# Latencymon and Graphics cards -- best for audio



## JohnG

Hi there,

Latencymon keeps telling me that I'm getting the biggest interrupts from my external graphics cards. Nvidia seems to be a real issue in some cases, though updating to the latest drivers helps. DirectX Graphics Kernel also seems to be an issue, as is NT Kernel & System, but not much to do about the latter, I assume.

First off, is this "real" or something that Latencymon just kicks out? Second, if it is real, what is the lowest interrupting card for graphics for what we do?

Thanks,

John


----------



## Jay Panikkar

I have a GTX 1070 in one of my systems, a 1060 on my laptop and I have run into latency issues with both of them. Disabling the card fixed the issue for me in both cases. 

nVidia's Pascal cards seem particularly vulnerable, but I don't think it's a hardware issue. LatencyMon shows this one file called nvlddmkm.sys (NVIDIA Windows Kernel Mode Driver) as the main culprit. This file takes too long to execute and presumably messes with the audio buffers. 

I don't encounter this issue consistently—it's seemingly random and that makes it quite frustrating. Some driver versions seem to exacerbate this issue while other versions seem to reduce it, but I've yet to find a common and consistent solution.


----------



## JohnG

I took my external card out of my strings computer completely, which resulted in a huge improvement. On that computer, I'm using the onboard graphics port from the motherboard.

Have two PCs that don't have any onboard graphics, however, so I'm on the hunt for a non-Nvidia card.


----------



## Jay Panikkar

You could look into the previous generation of AMD cards, the RX 500 series of cards. Be warned though, with all the cryptomining madness, these guys may be either out of stock, or hiked to ridiculous prices.


----------



## Killiard

I’ve just moved from Mac to PC and have been getting this issue too. I was using an Nvidia GTX960 in my Mac and so just dumped it in my pc build. 

Surely there must be some sort of solution to this instead of having to buy another card? I don’t want to have to spend more money!!


----------



## Jay Panikkar

Are you sure it's your GTX 960? Did you try disabling the 960 to see if it resolves the problem? You need to double-check.


----------



## Killiard

Not yet no. It’s been one of those things where I spent some time trying to look into it, then some work came in and I never got round to fixing it!!

Latency monitor was looking like this






Then Jason (Tack) suggested I roll back to another driver to see if it helped. It did a little...






But then I went and reinstalled the most up to date driver and it was the same as the older driver I tried.

There’s a few videos on the YouTube about it too...



But yes, next step is to disable the GTX and run off the internal graphics to see what difference it makes.


----------



## EvilDragon

We don't really need graphics cards for the work we do if the CPU has an integrated GPU...

OTOH, if you're working with both audio and graphics (3D rendering and whatnot), then yeah, you'd need one. But if you're doing audio only, you don't need it really. I drive two 24" monitors from the iGPU of my i7-6700K without any hitch or DPC spiking.


----------



## Killiard

I sadly can’t run my setup from the iGPU. I need HDMI 2 to run my main screen at 4K 60hz! The display port runs my second 1440p screen.

And ye know, playing games n stuff


----------



## EvilDragon

I'd have a dedicated machine for games, so that the DAW machine is "pure".

In your situation I'd run the 4K display over DP and run the 1440p display over HDMI. Get a converter if the monitor doesn't have HDMI input (what kind of monitor apart from Apple's doesn't have a HDMI input these days?).


----------



## Killiard

Thanks. I don’t really play many games to be honest. Just every now and again - honest! Not enough to justify building a whole machine for it anyway (I’ve two kids under 6!). 

Thanks for display setup recommendation. Annoyingly my 4K display is actually a tv and therefore doesn’t have a DP. The 1440p is a Dell so it has everything 

If the mobo supported HDMI 2 I’d be sorted!


----------



## EvilDragon

Get this:

https://www.amazon.com/Club3D-Displayport-1-2-HDMI-CAC-1070/dp/B017BQ8I54 (LINK)

Mobo DP to this to TV. Mobo HDMI to Dell.


Pretty much all the digital ports (DVI, HDMI, DP) are interchangeable with the right adapter.


----------



## Killiard

Awesome! I’ll buy one now 
Thanks for your help. 

And sorry for hijacking your thread John!


----------



## JohnG

Killiard said:


> And sorry for hijacking your thread John!



[sniff, whimper, weep....]

I still need a solution. The two PCs using onboard graphics port perform far better on Latencymon than those with graphics cards. Need something non-Nvidia. Is Intel any better? Do they even make graphics cards?


----------



## tack

My DPC latency is consistently solid. Although previously I had run 388.13, it's been so far well behaved even with the latest driver (installed this weekend to play Far Cry 5 ).

One thing I do which may or may not matter: I don't install any of the extraneous stuff (3D vision drivers, HD audio driver, GeForce Experience). I also disable the NVIDIA telemetry service (although I wouldn't expect that to affect DPC latency).


----------



## Killiard

I may have treated myself to Farcry 5 too. Purely for research purposes of course. Wanted to see what my new machine could do


----------



## tack

Certainly. Assessing overall performance while stabbing people in the neck is the pinnacle of system benchmarking.


----------



## Killiard

And fishing. Don’t forget the fishing.


----------



## Mornats

tack said:


> My DPC latency is consistently solid. Although previously I had run 388.13, it's been so far well behaved even with the latest driver (installed this weekend to play Far Cry 5 ).
> 
> One thing I do which may or may not matter: I don't install any of the extraneous stuff (3D vision drivers, HD audio driver, GeForce Experience). I also disable the NVIDIA telemetry service (although I wouldn't expect that to affect DPC latency).



I'll give that a go. I'm a hobbyist so my audio PC is also my gaming PC, photo PC and everything-else PC. I'm running a GTX 970 and latency monitor shows my GPU to be running up some latency. It was much worse when I had one of the free anti virus programs running (Avast or AVG). Swapped to NOD32 and things are much improved other than my GPU.


----------



## tack

My PC is also a general use system, for doing All The Things. It's certainly easier to optimize when you have a system dedicated to a specific task.

Personally I'd just use Defender. (Actually _personally_ I don't use any antivirus at all, but if I was making recommendations for people who aren't already pathologically paranoid about computer hygiene, it'd be to stick with Defender.)


----------



## Bender-offender

I’m having this same issue. The Nvidia drivers are causing the most latency. I’ve uninstalled them, but then you lose OpenGL which Breeze 2 needs (unfortunately). 

Does anyone know if a low-end AMD gfx card will have better drivers? Such as this card: https://www.bestbuy.com/site/xfx-amd-radeon-r5-220-2gb-ddr3-pci-express-2-1-graphics-card-silver/5315600.p?skuId=5315600


----------



## Austin Haynes

I have an Nvidia 970 GTX in my Windows 10 machine and haven't had any problems. In latencymon, the highest report DPC routine execution time is 254.384667 which is totally fine. I'm running driver version 23.21.13.8813 dated 10/27/17. The motherboard I'm using is an Asus x99 Deluxe and I belive the Nvidia 970 GTX is also an Asus brand so maybe that is making a difference?


----------



## Nathanael Iversen

I've got a 1060GTX in the DAW (Win10), running 388.43 drivers. The system is stable in the 22-23 range on LatencyMon. That said, it is still not as good as the onboard Intel motherboard graphics for latency. The system was rock solid at 5-7 and NEVER spiked. I get occasional spikes with the GTX, and slightly more system load on the Cubase performance meter. They don't seem to disturb Cubase, but the system was definitely more stable without the card. I use it to drive a 24" touchscreen in addition to the main screen, but when I upgrade the motherboard and CPU to one of the newer ones that supports multiple monitors, I'll likely pull the graphics card. Happily, the fan NEVER comes on - I never game on the system, so the card is completely idle compared to its capabilities. 

In a VEP sample server box, I do have a passive Nvidia 920 or something like that (Win 7 box). That system is completely stable with negligible latency. Now that it is stable, I never touch it. 

In direct answer to your question, John, if there is any way to use Intel onboard graphics, they seem to work well. I have found that I need to disable the audio drivers for any monitors or such that install with the Intel driver package. Outside motherboard graphics, it is all gamer cards or graphics designer cards. I've always wondered if the drivers for Quadro cards and such are better for our use?


----------



## JohnG

Nathanael Iversen said:


> In direct answer to your question, John, if there is any way to use Intel onboard graphics, they seem to work well.



You're right -- the two PCs that have onboard graphics far outperform the two that lack that. I second the motion for onboard graphics!


----------



## Nathanael Iversen

With Cubase currently unable to use more than 14 cores (real or hyperthreaded), I'm planning to upgrade the DAW to something like the i7-8700k that has onboard graphics and gets north of 4 Ghz on an easy overclock. I can't come up with a good reason to buy a large core-count machine that requires external graphics. The real-time performance for me has been better with built-in graphics, and I only use my music computers for music and have no need for 3D acceleration. I do need to run two monitors, but that is now possible.


----------



## Jay Panikkar

Has anybody tried AMD RX 560 cards? It's a cheap graphics card that supports OpenGL and everything else. I haven't heard of latency issues with AMD 5xx series of cards.


----------



## Killiard

Nathanael Iversen said:


> With Cubase currently unable to use more than 14 cores (real or hyperthreaded), I'm planning to upgrade the DAW to something like the i7-8700k that has onboard graphics and gets north of 4 Ghz on an easy overclock.



That’s what I did last month. I’m overclocking it at 4.8GHz with little effort. Only cost me £1200 to put together but I only put 32gb of ram in there. Ram is still really silly money at the moment.


----------



## EvilDragon

Nathanael Iversen said:


> With Cubase currently unable to use more than 14 cores (real or hyperthreaded)



Just some info (even though technically off-topic and a Reaper plug, ehehe, but I'm evil so let's roll), Reaper has no issues like these. Due to the way Reaper does anticipative processing, not all threads need to be MMCSS, anticipative processing threads can actually be slower. So Reaper can use up all the cores your CPU has without issues.


----------



## Nathanael Iversen

EvilDragon said:


> Just some info (even though technically off-topic and a Reaper plug, ehehe, but I'm evil so let's roll), Reaper has no issues like these. Due to the way Reaper does anticipative processing, not all threads need to be MMCSS, anticipative processing threads can actually be slower. So Reaper can use up all the cores your CPU has without issues.



Thanks for thinking of me! You made me laugh. I am quite aware of Reaper. Reaper is becoming very hard to ignore. As good as Logic and Cubase are, Reaper is kind of a wonder - something that is only possible now, not 15 years ago. It is a product of an entirely different era, and it shows. I don't have time to really play with it, and the repeated insistence that "it can be anything you want IF you customize it" doesn't endear it to me. I have excellent computer skills, and could even script stuff for it, but I don't really want that near my music. 

Truth is, the Cubase situation is quite manageable for most people, I think. I run several VEP sample servers, so my DAW doesn't have to be monstrous. If I decide to go "big DAW" with a massive "Extreme Edition" chip, I would just host all the sample stuff in VEP, which will happily use all the cores that Cubase won't (and I'm quite sure I wouldn't be saturating 14 real cores in the DAW portion). 

I am sure that Steinberg will re-architect whatever they need to. It won't be fun or easy for them, though. This is bound to touch some "deep" parts of their code-base that will require a lot of QA and iteration to get right. The law of unintended consequences tends to show up on these kinds of massive re-architecture missions. It will certainly be a bigger test for Steinberg than the outside world will know, and is no doubt a very annoying thing for their product managers to have to focus on vs new features.

If it starts affecting my work, I'll certainly look at Reaper, but the thought of rebuilding my whole environment around any other DAW is unexciting.


----------



## star.keys

I remember I replaced my Nvidia card with RX 570 and it helped solve all wired peaks and cracks. Latency monitor reported stable performance.


----------



## Piano Pete

I have been unable to run NVIDIA GPU's in my systems, mostly Cubase/Protools, for the past several years. I do not know what is going on, but as soon as I switched to AMD, everything seemed to calm down perfectly fine. I made the switch back in Cubase 8, and I have been unable to move back to NVIDIA since.

While NVIDIA definitely has better GPU performance, they just do not seem to play well with DAWs, and as Dragon commented, that performance is not needed for what we do.

--Edit:

Technically my cheese grater mac has an AMD in it as well, but I have never had any need to do testing, nor wanted to spend additional money, to figure out if NVIDIA would have been a better choice. It runs Logic perfectly.

--Second Edit:

Even for those who do graphics work or gaming on their DAW computers, AMD has plenty of power in the lineup to satisfy those functions.


----------



## JohnG

thanks all.

Now the question is which AMD card. One of my computers is "real old," with an ASUS motherboard model P6X58D Premium. There's no list of graphics cards but the manual says it can accommodate a PCIe 2.0 x16 card.

this one looks like it might fill the bill: 
MSI AMD Radeon HD 6450 2GB DDR3 VGA/DVI/HDMI Low Profile PCI-Express Video Card R6450-2GD3H/LP


----------



## chimuelo

I’ve used on die GFX since the Clarksdale CPUs (that first combo sucked).
I see no need for graphics cards.
Before these CPUs with iGPUs I used Matrox and then EVGA low end NVIDIA GeForce 30 dollar cards with HDMI/DVI.
Sometimes less is more.


----------



## tabulius

JohnG said:


> thanks all.
> 
> Now the question is which AMD card. One of my computers is "real old," with an ASUS motherboard model P6X58D Premium. There's no list of graphics cards but the manual says it can accommodate a PCIe 2.0 x16 card.
> 
> this one looks like it might fill the bill:
> MSI AMD Radeon HD 6450 2GB DDR3 VGA/DVI/HDMI Low Profile PCI-Express Video Card R6450-2GD3H/LP




You can use any PCIe 3.0 card in a 2.0 slot. Not much effect on a performance either. I have GTX 980 in a 2.0 slot and it works fine. No issues with Latencymon with my Nvidia card.


----------



## JohnG

thanks -- ordered it already. Hope to see a bit of a difference; the computer is ancient but the Nvidia drivers do seem to be an issue.

John


----------



## Paul Jelfs

The problem though being those of us with Xeon or Non Intergrated GPU (Like X99 Chipset etc) - No other choice than using an external card. Anyone else in a similar situation that has found a cheap-ish card that works well with Cubase, RME Raydat and Sample Libraries for big templates ?

Use a 730Gt and have used a 960 GTX in the past - same problem when VST's open on large projects . 

Pj


----------



## Piano Pete

Paul, I would suggest grabbing an AMD and see if it fixes your situation. Just find one that meets whatever requirements you need, number of monitors or whatever else. Check for whatever card is most cost effective and try it. Many places, even Newegg, will let you return stuff if it does not fulfill your requirements--as long as you do not break it.


----------



## chimuelo

If latencies still occur use this app along with LatencyMon to see if your hardware and software, including the OS, have installed HPET drivers without you knowing it.
I have no latency issues as I prefer iGPUs but Cards might or might not install drivers, that in turn kick on drivers in the BIOS and the OS, or in some cases even both.

http://www.bytemedev.com/programs/harmonic-help/


----------



## chrisphan

Excuse me for hijacking the thread, but could anyone tell me if my Latencymon readings are ok here? The 4th bar down is the only one that's always peaking, the rest stay well below 200 most of the time. I usually make music with 512 buffer setting, if that matters.


----------



## JohnG

chrisphan said:


> could anyone tell me if my Latencymon readings are ok here?



That storport thing causes problems for me as well. I have searched a couple of times and not found a real solution for excising or bypassing it.


----------



## JohnG

Piano Pete said:


> Paul, I would suggest grabbing an AMD and see if it fixes your situation.



I did that and unloaded all the Nvidia stuff, and it did help a lot. 

However, I still see issues with other stuff, like:

ndis.sys (on the PC whose card I replaced)

dxgkrnl.sys (on my winds/choir PC). I guess I can replace that computer's graphics card too.


----------



## chrisphan

JohnG said:


> That storport thing causes problems for me as well. I have searched a couple of times and not found a real solution for excising or bypassing it.


Is your OS installed on an M.2 NVME SSD? I tried booting mine from an HDD and that storport problem was gone. I assume a SATA SSD should do as well.

What I'm really curious about is does it actually affect my real-time performance? Because as I understand, the upper 2 bars represent the actual latency, the lower 2 diagnose the problem. So if my first 2 are well under 200, should I be good to go?


----------



## JohnG

It's booting from a regular WD hard drive.

as far as interpreting every detail of Latencymon, honestly IDK @chrisphan

But I have reduced my buffer from 1024 to 512 on that PC which is a win. It's quite old now so not sure putting even $50 for a graphics card was smart or if I should just bite the bullet and get another computer altogether to house the samples on the ones that are giving trouble.

Next lifetime...


----------



## chrisphan

JohnG said:


> Next lifetime...



Ha! I sometimes wish I could go back to not knowing as much about computers as I do now. Life was simpler back then...


----------



## Piano Pete

How much has it helped or not? What was your GPU timing before and after and over all latency, before and after as well?

The problem with ndis.sys and dxgkrnl.sys is that those are windows processes and not gpu related--if I am not mistaken. I cannot remember everything associated with those two things off the top of my head. I would need to do some digging, specifically for the gear you have as well. Unfortunately, tweaking the gpu may not do much with those, if anything. (I swear trying to fix these problems is like dealing with a russian nesting doll...)

You could try messing around with different drivers and patches, but as I am sure you are well aware, this is extremely time consuming and can sometimes only produce minimal improvements; at a certain point new gear is the best fix. I will be completely honest, this is something that I usually do by trial and error, step by step, with any computer I try to optimize. I usually keep a chart for each computer I build to keep track of all of this. Some things you can kind of go straight to and tweak expecting there to be a potential roadblock, but other than that, I am still amazed what has to be adjusted on certain computers. (I also hate when there is a problem, you tweak a process to then have to go back and undo this change to find the computer running better than it was before... how does this happen???) This is why I typically prefer to build everything I use, as it helps me trouble shoot down the road. I still have to use a specific Ethernet driver on my main pc and another one on my main slave. It took me forever to find the right ones, but I cannot touch them without causing horrendous issues. 

I would say that if you got a reasonable improvement on performance, $50 is pretty nominal for a quality of life improvement. If you feel that it was not worth it, you could return the card if that is still an option, or keep it for a rainy-day. 

Sometimes you just need new gear, and with something as mission critical as a master or slave rig, this is an area that I never feel is worth skimping on. At a certain point, it is unavoidable as much as we all despise it. 

You could also potentially try getting an SSD for your OS drive and to host your DAW on. I saw that you boot from a mechanical drive. I'm a fan of the tried and true 850evo/pro. The nice thing is if you decide to build a new computer, you could always just pop that SSD over, so it would not be a complete waste of money. 

If you keep having issues, is there anyway you could post a pic of the latencymon results or something with your rig setup? Unfortunately, I do not know how much digging I can do at the moment. I am currently in the midst of re-doing my template/studio before a job and trying to fix a thankfully not mission critical computer; I have been procrastinating on the computer for awhile.


----------



## JohnG

Thanks @Piano Pete .

I think I'm at the end of my tether for this computer and, as you hypothesized, the only sure remedy would be to get new guts for it. Sadly, that means new RAM, mobo, and CPU, and that also means reinstalling or reauthorizing a ton of things, the prospect of which makes me want to curl into a ball and hide.

But having reduced my buffer from 1024 to 512 I am going to leave things where they are until I just can't stand it, or Bill Gates comes to my house with a New Great Thing that Solves All Musicians' Problems.

Your post makes eminent sense overall and thank you for taking the time to offer your advice.

Kind regards,

John


----------



## MarcusD

Interesting thread. I've just downloaded Latencymon and ran it to compare desktop use with DAW use and I've got an interesting result with a GTX 1070 (founders edition) card. It appears that my latency issues are Kernal and Directx related. But when running the DAW it seems to improve, you would think it'd do the opposite.


----------



## DAW PLUS

That test is way too short, and latencymon should run without any other app running, so you can see whether the system runs clean in idle - which it should. 
IMO Nvidia Quadro drivers are much better, we don't have DPC spikes with Pascal cards, although very incidental up to 600µs - which is no showstopper for a composer system. AMD drivers are slightly better regarding DPC but they can be a PITA with high resolutions and DP connections.


----------



## Zoot_Rollo

here's mine after 10 minutes:

i7-7820x, 2x 2tb m.2, 128gb ram, evga 1080 ti

finally getting good VI counts with good CPU - even in Studio One Pro 4.0.1

when i run Vienna Ensemble Pro 6 to local host my VIs, barely a CPU blip.

lovely.


----------



## Allen Constantine

What do you guys think of these reports? 

I seem to be having some audio clicks and pops when using Cubase or any other audio applications, including playing movies, clips on YT, etc...


----------



## DAW PLUS

AllenConstantine said:


> What do you guys think of these reports?
> 
> I seem to be having some audio clicks and pops when using Cubase or any other audio applications, including playing movies, clips on YT, etc...


DPC Latency checker is not compatible with anything after Windows 7 , so ignore that tool.
Latencymon shows excellent results, although that spike at 524µs ideally would be a bit lower but nothing which should cause pops and clicks. Either something in the background is tampering with your system, like a weird BIOS bug regarding RAM speed settings I once detected, or simply wrong BIOS & Windows settings.


----------



## Ben

AllenConstantine said:


> What do you guys think of these reports?
> 
> I seem to be having some audio clicks and pops when using Cubase or any other audio applications, including playing movies, clips on YT, etc...


Which CPU model do you own? Have you already tried to disable all energy-saving options in Windows?


----------



## vitocorleone123

There's a utility that can help with NVIDIA on some systems. You run it as an admin and check it every driver update. It helped my system but didn’t fix it all. MSI utility v2.

I have a 970 With an i9.


----------



## Allen Constantine

Ben said:


> Which CPU model do you own? Have you already tried to disable all energy-saving options in Windows?



i7 3770k. A tad old but I am using it with ASUS ROG MAXIMUS V mobo and 24gb of ram.


----------



## Allen Constantine

vitocorleone123 said:


> There's a utility that can help with NVIDIA on some systems. You run it as an admin and check it every driver update. It helped my system but didn’t fix it all. MSI utility v2.
> 
> I have a 970 With an i9.




Thanks. I'll try the MSI utility and check.


----------



## chimuelo

I never use a card because I don’t use video on my DAW, strictly a monitor for editing, programming and performing. So on die GFX is simple and hassle free.

Upcoming build using an AMD 3700X will use ASPEED ADT2500 chip on motherboard for those tasks. 2D is plenty. The PCI 4.0 16x slot will get my meager PCI 3.0 1x Connector card for the DSP Rack.

ASRock definitely has some great options for RackMount builds.
This X570 Mini ITX should continue the tradition.
Been using their Server/Workstation boards with enthusiast chipsets for years.
Love their high quality PCB and life long parts. Not cheap but notch above consumer/gamer boards.






ASRock Rack > X570D4I-2T







www.asrockrack.com


----------



## Piano Pete

Revisiting an old thread with a new quandary. Figure it would better to keep this contained rather than a new one: 

@DAW PLUS

Been asked to build a few multi use systems for 3D modeling and Audio Production. The workload is fairly intensive in both fields. For audio computers, per my experience, I have stayed away from Nvidia, as I have yet to find a happy middle ground where I do not want to throw them out the window. This causes a dilemma, as NVIDIA kills it for 3D rendering. Do you have any clue how performance would be affected by using an AMD card for the display while keeping other NVIDIA cards onboard to be used purely for rending? 

Unfortunately, I do not have any spare cards lying around to test this out. I'm curious to see what the affects of having both GPUs while having an AMD card as the main display. I tried convincing them to separate the build out into a render server and main computers, but they want each system to be self contained.


----------



## Boltrane

EvilDragon said:


> We don't really need graphics cards for the work we do if the CPU has an integrated GPU...
> 
> OTOH, if you're working with both audio and graphics (3D rendering and whatnot), then yeah, you'd need one. But if you're doing audio only, you don't need it really. I drive two 24" monitors from the iGPU of my i7-6700K without any hitch or DPC spiking.


I'm assembling parts for a new audio-production PC and am wondering what graphics card to choose -- or if I even need one. The CPU I'm looking at is an Intel Core i7-12700K (12-Core), which has a built-in Intel UHD Graphics 770 card. Can you speculate, is this adequate for DAW and VI use? Or do I need to add a dedicated graphics card? I have no idea -- and graphics cards range from less than $100 to $3,500 or more!


----------



## EvilDragon

I would say that should be enough for starters, and then you can later see if some of graphics-heavy plugins (if you own them) might create some problems. But that's pretty rare.


----------



## vitocorleone123

vitocorleone123 said:


> There's a utility that can help with NVIDIA on some systems. You run it as an admin and check it every driver update. It helped my system but didn’t fix it all. MSI utility v2.
> 
> I have a 970 With an i9.


I now have a RTX 260. Still no major issues. Still using msiutility v2 after every nvidia driver update (because the properties get reset on every driver update).


----------



## brek

Boltrane said:


> I'm assembling parts for a new audio-production PC and am wondering what graphics card to choose -- or if I even need one. The CPU I'm looking at is an Intel Core i7-12700K (12-Core), which has a built-in Intel UHD Graphics 770 card. Can you speculate, is this adequate for DAW and VI use? Or do I need to add a dedicated graphics card? I have no idea -- and graphics cards range from less than $100 to $3,500 or more!



The one thing I would look out for is support for multiple displays. My CPU is i7-10700: iirc the built in GPU does support multiple displays, but not my MOBO.

When my Radeon RX died this winter, I really didn't want to spend close to $1k on something meant for gaming/mining. I found the Nvidia Quadro T600 to be just what I needed, at a price that was *only* twice what I had spent on the previous card.


----------

