Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

6-core at 3.33GHz or 8-core at 2.4GHz?

K

KeaneJas

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Nov 28, 2010
3
0
Been pondering a new machine for a while now and soon to move from the UK to NY, Apple hardware becomes even more appetising considering the uplift in FX/tax etc they charge in the UK.

So my questions is if should I go for a 6 Core at 3.33 or 8 core at 2.4Ghz? My budget is about $4K with 8GB of ram included. Understand the dual CPU boxes have 8 memory slots but is that the real only difference between the 2 towers?
 
Last edited:
Really depends on what you are going to use it for. I personally have the 6-core and love it :) (except for a problem withe gpu)

If you go for the 6-core, get the 5870, 12gb ram and a SSD. It cost me around $4,500 for that, but well worth it.
 
SSD and additional memory will be bought separately and not from Apple. Its mainly going to be used for Aperture, Photoshop and video encoding, maybe some editing but very light.
 
Not an expert, but I'd go for the 6-core then. But, prob better to wait and see what the other people say.

And yeah Apple SSD is a ripoff ;) Get a OWC SSD and RAM from superbiiz.
 
philipma1957 said:
I disagree on the apple ssd being a ripoff but the ram should be superbiiz.
Click to expand...

The Apple SSD is 512GB. If you don't need an SSD with that much capacity then buying an Apple SSD is a waste when you can buy 3rd party SSDs with smaller capacity at a significantly lower cost.
 
mrt209 said:
Really depends on what you are going to use it for. I personally have the 6-core and love it :) (except for a problem withe gpu)

If you go for the 6-core, get the 5870, 12gb ram and a SSD. It cost me around $4,500 for that, but well worth it.
Click to expand...
Could you tell me what problem you have had with the gpu? thanks.
 
For your uses the 6 core would be the best choice. The 8 Core would be a step down in performance as Photoshop is not written to deal with multiple processors but can handle as many cores as you can throw at it. The lower clock speed is going to rule your uses here. 6 core in a lot of PS tasks is quicker than even the 12 core apparently.

As a general rule it seems 6 core for photographers, 12 core for motion editing and 3D rendering. The 8 cores seem forgettable for alot of tasks.

I bought the 6 core for PS, LR, C1, Final Cut use and it screams. Well recommended.

I went with 24gb OWC RAM (works best in matched triple sets ie 8GBx3) and a dual SSD Raid 0 for boot/app/scratch and a 4x3tb Hitachi Raid 0 for data.

Consider an Apple refurb. I went this way, saved £500 and It's indistinguishable from new and has the same warranty. The money I saved allowed me to push the RAM and storage.

Apparently the 2.93 Quad is still a good choice for photographers, you can find them at Apple Refurb or new at Amazon. The 2.8 Quad new is still suppose to be good a choice as well.
 
Last edited:
I would point out also that hyperthreading means your 6 core machine will have 12 logical cores for software prepared to deal with it.

You probably don't need more.

At this point, I would say only video editors can really get more mileage out of the lower-clocked 8 core machine.
 
i'd go ith the 8 core, you can upgrade it manually to 12 core if you want, and it ships with 6gb ram rather then 3gb.
 
The OP is using Photoshop and Aperture. The 2.4GHz is the absolute slowest model for these apps. Upgrading to a 12-core down the road is very expensive. min $2000.00 just for the procs with low clocks, 2x3.33 6-cores will set you back $3200.00. Not too cost effective to buy the slowest machine available for your tasks at 3499.00 just to drop 3200.00 more for procs. In the end you'll have a $6700.00 machine (with no warranty) that will perform in Photoshop no faster than the 6-core at $3699.00. IMO bad idea.
Also you can upgrade any 2010 Mac Pro with new trays if you want, my single socket can have a dual socket upgrade by swapping out the processor tray.
 
Last edited:
i was in the same dilemma about a month ago
went with 8 core
reason
more memory slots
8 cores you run run easily 8 exports out of LR at the same time where 6 core struggles right now, especially when you are resizing all the exports at the same time, to achieve that on 6 core you will need to go beyond its capabilities of ram
capable of upgrading to 64 gig of ram
very quiet as it runs much cooler than 6 core
easily upgraded to 6 or even 10 core dual chips when they come out this year
you will already have memory that is tested on your 8 core
but yes 6 core 3.33 may be a bit faster now, well at least till tiger comes out and new LR4 and CS6 next year
and no need to upgrade video card for any photography work
 
derbothaus said:
The OP is using Photoshop and Aperture. The 2.4GHz is the absolute slowest model for these apps. Upgrading to a 12-core down the road is very expensive. min $2000.00 just for the procs with low clocks, 2x3.33 6-cores will set you back $3200.00. Not too cost effective to buy the slowest machine available for your tasks at 3499.00 just to drop 3200.00 more for procs. In the end you'll have a $6700.00 machine (with no warranty) that will perform in Photoshop no faster than the 6-core at $3699.00. IMO bad idea.
Also you can upgrade any 2010 Mac Pro with new trays if you want, my single socket can have a dual socket upgrade by swapping out the processor tray.
Click to expand...

Aperture is nicely threaded, but Photoshop is not.

Given that the raw ghz score between the two is extremely close, I'd only consider the 8 core if you were planning on upgrading the dual CPU's later (as the 3.33 ghz only has one CPU socket.)
 
mdgm said:
There are 10-Core Westmere chips coming out? Do you have a link? This would be interesting to read about.

I think you mean Mac OS X 10.7 Lion. Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger is old.
Click to expand...

Sorry Lion

And yes intel is working on
Westmere-EX MP Server 10 cores (20 threads) be available 2011-Q2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back