8 vs 6 core

[macbook123]

Are there any advantages to the six core? The 6 core config on the new 16" has faster clock rate than the 8 core, so are single thread applications faster? Or is the 8 core generally better and worth the upgrade?

 

[Erehy Dobon]

.

 

[mouthster]

the cores should park if they are not in use, so with light workloads the battery life should be the same, no?

 

[robvas]

Compare the benchmarks they don't lie

 

[AustinIllini]

Are there any advantages to the six core? The default config on the new 16" has faster clock rate than the 8 core, so are single thread applications faster? Or is the 8 core generally better and worth the upgrade?

Don't overlook the fact that the 6 core is cheaper. I expect the 6 core i7 to be great for most uses and I expect to keep this machine for 4-5 years. Either is a good choice but if price is king, that matters.

 

[maplingstorie]

well it is cheaper.

 

[maflynn]

Or is the 8 core generally better and worth the upgrade?

What are you looking to do? ITs hard to say what configuration best fits your needs when we don't know those needs

If you're computing the mass of the universe, then yeah the more cores the better. If you're doing office apps, facebook and whatnot, then 6 cores would be more then enough and why spend on something that you don't need.

Remember most of us have been working with 2 or 4 cores just a few years ago, so I think 6 cores for many people will be more then enough

 

[macbook123]

My question in the OP was very specifically: is the 6 core faster in some applications that are single threaded because it has a higher per core clock rate?

I'm not asking which config is better in general, not sure why that wasn't clear.

 

[velocityg4]

My question in the OP was very specifically: is the 6 core faster in some applications that are single threaded because it has a higher per core clock rate?

I'm not asking which config is better in general, not sure why that wasn't clear.

The 8-core has a higher turbo boost. The higher base clock rate is irrelevant. If you are doing an intensive single core task. The CPU is going to be utilizing turbo boost automatically.

The question would be if any of the CPU can maintain 4.5Ghz single core Turbo boost. If it would be easy for any of them to maintain that turbo boost. Then i9 models could likely maintain 4.6 or higher single threaded turbo boost. In which case they will always be faster at single core tasks.

If that speed can only be maintained temporarily. The i9 will still do better on average as they could hit up to 5Ghz briefly then throttle down to 4.5Ghz which is on par with the i7. Then all models would continue to decline. Until they hit a maximum sustainable single threaded turbo boost. At which point that speed would be a matter of individual luck. As in a winner of the CPU lottery combined with lucking out with Apple not using a gob of thermal paste.

Geekbench results would support a higher turbo boost on the i9 model in single threaded tasks. The differences are quite minor. That money would likely be better spend on more RAM.

 

[littlepud]

I think the 6 vs 8 core debate is very much like the 16 GB vs 32 GB RAM one... If you have to ask, you probably don’t need it.

 

[CE3]

My question in the OP was very specifically: is the 6 core faster in some applications that are single threaded because it has a higher per core clock rate?

I'm not asking which config is better in general, not sure why that wasn't clear.

The thread is titled “8 vs 6 core” and your OP does seem to be asking for general opinions on which configuration would be better:

Are there any advantages to the six core? The 6 core config on the new 16" has faster clock rate than the 8 core, so are single thread applications faster? Or is the 8 core generally better and worth the upgrade?

Both CPUs are great performers, and because they’re now in a body with improved cooling and airflow, they should yield better results than if they were in a 15”. Whether or not you would benefit much from the extra cores depends on how you’ll be using the machine.

 

[Fravin]

the cores should park if they are not in use, so with light workloads the battery life should be the same, no?

Well...

That's a good one.

Mac OS is designed to keep all the cores in use, windows doesn't distribute the load in all cores. Mac OS does, so unless you have a 32 bits app running single core, you won't have a single thread using only one core. That's why synthetic benchmarks aren't true.

It's clear that the 8 core will produce more heat than the 6 core one. But battery life isn't related with the heat generated by the computer.

That said, you can't say that one could have better battery life than another. They are different beasts. And in the end of the day, booth should have the same consumption.

 

[CYB3RBYTE]

I'm trying to figure out the same question myself. I just picked up my stock 6-core a few days ago, but I have no idea if I'm going to keep it or exchange for the stock 8-core. My main justification is that most of the time I'm just doing dual browsers, music, and some document work. However, I do like to pickup a game or two on windows, and I am going to want a better graphics card and more storage for that.

So should I keep the 6, and actually do my school work and forget about the windows gaming occassionally, or get the 8 and have the better Gpu and more storage?

 

[sennomulo]

This YouTuber did some tests with the 2018 15" MBPs comparing that year's i7 and i9, and found that the i9 had better battery life than the i7. I don't know how the new chassis would affect things, but the explanation he gives for the discrepancy sounds like something that would still apply.

 

[MrGunnyPT]

What are you looking to do? ITs hard to say what configuration best fits your needs when we don't know those needs

If you're computing the mass of the universe, then yeah the more cores the better. If you're doing office apps, facebook and whatnot, then 6 cores would be more then enough and why spend on something that you don't need.

Remember most of us have been working with 2 or 4 cores just a few years ago, so I think 6 cores for many people will be more then enough

This.

6 Core is enough for the 90% I work with 3/4 VMs at a time. I came from a dual core i5 2017" MacBook Pro... with 6 cores, it' unparalleled the amount of performance I got.

I don't see 8 Cores for example, even at home I have a i7 8700k with 6 cores at 4.7Ghz more than enough for gaming

 

[Dominus Mortem]

If you are even wondering if one is a benefit over the other in the application in which you intend to use it then you must have a usage scenario where you're concerned about it. Hardly anyone complains about having too much speed. If you think you might need it, then get the 8 core. I know for a fact I don't need two more cores, so I kept some of my hard-to-come-by money in my pocket by getting the base unit. It has not disappointed me in the least. But your case will be different.

One final thought: in any decision where I have struggled over two options of anything, I have never regretted taking the one that offered more of something opposed to less. It's only when I know the lesser option will always be fine that I go that route.

 

[playtech1]

I think this partly depends upon how long you anticipate keeping the machine.

A few years ago I would have said that a 2-core 4-thread processor (like that used in the 13 inch MBP of the day) was fine. Now, three years later I view a 4-core 8-thread processor as a baseline.

For more demanding tasks I think 6-core 6-thread is a good baseline for 2020. But given that the desktop CPUs are heading towards ever higher core counts, the software seems likely to try and take advantage of that and become more and more multi-threaded, making high core counts ever more important. What I don't know is how long will that process take and whether it would impact the types of things you do?

 

[Spudlicious]

............................

Yeah, the big block V-8 is more powerful than the inline 6 but it also consumes more gas which will force you to refill the tank more frequently.

....................................

I like that analogy.

 

[simonmet]

I didn’t need 8 cores, but I did need 1 TB storage, so I found opting for the 6-core model wouldn’t have saved that much.