Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'more cores - less frequency or more frequency less cores'.
Found 1 result
One older article I found online on subject "More cores - less frequency vs more frequency less cores" had this: " Faster clock speeds means more responsiveness when running heavy linear tasks such as running single-threaded applications. Most programs still function in a linear fashion, making use of only one core. In these cases, clock speed is king." Can anybody shine a light this and if it relates to Cakewalk on how it handles VST plugins and tracking? If I have to choose between: more cores - less frequency vs more frequency less cores, what would be a better choice? Particulary i7 7600U 2 CPU cores with Hyper-Threading support clocked at 2.8 - 3.9 GHz (2 core Turbo also 3.9 GHz) vs i7-8650U four cores but at a lower base frequency of 1.9 GHz. The Turbo Boost can go up to 4,2 GHz ? Main concern is which of these CPUs will handle better multiple instances of VST on separate tracks and tracking (no "bouncing" or archiving or freezing advise please. This is a specific CPU question) Thank you.