Is the iMac Quad Core i7 faster than the 2008 Octo-Core Mac Pro?

[DaSal]

So the older Mac Pro's from 2008 have 2 2.8ghz Quad Core Intel Xeon processors, without hyperthreading, for a total of 8 cores, and the top of the line iMac has a Quar Core i7 2,8ghz with hyperthreading for a total of 8 (virtual) cores.

With the ghz being the same but less "real" cores, but probably newer CPU architecture, which CPU will actually be faster?

 

[zedsdead]

So the older Mac Pro's from 2008 have 2 2.8ghz Quad Core Intel Xeon processors, without hyperthreading, for a total of 8 cores, and the top of the line iMac has a Quar Core i7 2,8ghz with hyperthreading for a total of 8 (virtual) cores.

With the ghz being the same but less "real" cores, but probably newer CPU architecture, which CPU will actually be faster?

Hyper-threading cannot match the performance of real-cores; however, there is no Turbo Boost in that model either. The 2.8 i7's in the iMac can achieve speeds up to 3.46 when not using all the cores. For any kind of encoding or anything where all 8-Cores are used, the Mac Pro will trump the iMac.

 

[netkas]

So the older Mac Pro's from 2008 have 2 2.8ghz Quad Core Intel Xeon processors, without hyperthreading, for a total of 8 cores, and the top of the line iMac has a Quar Core i7 2,8ghz with hyperthreading for a total of 8 (virtual) cores.

With the ghz being the same but less "real" cores, but probably newer CPU architecture, which CPU will actually be faster?

Arch is same, imac's i7 has ondie pcie controlelr and one of three memory channels disabled.

 

[Hellhammer]

Mac Pro will still destroy iMac. As said above, Hyperthreading isn't same as 8 physical cores plus support for Hyperthreading is still quite poor. Mac Pro is upgradeable too