nMP order Poll

[AidenShaw]

I believe the CPU speed is applicable for each core of the CPU. e.g. My W3690 has 6 cores. And each of them can work at 3.46GHz (not considering turbo boost at here). And they can all work at 3.46GHz instantaneously.

This is correct - a quad-core 4 GHz can run four threads at an effective speed that's more or less the same as a single core 16 GHz CPU.

Don't figure hyper-threaded cores into the mix though - a hyper-threaded quad-core 4 GHz could be more or less the same as 12 GHz to 32 GHz, depending on the apps.

 

[Bytehoven]

The faith is strong in this thread. I'd love to say YES, but I'll have to wait and see a NEW nMP.

 

[ActionableMango]

Which apps actually make use of 6 cores?

This is a strange thread to ask this in...a 2+ year old poll about who's buying the 6,1?

Anyway, to answer your question, Handbrake hammers all 6 cores 100%.

 

[fastlanephil]

Logic Pro X

 

[jblagden]

I believe the CPU speed is applicable for each core of the CPU. e.g. My W3690 has 6 cores. And each of them can work at 3.46GHz (not considering turbo boost at here). And they can all work at 3.46GHz instantaneously.

Video encoding / rendering can easily use all 6 cores. Even Chrome with some flash content can use more than 2 cores.

In fact, I intentionally limit Handbrake not to use more than 10 threads, which will make me able to use my computer very close to it's "normal speed" when video encoding in the background. Sometimes even limit it to 8 threads if I want to do more work when it's encoding. Otherwise, all 6 cores 12 threads will be 100% utilised only by this single apps, and my machine will clearly shown less responsive.

So does that mean that both of the cores in my MacBook Pro’s 2.4 GHz i5 can operate at 2.4 GHz simultaneously?

 

[AidenShaw]

So does that mean that both of the cores in my MacBook Pro’s 2.4 GHz i5 can operate at 2.4 GHz simultaneously?

Assuming that it's an Intel® Core™ i5-2430M, both cores can run at 3.0 GHz simultaneously.

They'll be able to sustain 2.4 GHz until the laptop starts to overheat and they are throttled down.

 

[jblagden]

Assuming that it's an Intel® Core™ i5-2430M, both cores can run at 3.0 GHz simultaneously.

They'll be able to sustain 2.4 GHz until the laptop starts to overheat and they are throttled down.

Specifically it’s an Intel® Core™ i5-2435M. Really? Each core can run at 3 GHz simultaneously? That’s pretty impressive. Where did you read about that?

 

[h9826790]

Specifically it’s an Intel® Core™ i5-2435M. Really? Each core can run at 3 GHz simultaneously? That’s pretty impressive. Where did you read about that?

Intel.

Go to their website, study the spec of i5-2430M and Turbo Boost 2.0 please!

Anyway, here is a screen capture that shows Final Cut Pro in real world usage (rendering 4K video) can use more than 6 cores (and both GPU at the same time).

 

[Bytehoven]

Handbrake hammers all 6 cores 100%.

Curious... are you well versed in Handbrake? I ask because I'm lost at trying to figure out why some BD source transcoded in Handbrake will play on my Sony and other will not. I'd love to pick someones brain on this.

 

[ActionableMango]

Curious... are you well versed in Handbrake? I ask because I'm lost at trying to figure out why some BD source transcoded in Handbrake will play on my Sony and other will not. I'd love to pick someones brain on this.

I don't know enough to deeply troubleshoot something like that. I can theorize a little bit:

If you were always picking the same handbrake preset and it is encoding the video, then I'm at a complete loss because the output file should always be the same format and codec.

On the other hand, if you are settings are just passing through the video without reencoding, then perhaps your Sony supports H.264 but not VC-1. The majority of BDs these days are encoded in H.264, but the next most common is VC-1. So if you're just doing passthrough, then the original H.264 or VC-1 encoding goes right through and your Sony can play the H.264 but not the VC-1. This is all conjecture though since I have no idea what settings you are using nor what your Sony supports.

If you want real help, I'd post in a forum more specific to Handbrake users and provide detailed information about your setup. If you don't want to start a new account somewhere else, you could give the AppleTV/Hometheater subforum here at MR a shot.

 

[AidenShaw]

Specifically it’s an Intel® Core™ i5-2435M. Really? Each core can run at 3 GHz simultaneously? That’s pretty impressive. Where did you read about that?

http://ark.intel.com/products/60636/Intel-Core-i5-2435M-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_00-GHz

Spec sheets for most Intel stuff is at http://ark.intel.com/ . The landing page shows links to processor specs. There's also a clever "compare" feature so that you can compare across family lines - just in case you want to compare your mobile CPU with a Xeon.

 

[jblagden]

http://ark.intel.com/products/60636/Intel-Core-i5-2435M-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_00-GHz

Spec sheets for most Intel stuff is at http://ark.intel.com/ . The landing page shows links to processor specs. There's also a clever "compare" feature so that you can compare across family lines - just in case you want to compare your mobile CPU with a Xeon.

Thanks. Now, I’ve read that each core of a CPU can run at the stated speed. For example each core of a 4 GHz CPU can run at 4 GHz. Does that also apply to laptops or does it only apply to desktops?
[doublepost=1453863555][/doublepost]

Intel.

Go to their website, study the spec of i5-2430M and Turbo Boost 2.0 please!

Anyway, here is a screen capture that shows Final Cut Pro in real world usage (rendering 4K video) can use more than 6 cores (and both GPU at the same time).
View attachment 612655

I didn’t say that there aren’t any programs which can utilize more than 2 cores. I’m simply saying that most don’t. And the thing is, most of us don’t Final Cut Pro. It seems like most, if not all, of the folks who use it are either professional video editors or Youtube video creators. Most of us don’t fit into those groups. I might open up iMovie once in a while, but I really don’t edit much video, especially not enough to justify buying a $300 video editing program.

In fact, I don’t even use the latest version of iMovie. I actually use the old version because it has the ability to keep separate project files without having to make library file for each project. And it has a cool dual-monitor mode which allows you to have the video timeline on one monitor and the video playback on the other.

 

[h9826790]

Thanks. Now, I’ve read that each core of a CPU can run at the stated speed. For example each core of a 4 GHz CPU can run at 4 GHz. Does that also apply to laptops or does it only apply to desktops?
[doublepost=1453863555][/doublepost]
I didn’t say that there aren’t any programs which can utilize more than 2 cores. I’m simply saying that most don’t. And the thing is, most of us don’t Final Cut Pro. It seems like most, if not all, of the folks who use it are either professional video editors or Youtube video creators. Most of us don’t fit into those groups. I might open up iMovie once in a while, but I really don’t edit much video, especially not enough to justify buying a $300 video editing program.

In fact, I don’t even use the latest version of iMovie. I actually use the old version because it has the ability to keep separate project files without having to make library file for each project. And it has a cool dual-monitor mode which allows you to have the video timeline on one monitor and the video playback on the other.

You are right, most people don't need the Mac Pro, but… your question was…

You just asked which apps actually make use of 6 cores (in this Mac Pro forum, in a nMP thread). So, FCPX is one of them. And this is a real world working apps, but not benchmark. Handbrake is another one of them (this one is more popular).

You didn't ask which apps that most people use everyday can use 6 cores for a single task. If you want that specific, then I don't know the answer, I don't even know which apps that most people use everyday. I can only represent myself but not anyone else. TBH, my personal guess would be this apps doesn't exist, otherwise, it means most of our computation device today is seriously under power.

You can buy the nMP and said it's a waste of money because none of your workflow / usage can utilise more than 2 cores. But you can't change the fact that FCPX can use 6 cores. And it is one of the answer for your question.

 

[jblagden]

You are right, most people don't need the Mac Pro, but… your question was…

View attachment 612740

You just asked which apps actually make use of 6 cores (in this Mac Pro forum, in a nMP thread). So, FCPX is one of them. And this is a real world working apps, but not benchmark. Handbrake is another one of them (this one is more popular).

View attachment 612741

You didn't ask which apps that most people use everyday can use 6 cores for a single task. If you want that specific, then I don't know the answer, I don't even know which apps that most people use everyday. I can only represent myself but not anyone else. TBH, my personal guess would be this apps doesn't exist, otherwise, it means most of our computation device today is seriously under power.

You can buy the nMP and said it's a waste of money because none of your workflow / usage can utilise more than 2 cores. But you can't change the fact that FCPX can use 6 cores. And it is one of the answer for your question.

Good point.