Why a 2.4 8 core may be better than 3.33

hiimamachiimamac
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
It struck me today when I was at the apple store.



With a quad, you are only going to get 8 threads, not 16 in 64 bit mode and thats going to give you more headroom right?



Also, if you boot to 64 and your plug in is 32 bit, will it work in Logic if opened as 64 bit? This makes a difference too.



Thanks

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 5
    hiimamachiimamac Posts: 584member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    It struck me today when I was at the apple store.



    With a quad, you are only going to get 8 threads, not 16 in 64 bit mode and thats going to give you more headroom right?



    Also, if you boot to 64 and your plug in is 32 bit, will it work in Logic if opened as 64 bit? This makes a difference too.



    Thanks



    Know one has an opinion on this?





    THink about it!



    Are the more threads you have the better?

    A quad is going to have 8 max, 4 real, 4 virtual, an 8 core is going to have 8 real, 8 virtual, giving you lots of room for plug ins.



    That;s got to be why its higher priced - at the same time I read stay away from the 2.4 core......and the 3.33 si supposed to be the sweet spot.



    Cheers..



    Just would like to know some other opinions.



    Thanks
  • Reply 2 of 5
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,326moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    It struck me today when I was at the apple store.



    With a quad, you are only going to get 8 threads, not 16 in 64 bit mode and thats going to give you more headroom right?



    The 3.33GHz one is a 6-core though. The 3.2GHz is a quad but priced a fair bit lower than the 8-core.



    My initial impression would be that the 6-core is the better option but benchmarks may prove otherwise. I just think 12 threads are enough for now and the higher clock should help processes that can't be split over more than a couple of threads.
  • Reply 3 of 5
    futurepastnowfuturepastnow Posts: 1,772member
    A single processor 4 or 6 core would be a far better option for most people. Heck, most computer users won't notice a leap from two cores to four.
  • Reply 4 of 5
    zephzeph Posts: 133member
    The way it was explained to me is that very few applications take advantage of the multi-core/multi-thread capabilities of the current CPU's. As such it may make more sense to buy a single-CPU with higher clockspeed.
  • Reply 5 of 5
    randianrandian Posts: 76member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zeph View Post


    The way it was explained to me is that very few applications take advantage of the multi-core/multi-thread capabilities of the current CPU's. As such it may make more sense to buy a single-CPU with higher clockspeed.



    That's why I liked the 3.6 GHz 2-core iMacs better than 4-core iMacs.
Sign In or Register to comment.