Which processor is better for editing and being futureproof?

[JamesMLB]

Which of these two processors is better for rendering files in editing programs such as After Effects and Sony Vegas aswell as being futureproof because I need the computer to last for a good few years:

Intel Core i7 2600k (4 cores)

OR

Intel Core i7 990x (6 cores)



Also, make sure to check out my spec that I'm contemplating here:
http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?8573-Is-this-a-good-spec

 

[MadMan]

There both very good but id pick the newer sandy bridge 2600k.

 

[Teaz]

both cpu will last you some real good long years and both will have plenty of power for your editing. the i7 2600 alone should provide you plenty of power for editing. if you have good use for 6cores then go for it but in my view you may be better off with the sandy i7 which is cheaper ands its power is near to the 990X. so the sandy should fit you fine with the spec in your other post.

 

[Wozza63]

@MadMan

the 2600 is not newer, the 990x was released very recently

 

[Unwina]

Which of these two processors is better for rendering files in editing programs such as After Effects and Sony Vegas aswell as being futureproof because I need the computer to last for a good few years:

Intel Core i7 2600k (4 cores)

OR

Intel Core i7 990x (6 cores)



Also, make sure to check out my spec that I'm contemplating here:
http://www.pcspecialist.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?8573-Is-this-a-good-spec

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7+990X+%40+3.47GHz

suggests that performance wise 990x pips the 2600K by 9% but pricewise (Bang/Buck) the 2600 wins hands down.

Of course price may not be an issue.

 

[Tracker]

@MadMan

the 2600 is not newer, the 990x was released very recently

he was referring to the processor family, sandy bridge is the latest, the 990x is a previous generation processor, even if it is, in itself, newer.

now, be wary of synthetic benchmarks as they don't translate to real world performance all the time. the benchmarks quoted are designed to take advantage of all available cores of the processor, (as most cpu suites are) in this case, the hyper threaded 990x has 12 theoretical cores (6 physical), versus the i7 2600k's 8 (4 physical).

try looking at these benchs:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_3.html#sect2 (without overclock, note the image editing table)
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_10.html#sect1 (once overclocked at various speeds to each other)

you'll note that one of the areas that the 2600k wins hands down is the image editing.. including after effects and vegas, yes the 6 core will outperform with all cores putting out, but the vast majority of programs, particularly the two you've noted, just don't utilise it all, so it's more beneficial to have fewer, faster cores than just having more cores to your processor.

imo it's no contest, the i7 2600k is cheaper, faster, more efficient, and comes with the latest pc architecture, the only reason to opt for the 990x or similar 6 core processors is if you're doing almost exclusively multi threaded cpu tasks like video encoding or archiving / database functions.

 

[Unwina]

... now, be wary of synthetic benchmarks as they don't translate to real world performance all the time. the benchmarks quoted are designed to take advantage of all available cores of the processor, (as most cpu suites are) in this case, the hyper threaded 990x has 12 theoretical cores (6 physical), versus the i7 2600k's 8 (4 physical).

oops I forgot to mention this, the synthetics that is

try looking at these benchs:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_3.html#sect2 (without overclock, note the image editing table)
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x_10.html#sect1 (once overclocked at various speeds to each other)

Aha somewhere else benching CPU's thats useful.

you'll note that one of the areas that the 2600k wins hands down is the image editing.. including after effects and vegas, yes the 6 core will outperform with all cores putting out, but the vast majority of programs, particularly the two you've noted, just don't utilise it all, so it's more beneficial to have fewer, faster cores than just having more cores to your processor.

glad i went for 2600k then, phew!

imo it's no contest, the i7 2600k is cheaper, faster, more efficient, and comes with the latest pc architecture, the only reason to opt for the 990x or similar 6 core processors is if you're doing almost exclusively multi threaded cpu tasks like video encoding or archiving / database functions.

oh dear that's just what I wanted to do. Oh well have to make do with the 2600k instead and console myself that my budget wouldn't have stretched to the better one anyway.

Nice pointers though have some +rep for that

 

[Wozza63]

the 990x cores are slightly faster, so its more cores and they are all faster, by 0.06GHz

 

[Tracker]

the 990x cores are slightly faster, so its more cores and they are all faster, by 0.06GHz

Core clock speeds doesn't equate performance, the sandy bridge processors are faster despite being clocked lower as the processor architecture is that much more efficient.