Why do you need 8 Cores?

[Mr. MacBook]

I'm just wondering why people want 8 cores so badly. I dont think there is ANY app that requires 8 Cores running at 2.33-3GHz to go fast. Four cores, maybe for gaming and intensive scientific graphic apps, but where the hell will 8 cores be needed?

Im speedy enough with a one core turion 64 processor, and even better with a core duo, why do we need dual core 2 quads in a Mac Pro? MacWorld cant even find a program with 4GB ram that will run faster than 2GB in a Mac Pro because there arent any ones that intensive

[amtctt]

I'm just wondering why people want 8 cores so badly. I dont think there is ANY app that requires 8 Cores running at 2.33-3GHz to go fast. Four cores, maybe for gaming and intensive scientific graphic apps, but where the hell will 8 cores be needed?

Im speedy enough with a one core turion 64 processor, and even better with a core duo, why do we need dual core 2 quads in a Mac Pro? MacWorld cant even find a program with 4GB ram that will run faster than 2GB in a Mac Pro because there arent any ones that intensive

Actually extra cores will hardly have much of an affect on gaming. Most pc games are not made for extra cores, unfortunately. I hope that they will in the future though. As far as 8 cores goes, it won't be long before some of the really intense programs will utilize all of them or at least most of them.

[robbieduncan]

I have code that I'm writing for work that uses well over 100 threads. I can always use more CPU. But that's server side code that processes millions of lines of data. Desktop stuff? Not so sure :D

[princealfie]

I have code that I'm writing for work that uses well over 100 threads. I can always use more CPU. But that's server side code that processes millions of lines of data. Desktop stuff? Not so sure :D

Cool but what are you exactly doing that requires 100 threads? Scientific computing?

[robbieduncan]

Cool but what are you exactly doing that requires 100 threads? Scientific computing?

Processing huge amounts of banking data.

[GFLPraxis]

3D rendering can use it. And I'm sure Apple will give us at NAB a new Final Cut designed to utilize 8 cores for video editors :D

[Multimedia]

I guess you haven't done any reading on the subject or you wouldn't be asking. It's not about ONE application using 8 cores at all. It's about being able to run several programs at once full bore. When transcoding video, those of us with only 4 cores have to put our work in a queue because once two processes are underway, the computer is hosed. With 8 cores, we will be able to run more processes before the system begins to get hosed. Still not what we need (16 cores), but better.

BTW FYI Toast 8 will use ALL 8 CORES at once to rip DVD Images much faster than it can now.

Moreover, all the 3D artists out there will probably be blasting you shortly. Everything 3D can use more than 8 cores at once.

[crees!]

I'm just wondering why people want 8 cores so badly. I dont think there is ANY app that requires 8 Cores running at 2.33-3GHz to go fast. Four cores, maybe for gaming and intensive scientific graphic apps, but where the hell will 8 cores be needed?

Im speedy enough with a one core turion 64 processor, and even better with a core duo, why do we need dual core 2 quads in a Mac Pro? MacWorld cant even find a program with 4GB ram that will run faster than 2GB in a Mac Pro because there arent any ones that intensive

Why would anyone want/need more than 640k RAM! :D

[Silentwave]

Multitasking and applications written to take advantages of multiple cores, maybe?

I know that my Core Duo MBP despite being very well specced out is only adequate for processing large numbers of high-res digital RAW images. I have multiple disk arrays that have sufficient throughput, but rendering and applying batch adjustments and conversions requires even more horsepower with every generation. Soon, my smallest digital files will be 10mp DSLR files, which I can shoot 5 of in a second now, possibly more shots at a possibly higher resolution within 6 months.

I'm also working with digital video, and more cores always helps when exporting from FCP via Compressor, or when rendering effects in Motion.

[twoodcc]

3D rendering can use it. And I'm sure Apple will give us at NAB a new Final Cut designed to utilize 8 cores for video editors :D

i agree here

[sdhollman]

I use After Effects, MAYA and Cinema 4D, a lot of times all at once, trust me I need them!

[Vidd]

Why would anyone want/need more than 640k RAM! :D

I was so disappointed when I discovered that quotation was fake! :(

Anyway, people convince themselves that they need these incredibly fast machines. That's one of the reasons that the acceptable G950 received so much criticism (although that seems to have dissipated recently).
People want to be able to say that they own an 8-core Mac.

EDIT: I don't mean to say that people couldn't legitimately need such a computer!
I'm just saying that many could do fine with the current iMacs!

[ATD]

Rendering. Every time I hit render in Maya it takes up 100% of every cpu I have connected, right now it's a quad and a dual. I just finished an animation that was 21 seconds long, with 6 cpus, all at 100% it took 28 hours to render. I'll take as many cpus as I can afford.

[daveporter]

Audio multitrack recording programs (Logic, Cubase, etc.) put full use to all 4 cores and all the RAM I have in my Mac Pro right now.

Faster processors, more cores, 64 bit OS and more memory capacity can all be used right now in the recording industry.

Dave

[FleurDuMal]

Because the more cores you have, the more girls will like you. It's the geek equivalent of having a large fun stick. :)

[dornoforpyros]

I don't, dual-core is just fine for my needs. But I'm not doing any video or 3d work really.

[dmw007]

Not sure why I need/want a Mac Pro with 8 cores...I guess so that I can be more productive in M$ Word and Safari. ;) :D :cool:

[bmcgrath]

Would photoshop get much of a boost with 8 cores?

[Multimedia]

Would photoshop get much of a boost with 8 cores?You mean the CS3 version that won't ship 'til April 25th before Leopard ships? Now who do you think knows? And if you think they know, what makes you think any of them are going to tell you before Adobe and Apple do? i.e. Yet To Be Determined. But certinaly multiple instances of Photoshop would. Probably not a good example as you'd have to buy more than one license.

[bmcgrath]

You mean the CS3 version that won't ship 'til April 25th before Leopard ships? Now who do you think knows? And if you think they know, what makes you think any of them are going to tell you before Adobe and Apple do? i.e. Yet To Be Determined. But certinaly multiple instances of Photoshop would. Probably not a good example as you'd have to buy more than one license.

A simple yes or no would have done but thanks for that

[Mr. MacBook]

I mean whywould apple need to release a 8 core MacPro to consumers, maybe to scientists and goverment/businesses, but idk why people really need more than four cores.

[MovieCutter]

Three words...

Final Cut Studio

[Multimedia]

I mean why would apple need to release a 8 core MacPro to consumers, maybe to scientists and goverment/businesses, but idk why people really need more than four cores.Well then you sir are not well read since most of these posts tell you why. I guess you'll be asking the same question next year why we need 16 cores. Because they're there silly. :eek: ;)

[Pigumon]

I mean whywould apple need to release a 8 core MacPro to consumers, maybe to scientists and goverment/businesses, but idk why people really need more than four cores.

It's odd that you'd ask a question if you're not willing to accept the answer given.

For apps that take advantage of every core, you're going to get the work done in half the time, or have more processors available to do other things. It's been said... Video and 3D apps will really see a boost from more processors. Generally these professionals won't be using this computer for playing games.

The name of the computer is MacPRO.. that stands for Professional. So it's aimed at Professionals. If you have a lot of work to do, the faster you do it the faster you get paid. if you can do it twice as fast.. well that's almost like getting twice the money (not really because there are lots of other factors but still..). You are getting things done more quickly and that does mean you will be able to get more things done in the same amount of time.

As far as consumers... although this top of the line computer is not aimed at consumers (i think you really need to understand that point), a lot of hobbyists do professional level work even though they are not doing that for a living. Isn't their time as important as others?

[Lycanthrope]

Well I want one and I'm just an over demanding home user...

Why do I want? Well I like to run multiple apps in parallel and get pissed off at the slightest drop in performance. Whereas individual applications perhaps don't take advantage of 8 cores I would imagine (but someone tell me if I'm wrong) that 8 applications running simultaneously would use a core each - perhaps that's simplifying it a little but I would expect the OS to distribute the load in such a case.

Also I'm thinking to invest in a computer that's going to be usable for 5 - 10 years, OK, nobody knows what may happen in the years to come but given the potential power of such a machine and the expandability for disk and RAM I think it will be money well spent in the long-run.

[blaaat]

Why do I want? Well I like to run multiple apps in parallel and get pissed off at the slightest drop in performance. Whereas individual applications perhaps don't take advantage of 8 cores I would imagine (but someone tell me if I'm wrong) that 8 applications running simultaneously would use a core each - perhaps that's simplifying it a little but I would expect the OS to distribute the load in such a case.


Amen, i just want to do a lot of things in the same time.
I'm pushing my current MB almost always to it's limits. I just need more power.

Waiting and waiting..

[Edge100]

Convolution reverbs like Space Designer or Altiverb use up massive amounts of CPU cycles. The more cores, the better.

Audio (like me) and video folks need all the power they can get.

[GFLPraxis]

You mean the CS3 version that won't ship 'til April 25th before Leopard ships? Now who do you think knows? And if you think they know, what makes you think any of them are going to tell you before Adobe and Apple do? i.e. Yet To Be Determined. But certinaly multiple instances of Photoshop would. Probably not a good example as you'd have to buy more than one license.

How about people who bothered to download the PUBLIC BETA?

I'd answer the question but my MacBook only has two cores so I can't test. If anyone with a Mac Pro would like to download the Photoshop CS3 public beta and run some filter and watch processor usage, let us know how it works!

[zap2]

I don't think there are any apps that NEED 8 core...however I'd be happy with 8 Core to rip DVD from handbrake(if handbrake support 8 cores, if it doesn't it will someday)


That said handbrake works fine on my Core Duo Mac Mini so I'm not a in a *huge* rush for Apple to relase an 8 core Mac :p

[tilman]

Multitasking and applications written to take advantages of multiple cores, maybe?


The catch here is that the rest of the system isn't scaled up the same way. Video encoding for example at some point will not go any faster no matter how many CPUs you throw at it because you have saturated your disk I/O.

[Multimedia]

How about people who bothered to download the PUBLIC BETA?

I'd answer the question but my MacBook only has two cores so I can't test. If anyone with a Mac Pro would like to download the Photoshop CS3 public beta and run some filter and watch processor usage, let us know how it works!BETA. Last time I looked there were still only 4 cores in the Mac Pro. So how's anyone gonna test the RELEASED version with 8 before April 25th and on a released 8 core Mac Pro until it's released and with Leopard on an 8 core Mac Pro until Leopard ships? You think Adobe didn't write all of CS3 Master Collection for 8 cores with Leopard management? Give me a break. :rolleyes:

[pengu]

You mean the CS3 version that won't ship 'til April 25th before Leopard ships? Now who do you think knows? And if you think they know, what makes you think any of them are going to tell you before Adobe and Apple do? i.e. Yet To Be Determined. But certinaly multiple instances of Photoshop would. Probably not a good example as you'd have to buy more than one license.

and of course it's unfathomable that someone has been using the CS3 beta and has FIRST HAND experience of whether PS CS3 uses say, four cores for a speed bump, which would tend to implicate that 8 cores will lead to a further bump.

[ATD]

I don't think there are any apps that NEED 8 core...

I disagree. This is on a quad, if it were a 8 core the number would be something like 785%. It will shallow every cpu you throw at it.

[Multimedia]

and of course it's unfathomable that someone has been using the CS3 beta and has FIRST HAND experience of whether PS CS3 uses say, four cores for a speed bump, which would tend to implicate that 8 cores will lead to a further bump.The assumption it will upscale to all 8 is not one I am willing to make. I don't believe that BETA software is the same thing as RELEASE software including features not included in the BETA versions. I hope you're right.

Don't misunderstand me. I invented 8 Core enthusiasm. I think anyone who doesn't buy an 8 Core Mac Pro is core challenged. Just trying to be conservative on the assumptions that's all.

[pengu]

The assumption it will upscale to all 8 is not one I am willing to make. I don't believe that BETA software is the same thing as RELEASE software including features not included in the BETA versions. I hope you're right.

Don't misunderstand me. I invented 8 Core enthusiasm. I think anyone who doesn't buy an 8 Core Mac Pro is an idiot. Just trying to be conservative on the assumptions that's all.

while it MAY NOT upscale as efficiently to 8 cores, dont forget that PS was one of the first main-stream apps to make use of Dual-CPU in Win98 (the OS didnt even know the 2nd cpu existed). Adobe aren't gonna shoot themselves in the foot with 4core maximum, after waiting so long for intel native binaries.

as for the beta/release. I cant imagine something as deep in the codebase as multi-threading for 8+ cores is a small thing to add..

but hey, heres hoping.. i just want VMware/Parallels to allow me to dedicate 2 cores to VM1 and 2 cores to VM2 (or maybe 2 cores to vm1 and 3 vms with 1 core each) so i can get my head back into Novell and OES in my spare time, without bullsh*tting around with buying a HP workstation.

[dpuckett]

Using Vmware Fusion running 8+ Virtual Machines I keep all 4 of my cores at about %40 so I can only imagine 8 cores would be even better.

[Karpfish]

Importing High-Res photos into Lightroom uses all four cores at close to or at 100%. When I'm going through several hundred RAW photos from an event, another 4 cores would be great. Of Course a FW 800 reader would also help me, maybe I should get one.

[macenforcer]

You know in 2010 when the 80 core chips are out we will laugh at these kind of posts. Multicore is the future. Software is headed that way period. HD is the video of the future and HD+ is the next big thing after that. YOu think dual core or even quad core can handle that? Can't handle it now. Takes a long time to rip movies and edit them on top of the line quad xeons.

No bring on the cores. You can never have enough.

Remember when 16mb or ram and a 170mb hard drive was the BOMB?

[synth3tik]

I can really only see it in high end video editing and 3D rendering. I am fairly sure that the music and 2D as well as most of the video industries can get by with 4 cores. High end scientific calculation, terrain mapping and render farms are the only places I can see needing an 8 core system. and these guys usually have a fleet of nodes or a Super computer.

[Multimedia]

Importing High-Res photos into Lightroom uses all four cores at close to or at 100%. When I'm going through several hundred RAW photos from an event, another 4 cores would be great. Of Course a FW 800 reader would also help me, maybe I should get one.Who makes those?You know in 2010 when the 80 core chips are out we will laugh at these kind of posts. Multicore is the future. Software is headed that way period. HD is the video of the future and HD+ is the next big thing after that. YOu think dual core or even quad core can handle that? Can't handle it now. Takes a long time to rip movies and edit them on top of the line quad xeons.

No bring on the cores. You can never have enough.

Remember when 16mb or ram and a 170mb hard drive was the BOMB?Zactly.

[Glenn Wolsey]

Multimedia, just a quick question. What specs do you hope to pack your 8 core Mac Pro with, and what displays will you be hooking up with it?

[Multimedia]

Multimedia, just a quick question. What specs do you hope to pack your 8 core Mac Pro with, and what displays will you be hooking up with it? two 2GB sticks (Omni (http://www.ramseeker.com/scripts/counter.php?http://www.omnitechnologies.biz/cgi-bin/catalog/cp-app.cgi?usr=&rnd=&rrc=N&affl=B&cip=&act=&aff=&pg=prod&ref=APLMP2X2GB667O&cat=emac2&catstr=)) RAM total 6GB for openers $480
four 500GB Seagate SATAII/300 16MB buffers $480 (already bought)
Blu-ray® HD DVR±RW $499 (from Apple)
Pioneer 112 DVD±RW $99 (from Apple)
three Blackmagic Design HDMI i/o PCIe cards $747
whatever ATI card Apple offers unless the stock nVidea card supports rotation
30" HP LP3065 High Color Gamut Monitor with 3 DL DVI Inputs (shared with my Quad G5) $1600
Dell 3007WFP 30" Monitor (already own)
Adobe CS3 Master Collection (academic) $999
Apple Final Cut Studio 6 (upgrade) $500 (guess)

So that's at least an additional $5404 above the base. Adds up fast. :eek:

I'll easily have over $9,000 in my setup to begin with. Sales tax alone will be another $720.

Total about $10,000 by the time I remember something I forgot here.

I really like my 4 screen Quad G5 setup. So I'll probably figure out a way to get two cameras into one PCIe card so I can get another display card inside. This assumes there will still only be 4 PCIe card slots. I wish there were more. Or perhaps Apple will add one pair of HDMI i/o ports from that kind of motherboard.

[Glenn Wolsey]

I really like my 4 screen Quad G5 setup. So I'll probably figure out a way to get two cameras into one PCIe card so I can get another display card inside. This assumes there will still only be 4 PCIe card slots. I wish there were more. Or perhaps Apple will add one pair of HDMI i/o ports from that kind of motherboard.

Sounds like a killer setup able to take on the toughest of tasks. Have you got any pictures on hand of your current 4 display setup?

[BarryW]

I would have loved to have used 8 cores for my CFD(computational fluid dynamics), it took a week to run one problem on a P4 with 2Gb Ram.
However the 8 core would need lots of ram, as that is the other limiting factor in cfd(depends on what type of solver you use explicit or implicit).

Thats why I would have one.

[Pressure]

You know in 2010 when the 80 core chips are out we will laugh at these kind of posts. Multicore is the future. Software is headed that way period. HD is the video of the future and HD+ is the next big thing after that. YOu think dual core or even quad core can handle that? Can't handle it now. Takes a long time to rip movies and edit them on top of the line quad xeons.

No bring on the cores. You can never have enough.

Remember when 16mb or ram and a 170mb hard drive was the BOMB?

Other than the fact that in 2010 we will not quite have x86-capable 80-core processors.

Intel made a test sample featuring 80-cores but those were not x86-capable so basically it is useless in the environment many of us would like to use it in.

In the same die area as the 80-core processor sample used, Intel could probably fill in sixteen x86-capable cores.

[product26]

multitasking

[patrick0brien]

The future...

[liv4Mac]

I mean whywould apple need to release a 8 core MacPro to consumers, maybe to scientists and goverment/businesses, but idk why people really need more than four cores.
If you don't need it then don't buy it.
People in the music business needs it for their audio plugins that relies on processors. The faster the processor the more plugins you can add. These plugins can be keyboards, sampler, drums, horns, synths and many many more. nowadays people uses a minimum of 24 tracks and each track can have 4 to 5 plugins. This is the story of my life.


I'm also into 3D using Strata as I'm typing my computer is rendering a still 104 X 70 3D image that has a total of 1,097 hours rendering time and it just past the half way point.
There are a lot of other aplications that depends on multiple processors and clock speed.

So you see my friend a lot of us needs it. Now I'm curious to hear what you do with you computer, is it mainly surfing the web? :D

[piltupso]

The question seems kinda silly. Technology has always been about bigger, faster, more powerful. How many people are still satisfied with their old Kaypro.