Specs - Cores vs Clock Speed??

Hi guys,

 

I am wondering if someone can help me decide on which Macbook would be best for mixing music, large sessions, with lots of cpu-intensive plugins etc…

 

For my budget, I can get an i7 quad core at 3.1ghz, or a six core i7 at 2.6ghz,

 

Would it be better to go for more cores but less clock speed, or more clock speed and less cores?

 

Thanks

What series processors are they, do you know? i.e. i7-7xxx, i7-8xxx or i7-9xxx ?

 

I would say that if the i7 Quad is 7th generation (i.e. i7-7920HQ) then despite the lower clock speed the single core performance may be stronger on the i7 2.6ghz which is either 8th or 9th gen i expect? (i7-8850H or i7-9750H).

 

Personally i'd go for the six core 100%, but if you can find out what processors are in each it will help subjectively to compare.

If I'm not mistaken, the 3.1 i7 quad-core is a Kaby Lake for the 2017, and the 2.6 six-core is a Coffee Lake for the 2018.

If these are the models you're talking about, the six-core is better overall.

more cores in 99% scenarios for audio

Only live input tracks and very heavily loaded single tracks will benefit from high core speed, and even then only in case if other cores are not loaded (since single core speed also greatly depends on turbo)

Clock speed is a rough measure of "instructions per second" – how fast the cores can execute the software. But Logic is especially designed to be able to make use of multiple cores, each one of which physically executes instructions in parallel with each other. Therefore, I think that more cores would be better, for the same reason that a wider freeway is often better than a faster car at rush-hour.

 

Be very sure that the hardware can execute Apple's most recent operating systems, Mojave or Catalina! Apple plays "planned obsolescence" games. Also be sure to buy a bumper-to-bumper warranty.

Edited February 26, 2020 by MikeRobinson

Cheers for the help guys,

 

I’m pretty sure these are the models:

 

Quad core (2017) – i7-7920HQ

6 core (2018) - i7-8850H

 

Guess 6 core is the way to go then

Clock speed is a rough measure of "instructions per second" – how fast the cores can execute the software.

It's becoming more confusing for buyers on pre-built systems though, due to the turbo boost numbers that do/don't get quoted depending on how the sale is pitched to the buyer. This post displays that perfectly.

 

Presuming this is along the lines of a 7920HQ vs 8850H/9750H comparison:-

 

7920HQ has 3.1ghz processor who's reported max turbo is 3.7-4.1GHz (Staggered across 4 cores).

9750H has a 2.6ghz processor who's reported max turbo is 4.5Ghz ('All core' turbo)

8850H has a 2.6ghz processor who's reported max turbo is 4.3Ghz ('All core' turbo)

 

That's why benchmarks can be so misleading, as seen with the previous gen i9's which looked quick, but throttled bad in confined units.

 

For applications under load (Like Logic), I would keep it simple and use law of averages to pick the mid-way figure on any turbo assisted CPU, which gives you:

7920HQ = 3.6ghz

9750H = 3.5ghz

8850H = 3.45ghz

 

At which point the two core advantage on the newer i7's is king as the average single core different is negligible. Plus. The older i7 is actually going to be worse in single core performance for majority of work thanks to the max turbos of each.

For what it's worth, since the very beginning I have purchased [almost ...] all of my Apple equipment from the "refurbished and clearance" section at Apple.com: https://www.apple.com/shop/refurbished

 

This is what happens to the computers that were used in the retail stores or loaned to schools. Apple takes them back and completely reconditions them – literally, as good as new. But in the eyes of consumer law they are not "new" anymore. Therefore they are sold at a discount. (I buy slightly-used cars "off lease" for much the same reason ... let someone else pay the depreciation, and give me an extended warranty to take me to 100,000 miles.)

 

Importantly, these machines qualify for AppleCare® warranty protection, exactly like brand-new gear. I always buy the longest possible warranty period and basically plan to use the machine for production work until the warranty period expires. Unfortunately these computers can fail without warning, and the expense of trying to repair one out-of-warranty are simply prohibitive.

Clock speed is a rough measure of "instructions per second" – how fast the cores can execute the software.

It's becoming more confusing for buyers on pre-built systems though, due to the turbo boost numbers that do/don't get quoted depending on how the sale is pitched to the buyer. This post displays that perfectly.

 

Presuming this is along the lines of a 7920HQ vs 8850H/9750H comparison:-

 

7920HQ has 3.1ghz processor who's reported max turbo is 3.7-4.1GHz (Staggered across 4 cores).

9750H has a 2.6ghz processor who's reported max turbo is 4.5Ghz ('All core' turbo)

8850H has a 2.6ghz processor who's reported max turbo is 4.3Ghz ('All core' turbo)

 

That's why benchmarks can be so misleading, as seen with the previous gen i9's which looked quick, but throttled bad in confined units.

 

For applications under load (Like Logic), I would keep it simple and use law of averages to pick the mid-way figure on any turbo assisted CPU, which gives you:

7920HQ = 3.6ghz

9750H = 3.5ghz

8850H = 3.45ghz

 

At which point the two core advantage on the newer i7's is king as the average single core different is negligible. Plus. The older i7 is actually going to be worse in single core performance for majority of work thanks to the max turbos of each.

 

this is if you don't account for thermal limits and ACTUAL turbo speeds. Then it gets more complicated again.

i.e. same chips/different bins (such as 16" i9 2.3 vs 2.4, or 13" i5 2.4 vs i7 2.8) turbo roughly the same because the system can't cool it enough for it to turbo to it max specs.

 

Since more cores = more heat, and the chips have been 14nm for a few generations now, it's hard to predict performance without benchmarks.

Even at base frequency the new 6 core i7's are pretty powerful due to the core count. I've got the 9750h in a windows machine and can do plenty on it @ 2.6ghz for majority of time (Have a profile with turbo completely disabled for battery and heat benefits).

 

For audio i think the biggest problem with CPUs that have such a large boost vs base frequency is the shifting of speeds due to thermals/requirements. No software wants the rugged pulled under it's feet mid-processing.

 

I know i've mentioned it previously with yourself, and shouldn't really bring windows talk here - but the ability to fix the CPU yourself is an absolute blessing to keep stability in a laptop form factor that will be subject to more thermal restraints.

Yeah i agree. For audio, undervolting and limiting (not disabling) turbo boost can do wonders for stability, its really a shame you can't configure macs like that