Can I upgrade a Mac Pro 4,1 CPU with a 3,1 CPU?

[cbt3]

Let me clarify as I am sure I worded that in a very stupid manner;

I have a 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 with x2 Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz
and due to an employee leaving my company, a (I think early 2010?) Mac Pro 4,1 x2 Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.26 GHz.

My initial instinct is to take the newer computer, however I would want to switch out the processors, even if its older. Is that possible? I would need to switch out other things as well, but lets take things one step at a time, the only things better on this computer when I looked at the specs were the motherboard (I assume, newer model) and the OS (10.5 vs 10.6),

Is this something that can be done? is it even worth my time?

 

[JuniperMonkeys]

Totally different socket — not economically possible. The 3,1s are LGA 771, and the 4,1s are LGA 1366. There are some pretty major architectural differences, too.

However, you could sell the 2008 and use the proceeds to pick up a couple of used Xeon W5590s; that'd be a nice upgrade for the 4,1

I should also point out that the 2.26 4,1 actually Geekbenches a little higher than the 2.8 3,1 anyway. That isn't the final word on performance, of course, but there isn't as big a difference as the frequencies alone would suggest.

 

[cbt3]

I should also point out that the 2.26 4,1 actually Geekbenches a little higher than the 2.8 3,1 anyway. That isn't the final word on performance, of course, but there isn't as big a difference as the frequencies alone would suggest.

really? that seems counter-intuitive? are their other tests I could run on each system?

 

[paulrbeers]

Let me clarify as I am sure I worded that in a very stupid manner;

I have a 2008 Mac Pro 3,1 with x2 Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.8 GHz
and due to an employee leaving my company, a (I think early 2010?) Mac Pro 4,1 x2 Quad-Core Intel Xeon 2.26 GHz.

My initial instinct is to take the newer computer, however I would want to switch out the processors, even if its older. Is that possible? I would need to switch out other things as well, but lets take things one step at a time, the only things better on this computer when I looked at the specs were the motherboard (I assume, newer model) and the OS (10.5 vs 10.6),

Is this something that can be done? is it even worth my time?

You aren't running 10.6 on your 2008 Mac Pro? I can understand why you may not have wanted to go to 10.7, but seriously you aren't on 10.6? I'd get someone on that right away even if you don't swap out for the 2009 (which you should!).

 

[bearcatrp]

That 2010 dual quads use hyper threading so in fact 16 threads total. Whereas your 2008 dual quads are only 8 threads. Plus Nehelem processors are more efficient handling memory. Keep the 2010. You can always upgrade those processors. Memory is cheaper too on the 2010's. Here are the specs from apple
http://support.apple.com/kb/SP506

 

[cbt3]

Well then, if it has hyper threading that changes everything, of course its going to be faster if its hyper threading and has virtually 16 cores.

However, now that it seems obvious to switch, here comes the hard part. I have a SansDigiital External RAID enclosure on this old Mac. with a miniSAS card. Would I be able to just plop all that into the 2010 Mac and have it work? Like a regular external Hard drive? Or would I need to Backup all the data and start from scratch on the newer system?





----------

You aren't running 10.6 on your 2008 Mac Pro? I can understand why you may not have wanted to go to 10.7, but seriously you aren't on 10.6? I'd get someone on that right away even if you don't swap out for the 2009 (which you should!).

No, I never got around to upgrading; it didn't seem like a big deal 10.5 is running stable

 

[bearcatrp]

It should work if it's the same version of OS X. If not, check with the vendor for any update before installing. Here is the info on those processors in the 2010:
http://ark.intel.com/products/40200/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E5520-(8M-Cache-2_26-GHz-5_86-GTs-Intel-QPI) .

 

[CaptainChunk]

The 4,1 machines are from 2009, not 2010. If I had my choice between that and a 3,1, I'd definitely take the newer machine. As stated before: superior CPU architecture, faster memory access and much cheaper RAM.

Plus, with a 5,1 firmware flash, you can run hex-core Westmere CPUs in it if you wanted to.

Food for thought: I really want to push my current 3,1 Mac Pro past 16GB of RAM because of After Effects. But my wallet tells me no when the unbuffered DDR3 2009-2012 Mac Pros use is a 1/3 of the price.

 

[cbt3]

Yeah, it is an "Early 2009" although I could have sworn that the girl who was using the computer started in 2010, I guess my memory serves me wrong

 

[JuniperMonkeys]

Yeah, it is an "Early 2009" although I could have sworn that the girl who was using the computer started in 2010, I guess my memory serves me wrong

Well, it coulda' been purchased in 2010. The "2010" machines didn't come out until... hmm, July 27th, actually. Weird coincidence.

 

[cbt3]

The 4,1 machines are from 2009, not 2010. If I had my choice between that and a 3,1, I'd definitely take the newer machine. As stated before: superior CPU architecture, faster memory access and much cheaper RAM.

I am going to go ahead and do that, however my main concern now is transferring my areca ARC-1880x SAS Raid Controller into the new machine without losing any data, obviously I am backing up all my data now just in case, but if its possible to set up the chip on the new computer and have it just recognize the current RAID array in my miniSAS external enclosure that would save me a lot of time.
Is that possible?

----------

Well, it coulda' been purchased in 2010. The "2010" machines didn't come out until... hmm, July 27th, actually. Weird coincidence.

That is actually probably what happened then I think I bought it in the beginning of july, just missing the new machines... I know sometime soon after she started the 6-core macs came out, so I guess that puts a timeline on things...

 

[cbt3]

Well I did some benches at it confirms the assessment, that the new computer is better.