Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

schalliol · Jan 8, 2008, 11:23 AM

I know that pre-8-core Mac Pros people upgraded quad-core units to 8 core. So, if someone has a 2.66 (or other quad), do you think they'll be able to move up to the pair of quard-core 3.2s or faster?

MacosNerd · Jan 8, 2008, 11:27 AM

Generally speaking I think its unlikely that you'll be able to upgrade it. I would suspect technically it might be done, but the cost and aggrevation could prohibit such a move.

Simon · Jan 8, 2008, 11:32 AM

There are two version of Harpertown. The 54x2 series Apple is now using run on a 1600 MHz FSB and require a Seaburg chipset. There is also the 54x0 flavor which runs on a 1333 MHz FSB and can be used with the previous chipset. If anything works it will be the latter. Even if so, you won't get a 3.2GHz upgrade. The fastest Harpertown available that doesn't require Seaburg is the 5460 at 3.16 GHz.

schalliol · Jan 8, 2008, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

The fastest Harpertown available that doesn't require Seaburg is the 5460 at 3.16 GHz.

Great info. Let's work on that. Assuming there will be no more Harpertown processors (safe?) perhaps we can find out if that unit is the fastest set of quads that dual-dual core Mac Pros will be able to upgrade to.

Here's a link to the Hard Mac upgrade to 8-core article for reference. I'll try to contact the original folks and see what they think about the 5460 at 3.16 or other CPUs.

Macadvo · Jan 8, 2008, 01:42 PM

This is indeed an interesting idea but I wonder if anyone here REALLY has the need for 8 cores?

When Apple made it's announcement today the only thing I was interested in were the graphics upgrades, I'm pretty sure I won't max out 4 cores anytime soon (ooh ooh a Bill Gates 640k moment!) with my photography work but do think I need faster graphics and faster hard drives.

chipchen · Jan 8, 2008, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Macadvo

This is indeed an interesting idea but I wonder if anyone here REALLY has the need for 8 cores?

Oh... be careful... I now realize I've said things like:

"How am I ever going to fill up this 230MB hard drive?"

"This 19.2 kbps modem is awesome!"

"Who needs anything more than 32MB of RAM?"

"Wireless is retarded... why not just run long ethernet cables?"

schalliol · Jan 8, 2008, 02:03 PM

I'm definitely good with the quad 2.66 for now, but it's a new unit. If I were to invest in more accessories than I already have, it might be nice to extend the use of the machine and in a few years upgrade to 8-core. By then more apps may take advantage of it. Just like one machine I have around here was a G4/733 digital audio, which now has a new graphics card, a dual 1.8GHz G4 CPU, a bunch of RAM, SATA, etc. It makes it a more usable machine. I probably wouldn't be interested in upgrading the CPU to anything but the most powerful upgrade I could drop in there, yet I wouldn't want to buy it at current prices. Like I could for the dual 1.8GHz, if in a few years I could get this upgrade done for $500, that would really extend the machine.

Macadvo · Jan 8, 2008, 02:11 PM

Thanks for clearing that up, I thought you were interested in upgrading to eight core now.

I can see that WAY into the future I may need more than the "puny" four cores I have now but only when developers have figured out how to multithread ALL apps properly.

As far as memory, hard drive space, and internet speed goes I can never have enough. I currently have a total of 2.4Tb of hard drive space and am already thinking of what my next purchase will be, another 500Gb internal to extend my RAID 0 to three drives? An internal 1TB for OS X and give the 250Gb to Vista? An external 1TB for backup, moving the current Time Machine drive (750Gb) onto an eSATA card for speed and using it exclusively as a scratch disk. The combinations are mind boggling.

SAS drives via the RAID card sound nice though, now THERE IS a reason for me to spend money lol

mduell · Jan 8, 2008, 07:14 PM

The 5400-series quads may or may not work in the older Mac Pros; there's reasons to suggest both ways but I haven't heard from anyone who has actually tried it.

The RAID card has always added SAS support; nothing new there other than that they acknowledge it.

Cadaver · Jan 8, 2008, 09:23 PM

Yeah, I think I'm set for a while. While new toys are always fun, I think I'm fairly satisfied with four 2.66GHz cores, 2.0TB of HD space and 6GB of RAM. I would be happy with a graphics card upgrade, and the new Dell 3008 30" display with 92% NTSC color gamut, multiple inputs and internal scaler would be nice (an improvement over my current 1st generation Apple 30"), but otherwise for the first time in ages I'm not itching to replace my desktop after 18 months.

My laptop, on the other hand... here's to a really cool ultra-portable or 13" MacBook Pro.

Simon · 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by Cadaver

I would be happy with a graphics card upgrade...

Should be possible in the near future. The AppleStore has a 8800GT upgrade kit and no mention of it working only on the newest MPs. PCIe 2.0 slots deliver more power to the card, but if this card has a power port you could plug in the board power on a PCIe 1.0 system. The upgrade kit is $349.

I guess it won't take long till we here the first reports. Shipping time for the kit is 8 days and I'm really tempted to get one and try it out in the 'old' octo MP I have here at the office.

mduell · Jan 9, 2008, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

Should be possible in the near future. The AppleStore has a 8800GT upgrade kit and no mention of it working only on the newest MPs. PCIe 2.0 slots deliver more power to the card, but if this card has a power port you could plug in the board power on a PCIe 1.0 system. The upgrade kit is $349.

Shouldn't be a problem... most if not all PCIe 1.x PCs work with the new PCIe 2.0 graphics cards.

Cadaver · Jan 9, 2008, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by mduell

Shouldn't be a problem... most if not all PCIe 1.x PCs work with the new PCIe 2.0 graphics cards.

Yeah, but this is Apple we're talking about. If they can save 10¢ by not putting a power connector on the card because the computer its designed for has a PCIe 2.0 slot anyway, they'll skip the power connector.

But I ordered an 8800GT card from Apple, anyway. I can always send it back or cancel the order if we learn it wont work in a rev. 1 Mac Pro.

5-7 week delivery wait for the card is what apple.com is stating currently.

toobiloo · Jan 9, 2008, 08:42 PM

I know this is early, but do people know if the new quad-core single processor can be upgraded to 2x processors? Is it the same motherboard, etc?

MarkLT1 · Jan 9, 2008, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by Macadvo

This is indeed an interesting idea but I wonder if anyone here REALLY has the need for 8 cores?

I can tell you first hand, anyone who is doing scientific/HPC work on their MPs, definitely has a desire, and use for 8 cores.

Simon · Jan 10, 2008, 04:19 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

Should be possible in the near future. The AppleStore has a 8800GT upgrade kit and no mention of it working only on the newest MPs. PCIe 2.0 slots deliver more power to the card, but if this card has a power port you could plug in the board power on a PCIe 1.0 system.

Originally Posted by mduell

Shouldn't be a problem... most if not all PCIe 1.x PCs work with the new PCIe 2.0 graphics cards.

Well, we both guessed wrong.

Apparently the 8800 GT upgrade kit WILL NOT work in Woodcrest/Clovertown MPs. The reason being that the 8800 GT card uses EFI64 ROMs which will not work in the older EFI32 MP. Th older MPs would require a 8800 GT with EFI32 compatible ROMs.

Simon · Jan 10, 2008, 04:32 AM

Originally Posted by Macadvo

This is indeed an interesting idea but I wonder if anyone here REALLY has the need for 8 cores?

I can guarantee you in scientific computing there are many people with that need. I work as a computational physicist. We run simulations on large clusters but we also need powerful machines for data post-processing and visualization as well as ode development and test runs. In our case we're using several octo MPs to do just that. Having more cores in the same box is a great thing: communications bandwidth is better, it's cheaper and it uses less space.

I understand that the vast majority of desktop users don't need dual Harpertowns, but then again that's not the target audience of the MP either. The MP is a workstation. People in scientific computing need exactly that kind of computer.

Macadvo · Jan 10, 2008, 04:52 AM

You know, the more I think about it the more I'm coming to the conclusion that this EFI32 / EFI64 is bullsh*t. EFI is a standard isn't it?

Simon, I understand there may be specific instances where eight core machines will be a good idea, the scientific community being one and the video editing/encoding crowd being another. Which is, now I think about it, the audiences Apple is probably targetting with the MP, so erm I take that statement back lol.

Mind you Apple also targets pro photographers with the MP's, and even with a library of over 15,000 photos I don't stress my MP at all.

Tesselator · Jan 10, 2008, 04:59 AM

I upgradded mine from 4-core 2.66 to 8-core 2.66. My MacPro now has two X5355 processors that I got form discount
shop online. The procedure is as easy as pie. No special tools needed, plenty of room to work. All ya need is an alan-
wrench and a philips screwdriver. Well besides some thermal cream and maybe some acetone to clean the surfaces for
complete perfection.

That's on the MacPro Ver 1.1 though.

Simon · Jan 10, 2008, 05:02 AM

Originally Posted by Macadvo

Simon, I understand there may be specific instances where eight core machines will be a good idea, the scientific community being one and the video editing/encoding crowd being another. Which is, now I think about it, the audiences Apple is probably targetting with the MP, so erm I take that statement back lol.
Mind you Apple also targets pro photographers with the MP's, and even with a library of over 15,000 photos I don't stress my MP at all.

I think it's just important to realize that the MP isn't just any desktop. It's a workstation targeted towards professional buyers with high performance demands. This is easily overseen because Apple doesn't sell a 'regular' desktop machine next to the MP. That's probably the kind of machine somebody like you would be looking for.

That said, anybody who thinks eight cores is overkill and is just looking for a nice expandable desktop Mac should now get a Woodcrest MP. They'll be going fairly cheap and they will offer more than enough power and expansion for people in that market.

Macadvo · Jan 10, 2008, 05:09 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

I think it's just important to realize that the MP isn't just any desktop. It's a workstation targeted towards professional buyers with high performance demands. This is easily overseen because Apple doesn't sell a 'regular' desktop machine next to the MP. That's probably the kind of machine somebody like you would be looking for.

Which could open up the whole xMac discussion all over again lol.

That said, anybody who thinks eight cores is overkill and is just looking for a nice expandable desktop Mac should now get a Woodcrest MP. They'll be going fairly cheap and they will offer more than enough power and expansion for people in that market.

Well said and I totally agree. The thing that made me decide to go the whole hog and get a MP though was a comment from a photographer about getting the new Canon 1DSMKIII which is around the £6k mark. He said "If I was a taxi driver I wouldn't think twice about dropping over £10k on a new car so why should I when we're only talking about £6k?"

It's all about whether you can justify he cost and whether or not what you're buying will make a difference to how you work. With my MP edits take a fraction of the time and is a lot more fluid in Aperture and CS3 than previously on my 20 inch iMac (which, incidentally is available if anyone wants it. I'll do a swap for one of the new 8800GT kits if they work in my MP lol).

Macadvo · Jan 10, 2008, 11:11 AM

These seem like a cracking upgrade for my quad 2.66 and if I can get my mate to get me two while he's in the states, by the time I sell my two dual core 2.66's I should actually be in profit!!

Simon · Jan 10, 2008, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Macadvo

These seem like a cracking upgrade for my quad 2.66 and if I can get my mate to get me two while he's in the states, by the time I sell my two dual core 2.66's I should actually be in profit!!

You could of course also go full blast and get two E5450 Xeons. They have the same TDP as the E5430s you linked to, but they run at 3GHz. The only downside is that they're a bit more expensive...

zaghahzag · Jan 10, 2008, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by MarkLT1

I can tell you first hand, anyone who is doing scientific/HPC work on their MPs, definitely has a desire, and use for 8 cores.

Absolutely, and not only that, but ram requirements are measured in RAM per Core. So you might want 1,2 or 4 gigs per core. That adds up pretty fast.

mduell · Jan 10, 2008, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

Apparently the 8800 GT upgrade kit WILL NOT work in Woodcrest/Clovertown MPs. The reason being that the 8800 GT card uses EFI64 ROMs which will not work in the older EFI32 MP. Th older MPs would require a 8800 GT with EFI32 compatible ROMs.

Laaaaaaaaaame. I wonder if it would work in Windows with the CSM, since the other COTS video cards with EFI-nothing work. Apple could offer a 64-bit EFI firmware upgrade for the older Mac Pros, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Originally Posted by Macadvo

You know, the more I think about it the more I'm coming to the conclusion that this EFI32 / EFI64 is bullsh*t. EFI is a standard isn't it?

EFI is a standard... but if you make a video card that only works with 64-bit EFI and a machine that only has 32-bit EFI, they won't work together.

Cadaver · Jan 10, 2008, 09:39 PM

I'm totally beginning to understand why PC fanboys laugh at us Mac users. This kind of sh!t shouldn't happen.

Macadvo · Jan 11, 2008, 02:24 AM

Originally Posted by Cadaver

I'm totally beginning to understand why PC fanboys laugh at us Mac users. This kind of sh!t shouldn't happen.

Yeah I know what you mean. All my evangelising of Apple and Macs has just gone up sh!t creek thanks to this. Way to go Apple.

Simon · Jan 11, 2008, 04:45 AM

Originally Posted by Cadaver

This kind of sh!t shouldn't happen.

I couldn't have said it any better.

Let's hope Apple comes to its senses and fixes this mess. Maybe they'll be especially sensitive to bad press around MWSF.

Macadvo · Jan 11, 2008, 05:04 AM

Hehe my thoughts exactly

schalliol · Aug 17, 2008, 02:43 PM

Seven months later...

I wondered if anyone around here upgraded their dual dual-core CPUs, and to what if so? I would be interested to know if there's an Intel chip that is the top-end that will work with the included MB in the unit, so I can watch prices on that chip and buy a couple when they drop. Ideas?

mduell · Aug 17, 2008, 06:43 PM

If any of the 53x5 series work, all of the 53x5 series should work; ditto for the 54x0 series. I know Anandtech put 53xx engineering samples in their Mac Pro, but I haven't seen a report from anyone who did it with the production version.

schalliol · Feb 8, 2009, 12:34 AM

Another six months later...I wondered if anyone around here upgraded their dual dual-core CPUs, and to what if so? I would be interested to know if there's an Intel chip that is the top-end that will work with the included MB in the unit, so I can watch prices on that chip and buy a couple when they drop. Ideas? From mduell's comment, it sounds like if we can verify some production CPUs work, we'll know what other CPUs might work. While the bus won't be as great as the 2008 Mac Pros, a 2007 Mac Pro with a 3.0+ GHz set of 4-core CPUs should be pretty credible.

bearcatrp · 10:18 AM

I've been watching the prices on the clovertowns that will work on the 1st gen intel mac pro's. The 3 ghz ones are still around 1200 bucks from newegg but have found some on ebay for around 600. The 3ghz seem to be the highest clock speed we can get AFAIK. Have seen some tests showing about a 30 percent speed bump between a 3ghz octo on a 1st gen to the 2.8 octo on the early 2008 mac pro's. As soon as the prices drop, hopefully when the new mac pro's come out, I'll be grabbing the 3ghz clovertowns and upgrading.

schalliol · Feb 8, 2009, 10:24 AM

Great information. Thank you! Do you have model numbers for those 3GHz units that should work?

Simon · 10:44 AM

The 3GHz Clovertown (65nm) model is the X5365. Intel's 1k price is $1172 a pop.
http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=30702

For the same kind of money you can get a X5460 Harpertown (45nm) at 3.16 GHz.

And of course then there's the X5470 Harpertown at 3.33GHz. It's $1386 though.

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=35430

schalliol · Feb 8, 2009, 10:51 AM

Yeah, that's pricey! I see one auction where you could get the pair for ~$1300. Hopefully in a year or so there will be less interest and on hand quantity will drop in price by a lot. As I understand it, you'd have to overclock the board to 1,333MHz. People seem to have done that without incident. Would the existing RAM at 667 be an issue? What did Apple do when it sold the 2007 8-cores?

I wonder what one could get for the existing dual core CPUs used. Probably not much, but if something could get the net price below $1,000, it might really be worth it. I am amazed by how much use I get out of all the CPU cores on my 2008 8-core.

Simon · Feb 8, 2009, 10:55 AM

FSB clock and the memory speed are two different things. The FSB used to be 1333 MHz and the RAM was 667 MHz (original MP). Now the FSB is 1.6 GHz and the RAM is 800 MHz.

schalliol · Feb 8, 2009, 11:36 AM

Oh, for some reason I thought it was 1,067MHz so the 3.0s can drop in w/o modification I suppose. So there is not correlation between RAM and FSB clock speeds, as there once was?

schalliol · Feb 8, 2009, 11:38 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

For the same kind of money you can get a X5460 Harpertown (45nm) at 3.16 GHz.

And of course then there's the X5470 Harpertown at 3.33GHz. It's $1386 though.

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=35430

These are compatible with the new MPs, but not the old ones, correct?

Simon · Feb 8, 2009, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by schalliol

Oh, for some reason I thought it was 1,067MHz so the 3.0s can drop in w/o modification I suppose. So there is not correlation between RAM and FSB clock speeds, as there once was?

RAM and FSB speeds do not need to be the same. They're two separate busses in Intel's design.

Simon · Feb 8, 2009, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by schalliol

These are compatible with the new MPs, but not the old ones, correct?

The 54x0 Harpertowns run on 1333 MHz FSBs. It's the 54x2 Harpertowns that run on the 1600 MHz bus the newer MPs have.

schalliol · Feb 8, 2009, 01:08 PM

Wow, so some day (as prices fall) we might be able to drop in quad-core 3.33s! Fantastic!

mduell · Feb 8, 2009, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by schalliol

Another six months later...I wondered if anyone around here upgraded their dual dual-core CPUs, and to what if so? I would be interested to know if there's an Intel chip that is the top-end that will work with the included MB in the unit, so I can watch prices on that chip and buy a couple when they drop. Ideas? From mduell's comment, it sounds like if we can verify some production CPUs work, we'll know what other CPUs might work. While the bus won't be as great as the 2008 Mac Pros, a 2007 Mac Pro with a 3.0+ GHz set of 4-core CPUs should be pretty credible.

Originally Posted by bearcatrp

I've been watching the prices on the clovertowns that will work on the 1st gen intel mac pro's. The 3 ghz ones are still around 1200 bucks from newegg but have found some on ebay for around 600. The 3ghz seem to be the highest clock speed we can get AFAIK. Have seen some tests showing about a 30 percent speed bump between a 3ghz octo on a 1st gen to the 2.8 octo on the early 2008 mac pro's. As soon as the prices drop, hopefully when the new mac pro's come out, I'll be grabbing the 3ghz clovertowns and upgrading.

Originally Posted by schalliol

Wow, so some day (as prices fall) we might be able to drop in quad-core 3.33s! Fantastic!

If you're planning to buy non-used CPUs, you need to pay more attention to Intel's pricing scheme. One price drop after a couple quarters is usually all a chip will see. Newer, faster chips will come out at lower price points, but they may or may not be compatible with older systems. 4 - 5 years after launch you may be able to pick up some cheap used chips from decommissioned systems, but at that point it's probably time to get a new system anyway.

angelmb · Feb 8, 2009, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by schalliol

I am amazed by how much use I get out of all the CPU cores on my 2008 8-core.

I guess this was already discussed, but which apps let you do squeeze all those cores?, I though such a thing was still in antenatal status… Thanks.

Simon · Feb 8, 2009, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by schalliol

Wow, so some day (as prices fall) we might be able to drop in quad-core 3.33s! Fantastic!

Not to spoil it for you, but by the time such CPUs become affordable chances are you'll want to swap the entire MP anyway.

Simon · Feb 8, 2009, 04:33 PM

Originally Posted by angelmb

I guess this was already discussed, but which apps let you do squeeze all those cores?, I though such a thing was still in antenatal status… Thanks.

If you're in scientific computing or HPC there are tons of codes that can easily saturate all eight cores. For the type of code I develop and use the more cores, the better.

angelmb · Feb 8, 2009, 04:40 PM

Good for you then

Thanks for the clarification

bearcatrp · Feb 8, 2009, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by angelmb

I guess this was already discussed, but which apps let you do squeeze all those cores?, I though such a thing was still in antenatal status… Thanks.

Video editing will use every core and so will BOINC for crunching data. Otherwise the OS handles the cores besides a few other programs. Hopefully snow leopard will address this as discussed in other forums.