Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Yackedy Sacks" data-source="post: 998232" data-attributes="member: 142126">you'd probably get more performance boost out of a higher clock speed quad-core (i.e. the new nehalem xeons) than a slower 8-core.  a single user is not going to easily hit all 8 cores.  i have the 2x 2.66ghz dual-core mac pro (woodcrest xeons) and i hardly get past 20% cpu usage.i was at the apple store a week ago, and the top-of-the-line mac pro is the clocked quad-core.  2nd best is the 8-core at a slower clock.  it felt good that after almost 3 years, the slower quad-core is still 3rd best in the store <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>