> It's also worth considering that Photoshop only really uses 2 cores at maximum anyway.
Seriously? I think this is more confirming that the person you replied to is right. Unless there is some reason that I can think of that only using 2 cores is a good thing?
What would you do with more CPU cores? One for the UI; one for CPU-only filters (if there are such a thing) and various other background workers like network downloads.
Everything else—the rendering, scaling, compositing, etc.—runs on the GPU, not the CPU, where it uses hundreds of cores. Y’know, like a 3D game.
And, like a 3D game, it’s still slow, because it’s doing something genuinely hard and your powerful GPU still isn’t powerful enough.
Answering this question means you have to understand a bit about how computers work. More cores doesn't automatically translate to faster performance. Photoshop is lightly threaded for most operations.
A cursory search brought up this link, but you should read up on threads and the difference between CPUs and GPUs:
Seriously? I think this is more confirming that the person you replied to is right. Unless there is some reason that I can think of that only using 2 cores is a good thing?