(1) 3.33 GHz 6-core vs (2) 2.4 GHz 4-core

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by keithos27, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. keithos27 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    #1
    Hi there.

    I'm relatively new to the Mac Pro world and was playing around with the different ordering configurations available.

    Can someone please explain the difference (along with any associated pros and cons) of getting one 3.33 GHz 6-core (6 cores) vs two 2.4 GHz 4-cores (8 cores)? The 6-core option is actually $383 more expensive. I guess what I'm trying to figure out is what are the pros/cons of having one chip that is faster (with less cores) vs two chips that are slower (but more cores)?

    I wouldn't be using this desktop for anything processor intensive at the moment... let's just assume some audio processing/editing with some minor graphics use (Adobe Photoshop).

    Does one configuration lend itself better to a casual user vs a user that processes a lot of data (ex. video, audio, etc)? I'm wondering if having one chip that is faster is better suited for my needs?

    Thank you,
    Keith :)
     
  2. CaoCao macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    #2
    assuming perfect multithreading the hexacore is slightly more powerful, considering that the hexacore is much faster for most people the hexacore is better
     
  3. keithos27 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    #3
    thank you caocao for the quick response.

    could you possibly explain "perfect multithreading" as i'm not familiar with what you mean?

    am i to assume that most programs out there would not take advantage of these mutlicores? i'm not entirely sure what 6 cores vs 8 cores really means to be honest. is it basically telling the operating system (and any applications that support it) that there are 6 brains vs 8?

    thanks,
    keith
     
  4. CaoCao macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    #4
    by perfect I mean that eight cores at 2.4GHz would equal 19.2GHz of power, versus the six cores at 3.33GHz equaling 20GHz (well 19.998 to be precise) generally there is some little thing in the coding meaning that they aren't all fully in use.

    imagine you have a choice of two groups of workers, one contains six and they work at 3.33x and a group with eight workers at 2.4x, in all situations where you only have six or less tasks the group of six always wins because they finish faster, also you will general have six or less tasks at any given time
     
  5. keithos27 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    #5
    that makes sense, thank you.

    one other question. :)

    how do i know what programs will utilize 6 cores or more/less? i assume OS X could utilize at least up to 12 (since apple sells a 12 core)?
     
  6. sboerup macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    #6
    very very little programs will be maximizing the multiple cores. Even if you used a program with 100% efficiency with multiple cores, the hexacore will still be faster. Since it's not, the hexacore will be MUCH faster than the stock 2.4 octo.
     
  7. keithos27 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    #7
    thank you, so i guess that's why it's the more expensive option. :)
     

Share This Page