Please be advised that due to scheduled infrastructure maintenance, we anticipate downtimes for the Native Instruments websites and Native Access on February 28, 2024 starting at 06:00 CET. For more details, click here.

Windows PC equivalent of Maschine+ specs

WarriorLite Member Posts: 66 Member

I know this a huge approximation, vst3 has yet to be implemented, and I think I read M+ code is optimised but where all other elements are equal, what is the rough equivalent of M+ CPU on a PC?


  • Kubrak
    Kubrak Member Posts: 2,753 Expert
    edited March 2023

    Maschine Plus is powered by a quadcore, 1.6GHz Intel Atom processor, 4GB of RAM. Atom cores are something like e-cores in 12th and 13th gen Intels, not very powerfull cores....

    In my experience, you need much stronger CPU and more RAM even for basic work on PC. I run Maschine also on 4C/8T 3 GHz i5 10th gen, 16 GB RAM for basic sketching.

  • D-One
    D-One Moderator Posts: 2,722 mod
    edited March 2023

    What do you mean by equivalent? It is a normal low-end (and of course low power consumption) laptop PC CPU; E3940.

    IMHO If you compare it to a PC/Mac running a full OS it's about as slow as a normal dual-core laptop from 2008-2014 or something... In terms of how much you can do before the audio starts to crack.

    A low-end 100$ i3 for example is at the very least 2x faster - but also has to deal with a more bloated OS and render graphics, more or less a similar experience but of course, the M+ gets completely crushed performance-wise with even a cheap 600$ modern windows PC (or a 600$ mac mini).

  • WarriorLite
    WarriorLite Member Posts: 66 Member

    By equivalent I mean when taken into account the adjustment you mention related to a full-fledged (i.e. largely redundant) operating system, graphics etc vs presumably, optimised dedicated streamlined system. Latency might be an issue but for equivalence, they will need to be made equal.

    I think I will just need to check against my x230 thinkpad, roughly, from the epoch you mentioned.

    Here is what the GPT oracle said:

    The Intel Celeron E3940 is a low-power quad-core processor primarily designed for embedded systems and has a base clock speed of 1.6 GHz. On the other hand, the Intel Core i5-3320M processor found in the ThinkPad X230 is a dual-core processor with a base clock speed of 2.6 GHz.

    In terms of raw processing power, the i5-3320M is significantly more powerful than the E3940, as it has a higher clock speed and more powerful architecture. The i5-3320M is also equipped with Intel's Hyper-Threading technology, which allows each physical core to run two threads simultaneously, effectively doubling the number of logical cores and improving multi-threaded performance.

    Moreover, the i5-3320M has a higher TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 35W compared to the E3940's 6.5W, which means it can sustain higher clock speeds for longer periods without throttling.

    Overall, the i5-3320M is a more powerful processor than the E3940 and will provide better performance in most applications, especially those that require multi-threaded processing.

    What I'll do is compare massive alone performance. I trust that my 16 gig ram and a ssd speak for clear advantage in the realm of samples.

Back To Top