12 core and the "software-trap"

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

  1. Paradiseapple macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Location:
    Germany
    #1
    I´m just about to order the 2.66-12 core MP but still wonder if i will step into the "software-trap" that was mentioned here so often. How much time will I win if I prefer the 12-core 2.66 to the 6-core? Will the 12 core already be "old" till Final cut and logic update there software to 12-core usage? Or is the 6-core just about to be "standard" in one or two years? Maybe the investment of the 1.300 Euro for the 12-core is a waste...

    P.S. Sorry that this subject was discussed quite often in other threads, but maybe you can help me.
     
  2. Greg Punzo macrumors member

    Greg Punzo

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    #2
    i'm in the same boat and you but already ordered my 2.66 12 core but thinking about trading it in for a 3.33 6-core.
     
  3. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #3
    My views on this are fairly well documented elsewhere... I think buying a computer for the future is unwise. You are investing money in a depreciating asset you can't fully use.

    To make this more interesting... it's like asking when you are 20 years old if you should buy a mini-van because one day you might meet the woman of your dreams and have several kids. :p :D Yep... it might happen... but wouldn't you rather be driving a sports car in the interim? :D ;)

    In other words... You can buy multi-threaded capacity you can't use today, or you can buy clock-speed that you can. This is likely not the last computer you will ever buy. :)
     
  4. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #4
    Hahaha thats probably the weirdest computer to car analogy I have ever heard
     
  5. 2contagious macrumors 6502a

    2contagious

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    agreed :p good one
     
  6. Paradiseapple thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Location:
    Germany
    #6
    Thanks for your friendly responses - I like the computer-to-car-analogy. I´m just afraid to get a 2 seat or 1 seat sports-car and maybe my two girl-friends (logic and Final Cut) become pregnant this year or next year with 8 or 12 babies. Will my car be able to transport them?

    Because to be quite honest: I cannot afford another car in the next 3 years...
     
  7. plasticphyte macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2009
    #7
    There is some point in both 'arguments'

    You can buy a CPU with a faster clock speed and get the benefit today & loose out on the advantages of more cores when software is updated, or you can put up with a slightly slower overall CPU clock speed and then get the benefits when software is able to take advantage of all the cores. Ultimately it's up to you based on your needs.

    I personally chose the multi core route when I purchased my iMac i7 QC as I only had one piece of software to be updated to work with multiple cores.
     
  8. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    Christ… 8-12 babies in ONE calendar year?!?!

    Anyways, I think you'll be better off with the 12-core the long run if you can afford it; even if you only use 6 cores, you'll be turbo boosted up to the 3.06GHz anyways. :)

    Don't forget 12 real cores is better than 6 real plus 6 fake cores any day of the week.
     
  9. Octobot macrumors regular

    Octobot

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2006
    Location:
    MPx12
    #9
  10. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #10
    I hear your plight...


    Your software today:

    [​IMG]

    Quad Core:

    [​IMG]

    Hex Core:

    [​IMG]

    Dodeca Core:

    [​IMG]

    The decision may seem obvious until your software turns into this...

    [​IMG]
     
  11. strausd macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #11
    And I remember reading how TB works on the six-cores where 2 of the cores will be boosted all the way. So max of 2 cores being boosted to 3.06, but with 2 CPUs that means 4 cores at 3.06, and with hyper threading, that means 8 virtual cores at 3.06 GHz? Not bad...
     
  12. GroundLoop macrumors 68000

    GroundLoop

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    #12
    Everyone goes on and on about this. There is one other thing to keep in mind when making your decision...

    Do you run multiple applications at once? One single app may not use twelve cores, but 3, 4, or 5 apps running at the same time can. It all depends on your use case. This is the reason that I got the 8-core in 2009.

    GL
     
  13. CaoCao macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2010
    #13
    twelve real cores, turbo boost tips the scales by boosting your speeds a lot when using six or less cores
     
  14. Paradiseapple thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Location:
    Germany
    #14
    Wow - thanks for your great sense of humour and all the advice. I´m quite shocked and inspired by the Jolie and Mercedes-Van-metaphor but anyway - I´m tending quite much to get the 12core. But with how much RAM: maybe I get 4x4GB RAM now and 4x8 later or the other way round to end up with 48GB. Poor bank account...
     
  15. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #15
    Why are you tending to get the 12 core?

    Who's to say that if FCP gets with the times, it won't use OpenCL extensively and the best system for FCP is a Quad core with a pair of 5770's?

    Look at it another way... the best bang-for-the-buck system for FCP today is probably the 3.2GHz Quad core. At $2900.

    Scenario A: Next year, if FCP goes the OpenCL route, you add another GPU for $249 and you're gold. If you had purchased the 12-core, you've wasted about $2000.

    Scenario B: If next year, FCP fully utilizes 12 cores, you sell your Quad (for say $2000) and you buy a refurb 12 core (for maybe $4000). No worse off than having bought the 12-core in the beginning.

    Scenario A saves you $2000 and Scenario B costs you only incrementally more if you wait and buy the best computer for the job when it's actually useful.
     
  16. Paradiseapple thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Location:
    Germany
    #16
    Thanks for your wise advise. It´s just difficult to get good refurbished Macs in Germany and I thought I could be up to date a bit longer than last time with my 2.66 Quad from 2006 than cannot deal with 64bit. But ok - I was happy with it for 3 years. Now I´m getting into trouble when I load my plugins in Logic (they need a lot of RAM).
    Going with your car analogy I would prefer the Hexacore-limousine. The Van looks frightening and - I agree - there are bad rumors about both of them - the 6 and the 2-core - when it is about logic and FCP. Some guys even say they are slower that 4 or 8-cores...
    But I have to question myself - that´s true - maybe I am just trapped by the hype of performance.
     

Share This Page