6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

The new MP announcement was initially exciting but a disappointment once they got to the price and entry-level components, but I'd like a quicker computer, and the iMac isn't practical. I currently have a 6-core trashcan but have an opportunity to get a 12-core with twice the RAM (64 vs. 32) and the D700 video card instead of the D500.

Our post audio machines are 12-core MPs, but we don't run the same plugins so I can't do an A/B comparison, otherwise I'd answer this question myself.

I use a lot of VIs, so, if I upgrade to the 12-core, will I notice more CPU headroom and/or speed? Benchmarks suggests so, but I prefer real-world feedback.

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

I certainly noticed a huge difference going from 4-core to 10-core

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

Why not just change out the cpu yourself?
It took me about an hour.
There are very good video instructions on you tube and you can buy an upgrade kit with refurb cpu on Ebay.
The graphics card will make little or no difference to PT.

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

and yes the 12 core is noticeably more powerful.:D

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

Stick to the 6-core, the 12-core will not improve performance with PT. The RAM will make the difference though.

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

That's what I did. And btw. specs of that 10-core beat 12-core on singlecore operations and only slightly lose on multicore. CPU doesn't have to be what Apple has sold as long as it is compatible with the socket

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

I hadn't considered a CPU swap and probably (because it's Apple) didn't realize that it could be done without headache. I'll check into this.

Any specific recommendations for a source for buying such a thing?

Edit: OWC has them for $449 so that's where I'm heading.

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

How could it not improve performance? PT is a 64-bit app which uses all available cores. According to some figures I've seen, an 8-core is 24% faster than the 6-core, and the 12-core is an additional 28% faster than the 8-core. That would be a major jump in speed.

With regard to RAM, at max I'm using about 75% of what I currently have, and typically it's about 25%. That component feels adequate.

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

I sure expect 12 cores will be faster than 6. But the numbers always depend on workload. Being 64-bit really has nothing to do with ensuring good multi-threaded performance. Give me a 6 plugin workload that is all single threaded plugins and it won't scale any better on 12, may run slower (threads jumping between cores (and so invalidating CPU caches), slower individual cores, smaller caches, etc.). The experience of not scaling beyond 6 cores may be with very old versions of Pro tools or pathologically non-scaling sessions/plugins.

I can certainly write a multi-threaded demo program that shows lots of weird/unexpected non-scaling effects... but for most real world workloads, specially with Pro Tools 2019.5 and it's greatly improved threading and over performance I expect CPU scalability for many workloads beyond 12 cores, but again exact kilometerage will vary.

2019.5 has even convinced me to get an 8 core i9 MacBook Pro, partially out of curiosity if it can run well without thermally throttling to nothing. I don't actually need that much power for my Pro Tools use, but it's handy for other stuff I do.

Re: 6-core vs. 12-core MacPro w/ ProTools
 

I have a 12 core trashcan and it’s starting to show it’s age. I’m not sure an individual VI or an instance of VE Pro can spread its load across multiple cores. In other words, with a demanding Kontakt instrument track in record mode, I will frequently see one core max out. In yet more words, it seems the speed of an individual core is as important if not more so than number of cores.

It’s not like I’m running at especially low buffer settings. I default to 256 but often have to up that to 512 to avoid CPU overloads. Anything less than 256 is not usually workable unless it’s a very simple arrangement.

I guess it’s dependent on your workflow and the VIs/libraries you use. In my case, when I’m looking at Geekbench scores I’m looking at the single core performance because that seems to be more reflective of the way I use a Mac.

That said, I’ve only just moved to 2019.5 and Mojave so I’ve yet to test if there has been any improvements in CPU usage with VIs