Which processor is faster

[Check 6]

In the real world when using any of the following: Photoshop, Aperture, Illustrator, In design or Final cut pro which of these processors will produce the faster workflow 3.33 6 core or two 2.4 quad cores acting as an 8 core system.

RAM the same except its speed 1066 on the 2.4 system and 1333 on the 3.33 system amount of RAM the same and Graphics cars the same

Solid state A drive for OS and applications the same on both

I know some people ask the most off beat questions but I been told that few applications use all available cores and therefor raw processor speed can be important. Thanks

 

[nuckinfutz]

In the real world when using any of the following: Photoshop, Aperture, Illustrator, In design or Final cut pro which of these processors will produce the faster workflow 3.33 6 core or two 2.4 quad cores acting as an 8 core system.

RAM the same except its speed 1066 on the 2.4 system and 1333 on the 3.33 system amount of RAM the same and Graphics cars the same

Solid state A drive for OS and applications the same on both

I know some people ask the most off beat questions but I been told that few applications use all available cores and therefor raw processor speed can be important. Thanks

My bet would be with the 6 core 3.33Ghz system. Many apps can scale to 4 cores but after that it there's a diminishing scale. Apps like Compressor can peg all 8 cores but in some apps you may not see much utilization beyond 4

Solid State for OS and Apps and fast HDD for large data is ideal. Tiered storage is must for high end systems IMO.

 

[Phrygian]

In the real world when using any of the following: Photoshop, Aperture, Illustrator, In design or Final cut pro which of these processors will produce the faster workflow 3.33 6 core or two 2.4 quad cores acting as an 8 core system.

RAM the same except its speed 1066 on the 2.4 system and 1333 on the 3.33 system amount of RAM the same and Graphics cars the same

Solid state A drive for OS and applications the same on both

I know some people ask the most off beat questions but I been told that few applications use all available cores and therefor raw processor speed can be important. Thanks

Well... i'm no expert but it probably depends on the program you are running and home many cores it takes advantage of... (then simple math there is 3.33 x 6 = 19.98 and the two 2.4 quads = 19.2... but hey thats just for fun trivia....) [Edit: Diminishing returns are indeed an issue as the poster above me noted]

From what i hear adobe products are terrible at using multi cores and dual quads etc....

But honestly.. you are basicly asking "should i get a newer hexcore MP or should i get a 2008-2009 dual quad core"... right?

Get the hex core. according to geekbench the 3.3 hex cores smash my 2008 dual quad with 2.8g, and i have upgraded my ram and got a new gpu and ssd... and besides you have to take the ram and the Motherboard into account etc... channeling.... sata II vs III... even IDE with the 2008

 

[derbothaus]

The hex has been shown to be actually always faster than 2.4GHz unless you need more memory than can fit in the 4 slots it offers. Sometime by a slim margin and sometimes by an embarrassing one.

 

[PowerPCMacMan]

Fastest processor for single-quad

The w3680 is 3.33 ghz.. the one above that, w3690 is 3.46, but I would not recommend that if you have already the 3.33 6-core chip, as you would yield only 4 percent speed and performance increase..