Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2009 4.1 dual core upgrade: Epic Fail

G

grame

macrumors member
Original poster
Nov 12, 2007
89
0
After following the instructions posted here and elsewhere I set about the task of swapping out my 2.26 x 2 for W5590 x 2 matched pair I got from a computer dealer on Ebay here in the UK. (SLBGE COSTA RICA 3.33GHZ/8M/6.40 - both cpus have the serial number 3944B323).

I upgraded the firmware to 5.1. I got good thermal paste. I researched like mad.

I got CPU A working fairly easily but CPU B just would not boot up. I tightened in tiny turns until eventually the red cpu warning light came on. I loosened, tried again. For hours. Days.

Eventually I wondered if the processors itself was fault so moved the cpu in socket B to socket A. Again it booted fine. Then when I installed the one that was in socket A into socket B it again refused to boot.

I have the required 2mm of thermal padding. I snipped the fan connectors exactly as outline on here and both heatsink fans are firmly connected and functioning.

My next idea was washers - so I bought 1mm aluminium washers and two on each pole. Again, cpu booted easily enough, but cpu B still refused. Once or twice it nearly booted - but the screen filled with lots of kernal panic black text. Next time, zilch.

At one point I thought I might have damaged the pins in the cpu tray and got hold of a brand new cpu tray. One of W5590s was left with a slight mark on the underside - but it worked fine in socket A when I tried it. Then I installed the second one into soclket B and again, nada.

Then I reinstalled the 2.26s and they worked. In both cpu trays. (So that second tray looks to have been a needless purchase. Sigh.)

I just wondered if there were any obvious errors I made in the process. I can get either W5590 to boot up in socket A. But when I put the other processor in socket B, nothing happens. No boing, no start-up screen, except for the one or two times when the kernal panic text spewed down across the screen.

This experience has been a most exquisite torture - and I am on the verge of surrendering...
 
grame said:
both cpus have the serial number 3944B323).
Click to expand...

I don't have much knowledge about xeon cpu markings, but i'm wondering if this is normal. Maybe someone knows.

EDIT: I think you might be looking at the wrong number and thinking it's the serial number - take a look here and scroll to the 1136 section: http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/CS-034064.htm

Some other things that come to mind. Can you list your entire configuration? Did you add ram to the other side of the board for the 2nd CPU to use (I don't have a dual but I think its required? Did you do PRAM reset in between adding/removing the CPUS. Power supply could be a culprit - perhaps you had a problem that only the additional CPU exposed - what graphics card do you have?
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys.

I tried with all manner of Ram installations. I have 2 x 4GB of Crucial Vengeance and 2 x 2 GB of OCZ Gold. I installed with the same configuration as when I had the original CPUs - channels 1,2 and 5,6 as per the service manual instructions. Originally OSX ok'd the installation of ram.

Everything about the machine is stock except for the ram - so stock GPU. It's been very well looked-after and so is in very nice condition. The only addition is a wifi card on the pci slot.

Didn't do a pram reset as wasn't able to get it up and running. Is that something I should have tried? I put the old CPUs back in now as i'm fearful of bricking the thing.

Thanks for the Intel link - you were right, the number I quoted was the FPO number. Oddly, there's only an odd symbol where it says the serial number should be.

Cheers for the pointers.
 
I'm sorry to hear you had problems upgrading yours to 5,1. I was almost about to buy a 4,1 to upgrade but decided not to for exactly this reason, plus the overhead cost of buying a dual CPU tray and second heatsink.

I kept reading conversion threads all over the internet and although most of them were successful the few failures I stumbled upon freaked me out.

I hope everything gets sorted out, if not there's always eBay :)
 
Thanks man. It's just so baffling. I've built a fair few Hackintoshes in my time and know my way round motherboards. But this just has me beat. The second CPU just resolutely refuses to boot - no matter how many times I tweak the bolts backwards and forwards. I guess Ebay it is. Such a shame as my 4.1 is a pristine example. Ho hum. Better start looking round for a 5.1.
 
Don't give up just yet. When I was researching the subject I ran into a similar case here on macrumors (don't remember the link though) that ended well. If I remember correctly the solution to his problem was tightening the bolts in diagonal and clock-wise applying the same amount of turns to each. (screws 1+3 then 4+2, 1st screw being on the top left)

Not sure you tried this already, might be worth a shot.
 
Just upgraded my 2009 8x2.26ghz (4,1) to 8x2.93 ghz (4,1)
and it booted fine but exhibited bizarre behavior.
Fans going full tilt / after shutdown / re-booting and resetting PRAM /
and resetting smc, the desktop was already visible when it was plugged back in.
(Behind a "fog") as if it never shut down then a little progress bar popped up to tell me HD was improperly ejected.
The desktop appeared completely normal and then the fans kicked up again.

It's seeing the new CPU's and all the ram and (other than fan speeds), all else seems to be running fine.
Ran a 15 minute Digilloyd integrity stress test and everything passed with flying colors.
Also did some quick Photoshop tests with a 6GB file and everything seemed fine there too.
The machine never got above barely warm during testing.

Brought it in to my local Apple repair center and the tech just called to tell me the SMC is completely corrupted
and needs to be re-flashed. He says that will solve the issues.

Since this is going to be used for as a work machine
the tech recommended not reflashing to 5.1 and keeping it at 4.1.
(He can't do it anyway because he is Apple authorized and I guess that would be breaking the rules at the shop)

I was warned off of reflashing to 5.1 and upgrading to 3.33Ghz
because of voltage differences that could potentially cause instabilities
on the logic board, which is why I decided to play it safe
& keep the machine in "2009 land".

Probably going to get flamed for the above comment,
but the advice from the apple tech and my electronics expert friend who researched it for me,
was enough to scare me off.

I know there have been plenty of folks here who have had great success with the upgrade,
so do not mean to take any thing way from them.
Just don't want to risk it with my work machine.

Once the machine is back and fully checked out, the the ram will be upgraded to 96GB to use as
a HD photoshop retouching machine for large layered files (100+ layers).
Currently it is at 32GB w/ ATI 5770 card.
(The card works great, but the ram is not sufficient for the work I need it to do).

As far as an earlier comment in the thread about ram,
quad/six-core 2009-2012 MP's will support 48GB of ram in OSX
& eight/12-core MP's will support 96GB in OSX (128GB in Mavericks).

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory
 
I might see if there are any technicians here in London who might be able to do it. I'm quite prepared to pay for someone to do it - I just can't give up any more time to it.

Oddly, having just tried yet again, I noticed that when i install the stock CPUs there's a sort of grinding feel to the bolts that I didn't get with the W5590. But as someone hereabouts wrote - it's an art.
 
MacMadness said:
Just upgraded my 2009 8x2.26ghz (4,1) to 8x2.93 ghz (4,1) ng seemed fine there too.

I was warned off of reflashing to 5.1 and upgrading to 3.33Ghz
because of voltage differences that could potentially cause instabilities
on the logic board, which is why I decided to play it safe
& keep the machine in "2009 land".

Probably going to get flamed for the above comment,
but the advice from the apple tech and my electronics expert friend who researched it for me,
was enough to scare me off.

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/Mac-Pro-Memory
Click to expand...

I don't know about the cpu's in dual-processor mac pros, but I did notice that the voltage range and TDP of the w3680 (six-core used in 5,1) and the w3580 (quad used in 4,1) are identical.
 
Studio K said:
I don't know about the cpu's in dual-processor mac pros, but I did notice that the voltage range and TDP of the w3680 (six-core used in 5,1) and the w3580 (quad used in 4,1) are identical.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

You're probably correct. (I say that because I don't know and will take your word for it.)
I recall 90v vs 103v numbers being thrown out, but could be mistaken.

Merely passing along information that was given to me by two fellows
who's opinion I respect. If what was conveyed to me about the potential voltage issue, was incorrect,
I certainly won't be offended if it turns out I'm way off base here...

(Installing video cards, HD's and ram are about the extent of my screw turning/sottering ability on computers) :D
 
MacMadness said:
Thanks.

You're probably correct. (I say that because I don't know and will take your word for it.)
I recall 90v vs 103v numbers being thrown out, but could be mistaken.

) :D
Click to expand...


I know nothing about CPU voltages and what-not. It could be that your electronics friend is on to something. I don't think that your friend would have any incentive to repeat the Apple explanation that you cannot upgrade the firmware.

Any Apple Service provider is probably going to discourage you from trying it, though. I've no idea what 90v and 103v refer to.
 
Studio K said:
I know nothing about CPU voltages and what-not. It could be that your electronics friend is on to something. I don't think that your friend would have any incentive to repeat the Apple explanation that you cannot upgrade the firmware.

Any Apple Service provider is probably going to discourage you from trying it, though. I've no idea what 90v and 103v refer to.
Click to expand...


You're right about the ASP, but the point both were making was about the difference in power requirements between the OEM vs. upgraded CPU's.

I think the 90v vs. 103v (or millivolts) was the difference between the stock 2x2.26ghz CPU's vs. 2x3.33 or 3.46ghz CPU's. (I may have the figures wrong, but there was a difference)
 
GermanyChris said:
Stock is a 3565
Click to expand...

3565 is the one Apple uses in the 2010/2012 Mac Pro.

I referenced the 3580 because, if my memory is correct, that was the one Apple put in the fastest 2009 Pro (the 3.33 Ghz one). I believe the 2.93 and 2.66 have the same specs regarding Voltage range and TDP as the 3580.

Anyway, none of this may have anything to do with 'MilliVolts' (whatever that is). I didn't use a hex-core in mine. I cheaped-out and bought the 3570. I like it, tho.
 
Studio K said:
3565 is the one Apple uses in the 2010/2012 Mac Pro.

I referenced the 3580 because, if my memory is correct, that was the one Apple put in the fastest 2009 Pro (the 3.33 Ghz one). I believe the 2.93 and 2.66 have the same specs regarding Voltage range and TDP as the 3580.

Anyway, none of this may have anything to do with 'MilliVolts' (whatever that is). I didn't use a hex-core in mine. I cheaped-out and bought the 3570. I like it, tho.
Click to expand...

The 3.33 is hex. 3.2 is the quad and it's a 3565. The fastest quad is 3.33 3580 but its not in any stock MP
 
My 2009 Mac Pro came from Apple (CTO) with a W3580. I saw this number printed on the CPU when I replaced it with the W3680... so at least *some* of them came from Apple with W3580 CPUs, like mine did. I sold it to offset the cost of my new W3680, making it a $300 upgrade.

Mine was a single CPU though, not dual CPU.
 
wonderspark said:
My 2009 Mac Pro came from Apple (CTO) with a W3580. I saw this number printed on the CPU when I replaced it with the W3680... so at least *some* of them came from Apple with W3580 CPUs, like mine did. I sold it to offset the cost of my new W3680, making it a $300 upgrade.

Mine was a single CPU though, not dual CPU.
Click to expand...

You have the only one then...
 
GermanyChris said:
You have the only one then...
Click to expand...
Not sure, but it was the best CPU option I could select when I ordered my Mac Pro in 2009. If I recall, the choices for single CPU at the time were:
  • 2.66 quad
  • 2.93 quad
  • 3.33 quad

I chose 3.33 quad. When I upgraded to 32GB RAM, it ran at 1066MHz. When I later ran the tool to update from 4,1 firmware to 5,1 firmware, my RAM suddenly ran at 1333MHz.

When I pulled out the original CPU from Apple and replaced it with the W3680 6-core, I noticed the old CPU was a W3580. For all I know, Apple used both the 3580 and 5590, since they are the same except for QPI links and a couple other minor differences.

I wish mine had the 5590, since I could have sold it for more than the 3580. Maybe my upgrade would have been $0 instead of $300 after it was all over! :p
 
wonderspark said:
Not sure, but it was the best CPU option I could select when I ordered my Mac Pro in 2009. If I recall, the choices for single CPU at the time were:
  • 2.66 quad
  • 2.93 quad
  • 3.33 quad

I chose 3.33 quad. When I upgraded to 32GB RAM, it ran at 1066MHz. When I later ran the tool to update from 4,1 firmware to 5,1 firmware, my RAM suddenly ran at 1333MHz.

When I pulled out the original CPU from Apple and replaced it with the W3680 6-core, I noticed the old CPU was a W3580. For all I know, Apple used both the 3580 and 5590, since they are the same except for QPI links and a couple other minor differences.

I wish mine had the 5590, since I could have sold it for more than the 3580. Maybe my upgrade would have been $0 instead of $300 after it was all over! :p
Click to expand...

It shows up no where, and when I asked at the apple store when I bought my 3570 no one knew (my local apple store isn't known for their brains though)..Stranger things have happened though and I don't know it all.
 
I see two sets of information on everymac.

This page says 5590.
This page says 3580 when you expand all details on the page:

"Custom Speeds: 2.93 GHz, 3.33 GHz* Architecture: 64-Bit

Details: *Via custom configuration, this model originally could be equipped with a single 2.93 GHz Quad Core Xeon W3540 processor for US$500 more. On December 4, 2009, Apple began offering this model with a single 3.33 GHz Quad Core Xeon W3580 processor for US$1200 more and lowered the price of the 2.93 GHz processor upgrade to US$400.

As requested by readers, EveryMac.com also has documented these custom configurations as their own models."

I *do* know that:
  • every Apple Store Genius I've met has been a disappointment :p
  • my CTO Mac had the 3580
  • I look at that info and recall spending $1200 more for the 3.33 quad, and feel like an idiot for how little I knew at the time

I was also dumb enough to add the Apple RAID Card. I needed a system that could edit a feature film right away, and did not spend nearly enough time doing research. :(

Since then, I've sold my 3580 and Apple RAID Card for decent cash, and replaced with a 3680 and Areca 1880ix-12. Life is much better with good information, and I learned most of my RAID info from Harm Millaard and our own 'nanofrog' here.
 
wonderspark said:
I see two sets of information on everymac.

This page says 5590.
This page says 3580 when you expand all details on the page:

"Custom Speeds: 2.93 GHz, 3.33 GHz* Architecture: 64-Bit

Details: *Via custom configuration, this model originally could be equipped with a single 2.93 GHz Quad Core Xeon W3540 processor for US$500 more. On December 4, 2009, Apple began offering this model with a single 3.33 GHz Quad Core Xeon W3580 processor for US$1200 more and lowered the price of the 2.93 GHz processor upgrade to US$400.

As requested by readers, EveryMac.com also has documented these custom configurations as their own models."

I *do* know that:
  • every Apple Store Genius I've met has been a disappointment :p
  • my CTO Mac had the 3580
  • I look at that info and recall spending $1200 more for the 3.33 quad, and feel like an idiot for how little I knew at the time

I was also dumb enough to add the Apple RAID Card. I needed a system that could edit a feature film right away, and did not spend nearly enough time doing research. :(

Since then, I've sold my 3580 and Apple RAID Card for decent cash, and replaced with a 3680 and Areca 1880ix-12. Life is much better with good information, and I learned most of my RAID info from Harm Millaard and our own 'nanofrog' here.
Click to expand...

everymac DUH!! :eek:

Why didn't I look there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back