2013 MacPro Trashcan for Cubase - 4 or 6 core?

Still not sure about switching over to Windows…(worried about real-time performance and using my External Hardware FX)

So, curious anyone out there with the 2013 MacPro would you recommend 4 or 6 core version?

4 core is 3.7 GHz
6 core is 3.5 GHz

My sessions are usually 40 tracks or less.
1 or 2 Virtual Instruments
Lots of Plugins both ‘External FX’ and VST (reason I’d be upgrading)

32 Channel I/O via 3 Universal Audio Apollos

I had the 6core and upgraded the cpu to 12 core last year November.
I recommend getting the 6 core or get the 4 core and upgrade the cpu.

I’m finding various details about the CPU upgrade online but not exactly sure on this.
Can you share how exactly you did yours?

Can I do it through OWC?


Let me warn you: I upgraded my 4-core to a 12-core (can’t remember where, but there are specific videos online that show you how to do it), and there was not a majorly significant increase in power with Cubase, so I sold it and got a 6-core. The 6-core seems to perform close to as well as the 12-core with Cubase, and neither were TOO much of an improvement over the 4-core, for me. There is some improvement for sure, but it wasn’t what I had hoped it would be.

However, Pro Tools was able to harness the power of the 12-core in a major way. When I tested PT after upgrading from the 4-core to the 12-core, the difference was very noticeable…just not so on Cubase. Something to keep in mind! For Cubase, a higher clock speed seems to be more important.

Interesting…ok thanks for the heads up on that!

My latest thoughts were to get an 8 core because of this chart:

Late 2013 Mac Pro|||||||||Single Core Tasks|||||||||Multicore Tasks
“Quad Core” 3.7|||||||||||Fastest|||||||||||||||||Slowest
“Six Core” 3.5|||||||||||||0.10% Slower||||||||||||43% Faster
“Eight Core” 3.0 0|||||||||20% Slower||||||||||||||24% Faster
“Twelve Core” 2.7|||||||||11% Slower||||||||||||||28% Faster

But sounds like that doesn’t exactly apply to Cubase. Darn…if anything I would probably be switching back to Logic X as I’m pretty sure that takes advantage of multiple cores better and I already own it. Or I may just record everything with Cubase and then Mix with Logic.

I guess 6 core would be the sweet spot according to the chart.

But…does anyone happen to know if Cubase is planning to further take advantage of multiple cores in the near future?

There has been talk asking about that on the forum since I came into Cubase about 2 1/2 years ago…and I’m sure even for longer than that, so I wish I could say yes, but no one knows for sure unless someone from the company says so. I’m cynical about it due to their past speed of improving things like this.

the trashcan had a silent speed bump so to speak in 2015 i think it was. They upgraded the speed of the onboard SSD, gave each model the next version up graphic card, and ditched the quad core.

I can tell you now, if you can spring for it, the 8 core is the one to get. It’s the absolute sweet spot of the entire line up. Even though 4 years and 2 months old, i still love those machines cause they are silent and have 6 thunderbolt 2 ports for tons of bus powered silent SSD’s.

The 8 core’s turbo is identical to the 6 core’s. 3.9ghz.

I can tell you that both spend more time around 3.7 ish than 3, or 3.5

The 8 cores has a lot more cache… it does make a difference… and it’s not just more cache cause 2 more cores, it’s actually more cache per core, it’s 25mb for 8 cores vs 12 for 6. Big difference.

I’ve used my friend’s 8 core, and even though i know modern PC’s are way faster, if i stay with mac, I am getting one before the new ones come out… why? I like to stick with what i know works, instead of always being cutting edge. It’s still a great machine.

it also never gets loud. No hum or vibration.

Anyway, that’s my recommendation, if the budget will allow.

Did you read the table I posted?

Not sure I understand many things you have said here. Anything to back your claim of the 8 core?

Why do you say a modern PC is faster? Don’t understand that claim either.

…Not saying my gut doesn’t disagree with you (may end up with 8 core)… but the table and cubase documentation says otherwise.

anything to back your claim other than a very hard to read “table” you posted? You asked which mac pro to buy, the 4 or 6 core. if you want the 4 core you have to get a second hand one. I recommended the 8 core because that’s the one i recommend.

Of course a modern PC is faster… The mac pro chips are multiple generations old.

An imac pro vs a modern 8 core PC is the correct cross test… Not a mac pro. I was just simply saying it’s still a capable machine. An 8 core base imac pro would destroy an 8 core mac pro… because the imac pro is using current intel technology.

I feel your table is wrong… geekbench shows the 8 core single core performance as 3816 vs 3811 for the 6 core. So, basically the same, as i have experienced (i only looked up geekbench after your hostile reply to my polite post that was just passing on an informed opinion and trying to assist you, and it confirmed what i already know with my OWN real world hands on use of my bestie’s 8 core trashcan mac pro with pro tools and logic).

This is because, as i said, due to the mac pro’s excellent cooling, it never throttles down and is always in turbo boost mode. So even though the 8 core is 3ghz base and the 6 core is 3.5ghz, the 8 core is just as fast in single core performance…
in multi core geekbench is 25% higher than the 6 core. So in cubase on large projects, or any daw with multi processing, the 8 core will beat the 4 and the 6 core.

The 4 core is the lowest performer of the lot.

So since you love tables so much, there’s some for you.

Or perhaps it’s just cubase. Logic and pro tools make GREAT use of the 8 physical cores. who knows. I haven’t used cubase in anything larger than a 4 core. Logic and pro tools FLY on the mac pro 8 core.

I’ll be getting the 8 core mac pro myself, can’t wait.

Ps the fact you asked me to back up how a modern pc is faster than a trashcan mac pro, pretty much says you don’t understand the subject topic properly anyway.



whoa man… not trying to be hostile.
ok thanks for the info!

I’m leaning towards the 8 core myself.

Sound like some conflicting tables out there I guess regarding the single core performance.

no problem then… misunderstanding… i thought you were saying “tell me this NOW and this and this i demand it”

but obviously i took it the wrong way.

Enjoy your new mac pro whatever you decide.