Mac Pro 3.1 4 vs 8 core, worth it?

[smashprod]

I am finally hitting the CPU ceiling on my Mac Pro 3.1 quad core (2.8Ghz). I need to get a slave machine for VEPro and Bidule; I can't run the really heavy LASS patches without choking.

I don't have the money to do what I should do (new high-end Mac Pro). I see 8 core machines available (2.8 Ghz Harpertown processors from 2008). Worth it? And how much more headroom would I get on the 8 core (I'm running big orchestral templates), assuming I made that my main CPU and my quad the slave?

[mikehalloran]

Used 8 cores are becoming affordable. I would check OWC for memory prices on the machine(s) you are considering so you know the total cost. Once you hit a certain point, the actual CPU speed isn't really much of an issue since cores/memory do the heavy lifting here.

Although many programs do not take the best advantage of multiple cores, that is changing so I think you are on the right path.

[smashprod]

The memory is cheap. Plus it's the same specs as my current quad so I can mix and match as needed.

As for programs taking advantage of multiple cores being more important than processor speed, yes, that's exactly what I've been thinking. I rely heavily on Kontakt which makes good use of multiple cores (using KMS). And I also rely heavily on EW PLAY, running under Bidule; as long as I don't use ReWire, those programs also use multiple cores (though PLAY's memory server daemon does NOT play well with others...)