, one for WW, one for brass, etc.

Case B:
You load them up on some combo of 64 GB and 32 GB machines. In that scenario, you can, in fact, play them back in real-time because you've doubled or tripled your voice count capacity. So now you don't have to bounce anything. Plus, odds are you can run at lower latency.

If Case A and Case B cost the same, wouldn't you rather use the Case B setup?

And even if you just don't want multiple machines for some reason, are you really going to load up enough mic positions to cause yourself to constantly bounce tracks? I bet not - you're going to reduce the number of mic positions to the point that you don't have to do much bouncing. In which case your RAM usage comes down and a 128 GB machine is not necessary.

So, yeah, I just can't imagine the use scenario where a single 128 GB machine makes sense.

But, like I said, whatever works!

rgames


----------



## jsp21 (Jan 4, 2016)

Forgot to mention, OP: if you're getting 128 gigs, do take a look at ASRock's QVL list for the Extreme 4 and try to go for whatever RAM is _on_ the list.



pmountford said:


> Im tempted with a 6600 on an Asrock m/b which looks like it can be overclocked to 4.5ghz even though its not a K cpu. Paired with 4x16gb it seems pretty cost effective as a slave.



Yeah, I've been messing with non-K processors for a slave too. Unfortunately, overclocking the non-K versions is currently very unstable. Mobo manufacturers have been dishing out loads of BIOS updates for stability but it's far from perfect. For now at least, the cost difference between the Ks and the non-K versions are small enough that I'd just buy the Ks.



rgames said:


> But you're going to have to bounce tracks if you load up enough to require 128 GB on any one machine. In which case, what's the point? Wouldn't it be better to get multiple machines if the cost is the same?
> 
> Let's say you need 96 GB to load up ALL mics for ALL of your libraries (I still find that hard to believe...). You have two choices:
> 
> ...



Good points. I use HO Diamond extensively and have never needed more than 64 gigs.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Jan 4, 2016)

rgames said:


> I've found that 6-12 kB works for nearly everything if you're running from SSD on a PC. There are a few True Strike instruments where I needed to bump it up to 18 kB for some reason. 30 kB is really high for SSD.
> 
> So that'll save you 5-10 GB right there. Then you're down around 40 and I'm still left wondering what you guys are doing with 128 GB RAM  I don't use much Spitfire, though, so maybe their scripting requires larger buffers. But I run Albion 1 completely purged and it runs fine at 10 ms total buffer (sound card + VE Pro) in my template on my i7 laptop.
> 
> ...



With 30kB the disk meter jumps all the way up at the loop points if I have a couple of BML woodwinds playing tutti off of 1 SSD with 2 mic positions so I'm not sure that I can get it all that much lower without having to spread everything out over a huge number of SSD's (currently using 4 for samples). I also don't purge anything. 

I've had to go to using a slave because Cubase + Pro Tools ends up taking over 10GB. If I were using it as only a slave then perhaps I could finish off completing the BML orchestra without having to have gone back to using my slave. 

Considering that JXL has 6x 128GB slaves at his home studio, I'm not surprised that composers are needing 128GB.


----------



## WorshipMaestro (Jan 4, 2016)

This thread kind of took on a life of it's own and I'm not sure the original question really got answered completely.

In the age of 64 bit hardware and OS it isn't the CPU that determines how much memory can be addressed. It's the motherboard, BIOS and controlling chipset that sets the limit. If the motherboard can access 128GB of memory then so can a 5820.

Shortly after I got my Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4 with Thunderbolt I was checking the website to see if the BIOS revision was current. I found there was a newer beta BIOS which added support for 16GB DIMMS. With 8 memory slots that equals 128GB. (I didn't flash it because I like my workstations stable and 64GB was my plan all along)

Don't get me wrong - I agree with many of the comments regarding the usability of that much RAM in an audio workstation due to voice count limits. I just thought I'd try to bring clarity to the answer to the OP's question!


----------



## WorshipMaestro (Jan 4, 2016)

sunnymusic said:


> I'd like to build a slave PC for supporting 128gb memory.
> 
> I'd like to build like below.
> Could you check if the PC's configuration has any problem?
> ...



You might look into Mushkin memory. They have some with lower latency and higher speed than most of the other manufacturers. I got mine from an online company called Ram Experts. It was just slightly more expensive than Crucial and significantly faster.


----------



## chimuelo (Jan 4, 2016)

Non K BIOS by Supermicro is fantastic because the board and the BIOS were designed from the ground up for that reason.
ASRock MSI and ASUS have designed their boards for K Procs and Z170 chipsets.
The biggest advantage of non K CPUs is low heat no spikes and superior single core performance.

This is personal preference due to Zebra2HZ and Bidule MP Assign.

I don't like Turbo Boost EIST or splitting up a Core into 2 less efficient threads.

If I had an 8 core/16 thread Xeon or X99 E I'd still avoid extra threads.


----------



## rgames (Jan 4, 2016)

Gerhard Westphalen said:


> Considering that JXL has 6x 128GB slaves at his home studio, I'm not surprised that composers are needing 128GB.


How much RAM is actually used in each machine?

He probably has that many machines because of voice count limitations, not RAM limitations. Each machine might have 128 GB installed but that doesn't mean he's actually using anywhere close to that amount. He might have only 10 GB used in each machine. If so, he could, in theory, load it all on a single 128 GB machine. But, as I said above, he'd have to bounce like crazy. Which is (probably) why he's using multiple machines, not the RAM limitation.

I guess he could have 768 GB worth of custom samples loaded into RAM (20 mic positions per section?). But given how much time and effort went into producing, say, HO Diamond (which uses only about 40-50 GB RAM), do you really think that's likely for one composer? Also, given that something like 5% of the library is loaded into RAM, that means such a custom library would be something like 15 TB on disk. Can you imagine what it would take to organize such a library, especially for one dude? Seems really unlikely...!

But, of course, I don't know. Show me a screen shot of the Windows performance meter along with what's loaded on each of his machines and then I will 

rgames


----------



## Lawson. (Jan 4, 2016)

rgames said:


> But you're going to have to bounce tracks if you load up enough to require 128 GB on any one machine. In which case, what's the point? Wouldn't it be better to get multiple machines if the cost is the same?
> 
> Let's say you need 96 GB to load up ALL mics for ALL of your libraries (I still find that hard to believe...). You have two choices:
> 
> ...



That's assuming that every section plays every articulation at any given time. I try to stay realistic and only use one (or two if I'm layering for some reason) articulation per section at a time. So, it doesn't really matter how much I have loaded it up, as it still streams the same amount.

Ideally, I would have multiple computers (for the reasons you stated), but 64GB RAM is cheaper than getting a whole new 64GB machine. On the bright side, if I do get a new computer, I'll save $600 from already having the RAM!


----------



## chimuelo (Jan 5, 2016)

I have no scientific data to back up my theory of 50% headroom.
But I will use 64 gigs to run a 32 gig template.
I ues less tha half of my 18 x SHARC DSP chips for real time fx parameter modulation and mixing.
Since 2009 my DSP rack NEVER crashed.
Nor have my fast little DAWgs.
Maybe samples stashed at the far ends of each DIMM are hard to reach as pre fetched data hurdles and leaps over rows and rows of 12-30k bytes of audio buffers....?


----------



## FredrikJonasson (Feb 21, 2016)

rgames said:


> Also, be aware that a single machine has a voice count limit that has basically no dependence on RAM. You can load up a bunch of libraries but you'll never be able to actually *use* most of them at any given time. So keep that in mind.
> 
> For the price you'll spend on a 128 GB machine I bet you can get two 32 GB machines. Those two machines will vastly outperform the one.
> 
> rgames



This is totally new to me. What is determining the achievable RAM? Where's the line for how many GB that is actually effective?


----------



## wpc982 (Feb 21, 2016)

Let's say you are using Kontakt as the main sampler -- wouldn't you need a second license for simultaneous use? And so saving that cost, plus the power supply, plus the extra monitor, disk drives, etc etc, would contribute a good chunk of the cost of a bigger and better single machine -- I regularly use perilously close to my entire 64Gb of memory, so I'm debating the same issue.


----------



## rgames (Feb 21, 2016)

FredrikJonasson said:


> This is totally new to me. What is determining the achievable RAM? Where's the line for how many GB that is actually effective?


I'm not sure what you mean by "achievable RAM" but the machine can handle only so many voices *at one time*. So you can load up 128 GB worth of samples but you can only have so many playing at one time. For example, let's say you load up EVERY mic position for EVERY string library out there. And let's say you have some high-voice-count passages like 1/32nd note runs in the violins. As long as you use only one or two libraries and/or mic positions at a time, you're fine. But if you send that violin line to ALL of them at the same time then it'll never work. It doesn't matter that they're loaded into RAM - the computer can't keep up with the playback.

So, sure, you can have everything loaded up but if you need more voices than the machine can handle then you have two choices:

1. Bounce tracks to audio
2. Get a second machine

If you never exceed the voice count that the machine can handle then there's no issue. If you do exceed the voice count then those are your only options - RAM has no effect on voice count. Having multiple machines gives you much more flexibility because you can add a lot more voices before you have to bounce. You can also run at lower latency because the machines aren't working as hard.

I've never seen an example of a practical setup that benefits from 128 GB RAM - why would you load up so many libraries and mic positions but never use them? Especially since SSDs came on the scene, RAM usage has dropped dramatically. You can drop the pre-load buffers way down these days. Except for PLAY, of course, but that player performs poorly, anyway, so you're forced to multiple machines if you want to use an all-PLAY setup with moderately complex musical material.

In my experience, two $1500 machines will always outperform a single $3000 machine. However, if you don't need high voice counts then a single machine is "good enough" and there's no point in getting more than one.

rgames


----------



## wpc982 (Feb 21, 2016)

rgames, you keep raising the issue of "voice counts" --- but really, if this is music we are talking about, how many "voices" can an ear hear? Surely fewer than a medium-powered computer can produce. In the old days, Gigastudio, sure I occasionally hit more than 56 simultaneous voices (or whatever the limit was) due to reverb tails, but I haven't even had to think about voice count for years and years.

In all my Kontakt instances I have "Cpu overload" disabled -- supposedly this is a thing that drops voices when there are too many. Never have a problem, and I do load up to 48 Gb or so of samples for a typical orchestra and chorus project.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (Feb 21, 2016)

wpc982 said:


> rgames, you keep raising the issue of "voice counts" --- but really, if this is music we are talking about, how many "voices" can an ear hear? Surely fewer than a medium-powered computer can produce. In the old days, Gigastudio, sure I occasionally hit more than 56 simultaneous voices (or whatever the limit was) due to reverb tails, but I haven't even had to think about voice count for years and years.
> 
> In all my Kontakt instances I have "Cpu overload" disabled -- supposedly this is a thing that drops voices when there are too many. Never have a problem, and I do load up to 48 Gb or so of samples for a typical orchestra and chorus project.



If you consider things like legato, release trails, multiple mic positions, fast playing, etc. a single patch can hit over 100 voices (even just holding down the sustain pedal on a simple piano patch and playing). I can imagine a complex action cue hitting over 1000 voices if you're using the more voice intensive libraries.


----------



## shomyca (Feb 21, 2016)

Well, I used single machine for a couple of years, i7 2600k, 32GB ...I recently bought new master, 5820k 64gb, old one is now slave. Voice count limit is a real thing, unfortunately. I did this upgrade because I was hitting voice count limit...sure, 32gb was a pain in the ass as I couldn't load all the instruments I wanted to sit there ready to be tried and recorded...BUT, the real problem was the count of the instruments (voices) that can be played at the same time. For example, I couldn't dream about layering different string libraries if I wanted all to be streamed real time...never bother with bouncing, another pain in the... I was focusing on the music arrangements, orchestration (you can do beautiful stuff just with LASS) ...but now with two machine, totally different story.

And btw... it seams that my new 6-core cpu can not stream more instruments than my 4 years old 4-core...how's that!?  Exactly what rgames was talking about all this time 

I was thinking whether to buy 4-core or 6-core... I went for 6-core because of plugins, I saw some benchmarks...it turns out that more cores are better for plugins, so you can run more instances of verbs, eqs, comps, itd... Not sure if that's true though...


----------



## wpc982 (Feb 21, 2016)

out of curiosity, how do you know that voice counts are exceeding your limits? And what is your VST instrument? I typically use 6 Kontakt instances, quite filled with instruments in banks; 100 tracks, three string libraries, two choral libraries, woodwinds, brass, percussion. I don't know of any way to sum up the voice counts from the different instances, but just observing the little counters in each Kontakt window there might be a couple hundred voices active at any time, and CPU usage coasts along at 3-5 percent, while memory usage of my 64 gigs is around 80-90%. I rarely use multiple mic positions, so maybe that helps.


----------



## neblix (Feb 21, 2016)

wpc982 said:


> Let's say you are using Kontakt as the main sampler -- wouldn't you need a second license for simultaneous use?



No, because Kontakt doesn't use ridiculous and out-of-touch DRM models.


----------



## shomyca (Feb 22, 2016)

wpc982 said:


> out of curiosity, how do you know that voice counts are exceeding your limits? And what is your VST instrument? I typically use 6 Kontakt instances, quite filled with instruments in banks; 100 tracks, three string libraries, two choral libraries, woodwinds, brass, percussion. I don't know of any way to sum up the voice counts from the different instances, but just observing the little counters in each Kontakt window there might be a couple hundred voices active at any time, and CPU usage coasts along at 3-5 percent, while memory usage of my 64 gigs is around 80-90%. I rarely use multiple mic positions, so maybe that helps.



The performance meter tells me. I never counted voices but I see my asio/vst/performance meter is going higher every time I add (record, not add to ram) instrument. And when that instrument are fast pizzicato, for example, meter goes up more than if it is some sustain (a lot of short samples streamed, more voices at a time ...and some instruments stream more voices than others)... When it's too much going on at the same time I begin to get audio artifacts as in, peaks and dropouts.

One powerful machine can stream quite a lot, I used quad core 32gb system for 4 years as a full time game composer, especially if you rise you buffer settings, but there is a limit, there are some really demanding librarys. What is that limit? Richard says it is 1500 voices.

Amount of RAM is just giving you that possibility to have more of your instruments ready to be played instantaneous, nothing more. And that is a great thing, I see myself make upgrade to 128gb in the future  ...but I was far from able to stream all of the loaded instruments and articulations in my old 32gb system, at the same time.


----------



## synapse21 (Feb 22, 2016)

> In my experience, two $1500 machines will always outperform a single $3000 machine. However, if you don't need high voice counts then a single machine is "good enough" and there's no point in getting more than one.



Richard, is there a way to increase the voice count on a single machine? Does voice count performance increase using the default 60kB buffer Kontakt starts with, as opposed to the streamlined 10-18kB example you mentioned for streaming from SSD drives (using more memory)?

- Rodney


----------



## shomyca (Feb 22, 2016)

synapse21 said:


> Richard, is there a way to increase the voice count on a single machine? Does voice count performance increase using the default 60kB buffer Kontakt starts with, as opposed to the streamlined 10-18kB example you mentioned for streaming from SSD drives (using more memory)?
> 
> - Rodney



Good question. I would guess that it doesn't have anything with the voice count, but still would hear the answer from Richard.


----------



## Sean Beeson (Feb 22, 2016)

I am using the 5820k with 129gb of RAM right now. Able to load every spitifre library I own with three mic positions and some RAM to spare!

Streaming from a PCIe Intel 750 SSD 1.2 tb.

No problems here!


----------



## synapse21 (Feb 22, 2016)

Those PCIe SSDs are little beasts! It is simply bandwidth then? SATA III / SSD combinations being too slow for large voice counts?


----------



## Sean Beeson (Feb 22, 2016)

synapse21 said:


> Those PCIe SSDs are little beasts! It is simply bandwidth then? SATA III / SSD combinations being too slow for large voice counts?


I think you can do fine with just SSDs too. My last PC had 10 of them, and that reached a point where I was saturating the bus or something odd... I just decided to build a dedicated Spitfire machine, and a dedicated Berlin Machine, load 'em up to the brim, let them run cool and stable and have overhead too!


----------



## FredrikJonasson (Feb 23, 2016)

Sean Beeson said:


> I think you can do fine with just SSDs too. My last PC had 10 of them, and that reached a point where I was saturating the bus or something odd... I just decided to build a dedicated Spitfire machine, and a dedicated Berlin Machine, load 'em up to the brim, let them run cool and stable and have overhead too!



Sean, do you mind sharing your specs? I'm super confused trying to build a new workstation with that much memory, and if it makes sense to use a single machine at all. For example what motherboard do you use?

I'll gladly start a new thread if I go off topic..

Also for the streaming part of your post, that is solely for increase number of voices if I understand you right, not crushing the RAM with Spitfire instruments?

EDIT: Regarding the motherboard, for example the X99-A would work. However any comments or tips is appreciated. 

2nd EDIT: Actually my vendor seems to be missinformed; all X99 motherboards , including Deluxe, I've looked up on over at ASUS site only supports 64GB.


----------



## shomyca (Feb 23, 2016)

I don't consider myself as an expert, I am in the game just for 4-5 years...but was learning a lot from this forum and others...so pls, feel free to correct me.

RAM is the fastest storage unit in the system, right? So I don't see why is there a SSD talk at all concerning the voice count. So let's presume that we have unlimited amount of RAM. Even then we can stream the same amount of voices at the same time as we can with 32GB RAM, or less... RAM, and any other type of storage (ssd, hdd, pcie ssd, m2), has nothing to do with the maximum number of voices that we can stream at the same time. People were experimenting with the faster RAM also, and everyone came to same conclusion that faster RAM doesn't benefit for audio, and we don't get more voices at time because of that. So it's not the storage, it's something else...or everything together.

It's the system bandwidth... I don't know how to call it another way. I would really love to hear the real tech explanation about all of this...


----------

