Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by jimjim776, Feb 3, 2012.
is 8 enough?? or w/plug ins etc. is 12 the way to go?
8 core what? Woodbridge, Cloverfield, Nahalem, Westmere? Pro-tools can be run on a single core chip. Depends on your expectations. The performance of the 8-core Mac's differ greatly with generation. So maybe a little more info. I'd get more memory than anything else if you are running everything on the host without DSP. Get at least 16GB of RAM from 3rd party. The verdict is out on Pro-Tools scalability over cores which is what you need to figure out. The Quad 3.2GHz may be faster on host plugins than the 8-core at 2.26 or 2.4GHz but the 8-core will beat it on mixing. Hard to say. When you are recording, a high clock speed is best. When mixing, lots of cores are better than clock speed. Or do what I did and get the 6-core 3.33GHz. The best of both. It is faster than the Quad and all the 8-cores except for the 2009 8-core 2.93GHz. But it will be faster when tracking. Hope some of this helps.
6 Core 3.33GHz is very solid for the money. If you plan on using more processor intensive applications than just Pro Tools (video editing or scientific applications, graphics, etc.) then the 12 core will make a pretty big difference over the hex-core.
8 core westmere current version
The ? Is about current or sort of current, the 2010 models, I'm buying it new
Thanks for all that info.
8 is enough cores but they are so anemically clocked you may be needing a newer machine sooner than you'd like. New Mac Pros may happen soon too. If you can wait, wait.