How effectively does Photo use additional cores and dGPUs?

[IvanR]

I apologize if this question has already been asked and answered, but since I intend to buy a new laptop in the next month or so it is important for me to know how effectively Photo can use quad-core CPUs and dedicated GPUs? I'm leaning towards ultrabooks because of their superior mobility. However, if Photo is able to effectively use 4 cores and fast GPUs, I would rather get a beefier laptop, which is less mobile but offers more processing power.    

 

So, does anyone know what's crucial for good performance in Photo? Good single thread performance, additional cores or dedicated GPU?

 

Thanks!

[anon1]

turns out you are actually the first one to ever ask this question, 

let me try to do some research in order to answer this...

 

1
2
3
4

5

6

7

8

9

...there may be even more 

 

turns out you were not the first one after all 

 

 

bottomline ist

get a quad core laptop 

 

 

[IvanR]

Thanks mate, that's good to know. A quad core laptop it is!

[R C-R]

Not that it would be very relevant to laptops (because of the impact on battery run time) but I wonder if there are any significant benefits in running AP on fast CPU's with more cores that would justify the increased price.

 

I noticed on the Mac side that even for some computationally intensive processes (like in MBd's toggle.afphoto file from another topic), according to Activity Monitor my quad core i5 iMac apparently never used more than two cores (topping out at about 185% of the 100% x 4 total), so it seems not every process in AP will use all the CPU power available.

 

I also wonder how the yet to be released, insanely expensive iMac Pro with the 18 core (!!) Xeon cpu option would benchmark. If I win the lottery or a rich relative I don't know about leaves me a fortune, I will get one, run it, & post the results ....