One factor would be 1st and 2nd level cache on the respective chipsFor photo and video, which is the best bang for the buck - Intel i7 or AMD Phenom II X6?
Both are 6 core, about the same mHz.
yeah, i7 does not instantly mean 6 cores nor does i5 mean 4 cores. Most of intel's offereings are not more than 6 cores in the consumer market except for the extreme high end. AMD wins the core count in consumerland, and if your app is well threaded, it will perform well.While I'm all for saving cash if it's not necessary, there are 2 factors playing into this:
- I just got my yearly bonus, so I have cash right now
- I've been burned before on buying computers I "thought" would be powerful enough. This one lasted almost 10 yrs because it was the 2nd fastest thing out at the time.
Interesting to hear that a faster clock speed i5 (most of the i7's seem to be in the 3GHz range) might be fast enough though ... I just noticed that not all i7's are 6 core ...
An upgrade on the Macpro is on the cards - probably to a top of the range iMac.As for GPU assisted stuff, Aperture is the only thing that utilizes it right now. LR is heavy on the CPU. Photoshop uses the GPU for some calculations, so it's a safe bet LR eventually will too. Just a matter of how optimized they can get and how fast. Both that and coding for multiple cores is not likely fun.
Kevin, your similar performance seems crazy, are you just working with small batches at a time? I'd gather the SSD helps a lot, too. But kind of amazing CUDA support differences. I'd look into upgrading your desktop, it'd probably be a cheap performance boost.
Interesting you bring that up as a way to remind me I haven't updated the post ...Sandybridge has also just been released so you could read up on that but I think this post has been long enough