No doubt, Windows adds a considerable amount of CPU overhead, but based on how I understand multi-core processors and operating systems, the scenario I talked about will be OS agnostic. Linux will offer better performance, mostly, but won't utilize multiple cores any differently. Thus, my conclusion won't change: too many cores only works faster when your application actually uses multiple cores. Video rendering is one workflow that does work well. Occasionally, I make videos. This is where the i9 excels. I didn't bring that up, because it's an edge case for me. However, if you find yourself opening multiple applications and windows, an i9 will help keep your workflow faster. Personally, I try to minimize the number of concurrently open applications.
I noticed this a while ago. The more expensive CPUs have more processor cores that are individually slower. The cheaper CPUs have a small number of faster cores.
If you spend all of your time compiling, encoding videos, or playing games then spend the extra money for more cores. Otherwise, you are paying more to make most of what you do slower.
(post is archived)