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

masaski

macrumors newbie
Jun 25, 2015
1
1
I have been wanting to do this upgrade for quite some time but have been procrastinating. Turns out that I should have done this ages ago - this was a very, very, very simple job.

I bought:

Item: 2 x 3.06GHz X5675 processors
Where from: eBay

Item: ArctiClean 60ml Kit (includes 30ml ArctiClean 1 and 30ml ArctiClean 2) and 3.5grams Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound
Where from: http://www.amazon.com/ArctiClean-3-...ref=sr_1_2?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1412014849&sr=1-2

Item: Eklind 3mm X 9"long Hex Key T-handle
Where from: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000X285AW/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

Item: Packet of cotton sticks.
Where from: Any supermarket or pharmacy.

I wanted to make sure that I kept side A stuff separate from side B, hence the Post-it notes. I ended up not needing that.

I also printed out the relevant pages from the Mac Pro Apple Technician Guide. Also didn’t need that.

I also had this video clip loaded on my Apple TV:

There are other YouTube clips that you can watch - just do a search for Mac Pro upgrade on YouTube.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_01_29_9_2014.jpg


I started by removing the processor tray from the Mac Pro.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_02_29_9_2014.jpg



I used the 3mm allen key to undo the four bolts that hold the heat sink to the logic board.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_03_29_9_2014.jpg


Once the bolts are undone then the heat sinks lift off easily enough. You can see the thermal paste on each of the heat sinks and processors.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_04_29_9_2014.jpg


A close-up photo of the bottom of a heat sink. You can see some dust that I had to remove. Each of the four bolts has a spring. You’ll need to apply someone downward pressure on each bolt later on when it’s time to put the heat sinks back on.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_05_29_9_2014.jpg


Apple used a lot of thermal paste originally, resulting in the excess being pushed over the outer ridge of the processors.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_06_29_9_2014.jpg


I wanted to make sure that the cotton stick was soaked with plenty of cleaning liquid so I removed the nozzle from the top of the bottle and dipped the cotton stick in.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_07_29_9_2014.jpg


The old thermal paste quickly turned to liquid.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_08_29_9_2014.jpg


I cleaned the old thermal paste off the top of each heat sink. I wasn’t prepared for the amount of liquid goo that there was, so used a microfibre cloth to wipe all of the thermal paste off the contact surface.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_09_29_9_2014.jpg


The old thermal paste quickly dissolved into goo once the damp cotton stick was rubbed around. Then it was a matter of having something to wipe the goo off with, which is where the microfibre cloth came in handy. Some cotton wipes would have also done the job.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_10_29_9_2014.jpg


The two X5675 3.06 six-core processors that I bought on eBay.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_11_29_9_2014.jpg


To remove the old processors, release the lever.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_12_29_9_2014.jpg


The door that holds the processor in place will then lift up.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_13_29_9_2014.jpg


The old processor then simply lifts out. Very simple.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_14_29_9_2014.jpg


I put the new processors in place and then pushed each lever back into place. This pushes the door down that holds the processors firmly against the logic board.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_15_29_9_2014.jpg


It’s impossible to put the processors in the wrong way.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_16_29_9_2014.jpg


Once both processors were in place it was time to apply new thermal paste.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_17_29_9_2014.jpg


I didn’t want to put too much paste on and then have grief with removing the excess paste, so started with a very small amount.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_18_29_9_2014.jpg


I quickly found that more thermal paste was needed, so used the syringe to apply it in different places before using a cotton stick to spread it out.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_19_29_9_2014.jpg


This stuff was quite thick, and cotton from the cotton stick was easily coming loose.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_20_29_9_2014.jpg


Once I had spread the new thermal paste and made sure there were no cotton strands in it, I used the syringe to put a small ridge around the outside of the processors. This was so that it would flatten out when I put the heat sinks back on.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_21_29_9_2014.jpg


With the second processor, I used the paste syringe to apply the paste in a spiral pattern, which was then easier to spread out with a cotton stick.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_22_29_9_2014.jpg


I made another outer ridge with the syringe on the second processor.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_23_29_9_2014.jpg


Then it was time to put the heat sinks back on.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_24_29_9_2014.jpg


I made sure that the connection lined up on each heat sink.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_25_29_9_2014.jpg


Previous photos have pointed out the spring on each bolt. When doing these bolts back up, you need to push down on the allen key to get the ends of the bolt to reach the logic board.

With tightening the bolts, I found that I had to make sure that each of the four had reached the logic board before tightening any of them up. Tightening up just one bolt first pulled the heat sink onto an angle that made it difficult to get the other bolts to reach the threaded holes on the logic board.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_26_29_9_2014.jpg


Within minutes the heat sinks were back on and the processor tray was ready to go back into the Mac Pro.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_27_29_9_2014.jpg


Mac_Pro_Upgrade_28_29_9_2014.jpg


The seconds felt like hours, but finally the startup chime happened and the Mac started up. Success!

I’m now kicking myself for not doing this a long time ago. I spent around half an hour on this, being overly cautious and taking photos. Realistically, this could be done in minutes.

Mac_Pro_Upgrade_29_29_9_2014.jpg


The Get Info box before the upgrade:

24_Get_Info.jpg


The Get Info box after the upgrade:

306_Get_Info.jpg


The Hardware Overview before the upgrade:

24_Hardware_Overview.jpg


The Hardware Overview after the upgrade:

306_Hardware_Overview.jpg


Geekbench score before the upgrade:

24_Benchmark.jpg


Geekbench score after the upgrade:

306_Benchmark.jpg


The Mac feels a heap sharper. As mentioned, I should have done this a long time ago instead of putting it off.

I had originally wanted to get a pair of X5680 3.33GHz six-core processors but ended up buying the 3.06GHz processors for about one third the cost of what X5680s were going for at the time.

Conclusion: if you have a 2009 or 2010 Mac Pro then do this! If you have an earlier Mac Pro then sell it, get a 2009 or 2010 and do this. It was very simple to do and has made a massive difference to the speed of my Mac Pro.



Hi there,

Just wanted to drop by and thank you for this great guide. I've just upgraded my 2 x 2.4Ghz E5645 6 core to a 2 x 3.46Ghz X5690 6 core system and it was a breeze thanks to the info contained in this thread. Anyone out there thinking about this, just do it!!

Big ups!

Mark
 
  • Like
Reactions: Synchro3

Phildo

macrumors member
Nov 14, 2011
90
0
Perth, Western Australia
You're most welcome.

Photos make all the difference, huh?

At least I didn't smash my camera whilst taking photos of the Mac Pro jobs.

I've been doing photo guides of jobs that I've done on cars over the last couple of years, and my 18 month old Canon G16 appears to have expired tonight. It gets knocked a lot in the carport and these days it looks like it has spent its entire life in a tumble dryer.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/search.php?do=finduser&u=2108365&starteronly=1

And yeah, when I stop spending money on cars for five minutes I'll go looking for a pair of X5690s...
 

pixxelpusher

macrumors member
Aug 1, 2011
92
17
Have just done this upgrade too! Dropped a pair of X5680 cpu's into my 2009 Mac Pro with 48GB of 1333 ram (3x 16GB), a GTX770 video card and a Crucial MX100 512GB SSD drive. All running very smoothly so far. I left the heat spreaders on the cpus and just tightened the heat sinks so they were "finger-tip tight" (didn't count turns). Have been running for a few weeks with no probs. Will post some benchmarks as I get to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MTBnBeer

bokkow

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2012
296
247
The Netherlands
Is a X5670 for ±70$ a no-brainer? :)
I got a deal for 4 x 4GB ECC Reg 1333 for 35€ + X5670 for 65€ to upgrade my W3530/6GB quite content about it.
 

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Is a X5670 for ±70$ a no-brainer? :)
I got a deal for 4 x 4GB ECC Reg 1333 for 35€ + X5670 for 65€ to upgrade my W3530/6GB quite content about it.

Yeah, pretty good. But try to get a X5675 instead if you don't want the fans kicking in. That's the last official CPU "supported" by Apple, as in, the TDW is lower than lets say x5680 and x5690. Thought I think the latter is fine and once in a while the fan whirring is ok.
 

OB-NZ

macrumors newbie
Jul 8, 2015
22
0
New Zealand
Yeah, pretty good. But try to get a X5675 instead if you don't want the fans kicking in. That's the last official CPU "supported" by Apple, as in, the TDW is lower than lets say x5680 and x5690. Thought I think the latter is fine and once in a while the fan whirring is ok.
Sorry, I can't follow. Why would the fans ramp up on a X5670? Isn't this processor supported also, with the same TDP? Please correct me if I'm wrong, im no expert just a little confused, was looking at the X5670 processors but may go with dual X5672 but can't find any evidence that they boot.
 
Last edited:

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Sorry, I can't follow. Why would the fans ramp up on a X5670? Isn't this processor supported also, with the same TDP? Please correct me if I'm wrong, im no expert just a little confused, was looking at the X5670 processors but may go with dual X5672 but can't find any evidence that they boot.

Apple maxed out on the lower TDP at x5675 on their 2012 Mac Pro. The x5680 and x5690 use a really high TDP so the fans ramp up if you install it. Apple never supported these processors.

I would go with x5675 if you really care about the TDP. I went with the x5680 (x5690 is the max you can go but it's not a big jump in terms of performance) and they are both the same TDP...so I would say its best to max out I suppose, but you can control the fans with MacsFanControl and have it auto run in the background and a non-noisy setting and cool the CPUs. The Mac Pro fans kick in around 80 degrees.
 

OB-NZ

macrumors newbie
Jul 8, 2015
22
0
New Zealand
Apple maxed out on the lower TDP at x5675 on their 2012 Mac Pro. The x5680 and x5690 use a really high TDP so the fans ramp up if you install it. Apple never supported these processors.

I would go with x5675 if you really care about the TDP. I went with the x5680 (x5690 is the max you can go but it's not a big jump in terms of performance) and they are both the same TDP...so I would say its best to max out I suppose, but you can control the fans with MacsFanControl and have it auto run in the background and a non-noisy setting and cool the CPUs. The Mac Pro fans kick in around 80 degrees.
Sorry, I thought that you were trying to say that the X5670 chips would cause the fans to ramp up.
Im looking to upgrade a 4,1 DP but don't have much of a budget to work with after the purchase of it. One thing that I would like to avoid is having the machine making more noise, also a little concerned that I might reduce its life expectancy if running Xeons with a higher TDP, if it was to crap out I wouldn't be able to afford to repair it for quite some time, so it's pretty critical that its stable. Maybe a higher clocked eight core setup is the best option for me?
Any thoughts...

Ollie
 

bokkow

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2012
296
247
The Netherlands
Yeah I'm also a bit confused now, the X5670 would ramp up the fans in a 5.1, to a 100% 24/7? The TDP is equal to the X5675 (90W) and the TDP is even lower than the stock W3530 (130W). I understand that the type has to be supported in EFI/SMC. I wouldn't want to use a third party tool continuously to keep the fan speed acceptable.
 

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Sorry, I thought that you were trying to say that the X5670 chips would cause the fans to ramp up.
Im looking to upgrade a 4,1 DP but don't have much of a budget to work with after the purchase of it. One thing that I would like to avoid is having the machine making more noise, also a little concerned that I might reduce its life expectancy if running Xeons with a higher TDP, if it was to crap out I wouldn't be able to afford to repair it for quite some time, so it's pretty critical that its stable. Maybe a higher clocked eight core setup is the best option for me?
Any thoughts...

Ollie

80watt is fine on the Mac Pro running at lower fan speeds. It won't make any noise. Once you put in the x5680 or x590 (TDP rated at 130watts) the fans will spin up faster than usual. Mac Pro's have some of the best fan systems in the world, they're huge and blow right at the CPU. You can run a fan control app and ramp up the default a bit and still have no noise.

I've been happy with the x5680 so far. The ramp ups are fine once in a while, it's not too jarring.

If you go x5675 you won't have to deal with ramp ups or any fan software.
 

OB-NZ

macrumors newbie
Jul 8, 2015
22
0
New Zealand
Yeah I'm also a bit confused now, the X5670 would ramp up the fans in a 5.1, to a 100% 24/7? The TDP is equal to the X5675 (90W) and the TDP is even lower than the stock W3530 (130W). I understand that the type has to be supported in EFI/SMC. I wouldn't want to use a third party tool continuously to keep the fan speed acceptable.
Isn't the X5670 a newer Westmere CPU that runs cooler than the previous 55.. Nehalem Xeons?
 

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Yeah I'm also a bit confused now, the X5670 would ramp up the fans in a 5.1, to a 100% 24/7? The TDP is equal to the X5675 (90W) and the TDP is even lower than the stock W3530 (130W). I understand that the type has to be supported in EFI/SMC. I wouldn't want to use a third party tool continuously to keep the fan speed acceptable.

No, if you go x5680 or x5690 the ramp ups will be more jarring. Not with x5670 or 75. Look up maxed out Mac Pro 2012's and look at what CPU's they max out at.
 

bokkow

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2012
296
247
The Netherlands
No, if you go x5680 or x5690 the ramp ups will be more jarring. Not with x5670 or 75. Look up maxed out Mac Pro 2012's and look at what CPU's they max out at.

Yes I know that there are higher clocked editions:
X5670 2.93GHz TDP 90W
X5675 3.06GHz TDP 90W
X5680 3.33GHz TDP 130W
X5690 3.45GHz TDP 130W

But this would mean that a X5670 would be just as quiet as a X5675 right? I mean, the fan speed is only directly connected to the actual temp of the CPU? Not connected to the modelname or anything?

Confident? luckily you get the easy upgrade. I will have to sweat and cross my fingers.

Why is that? :)
 

OB-NZ

macrumors newbie
Jul 8, 2015
22
0
New Zealand
Yes I know that there are higher clocked editions:
X5670 2.93GHz TDP 90W
X5675 3.06GHz TDP 90W
X5680 3.33GHz TDP 130W
X5690 3.45GHz TDP 130W

But this would mean that a X5670 would be just as quiet as a X5675 right? I mean, the fan speed is only directly connected to the actual temp of the CPU? Not connected to the modelname or anything?



Why is that? :)
Temp surly? I'd be even more confused if a chip with a newer architecture and a lower wattage caused the fans to run quicker than your older W3530?
 

bokkow

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2012
296
247
The Netherlands
Temp surly? I'd be even more confused if a chip with a newer architecture and a lower wattage caused the fans to run quicker than your older W3530?

That's indeed what I would guess but SDAVE's first reaction made me doubt..

One more small question before I pull the trigger on this deal although not CPU related. The memory is:
Samsung M393B5170FH0-CH9
Memory Size : 4GB
Data rate (MT/s): 1333Mhz
Memory module name: PC3-10600R Registered
Memory rank : 2Rx4 (Dual Rank)
Memory ECC: ECC Server memory

I couldn't find a situation in which this memory was used in a 4.1/5.1, but as I see it, it should just work fine right?
 

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Yes I know that there are higher clocked editions:
X5670 2.93GHz TDP 90W
X5675 3.06GHz TDP 90W
X5680 3.33GHz TDP 130W
X5690 3.45GHz TDP 130W

But this would mean that a X5670 would be just as quiet as a X5675 right? I mean, the fan speed is only directly connected to the actual temp of the CPU? Not connected to the modelname or anything?



Why is that? :)

Yes, x5670 will be just as quiet as the x5675. It's a matter of the TDP. Higher clock speeds and more cores require more cooling. It is connected to the thermal sensors that are all over the MP. It's a nice piece of machinery. The higher speed fans spin up when temperature hits 80 degrees. You will get to 80 degrees MUCH less later on the x5675 than on the x5680. I have even re-applied thermal paste twice and it didn't make a difference for me. The fans spin up if I start hitting the 80 degrees mark. I sometimes use MacsFanControl to have boot controlled temperatures.

The x5680/5690 are 40W higher than the other ones, that is almost twice the amount of Wattage than the x5675.

In other words, if you would like your MP to function like a normal machine as Apple intended, go with x5675. If you would like to push this machine to the highest capabilities, go with an x5680 or 90, depending on how much you want to save. I went with the x5680 because at the time, the x5690 was about $300 more than the x5680 and it's not much of a difference between those two processors...maybe about 5-6%. Very negligible. I'd rather save the $300. But I think now the x5690 is very affordable because a bunch of people running servers had leases that expired and they put them up on eBay.
 
Last edited:

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
That's indeed what I would guess but SDAVE's first reaction made me doubt..

One more small question before I pull the trigger on this deal although not CPU related. The memory is:
Samsung M393B5170FH0-CH9
Memory Size : 4GB
Data rate (MT/s): 1333Mhz
Memory module name: PC3-10600R Registered
Memory rank : 2Rx4 (Dual Rank)
Memory ECC: ECC Server memory

I couldn't find a situation in which this memory was used in a 4.1/5.1, but as I see it, it should just work fine right?

It should work. Buy from a place that has a good return policy. You don't even need ECC memory for the Mac Pro 2009+
 

bokkow

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2012
296
247
The Netherlands
Yes, x5670 will be just as quiet as the x5675. It's a matter of the TDP. Higher clock speeds and more cores require more cooling.

The x5680/5690 are 40W higher than the other ones, that is almost twice the amount of Wattage than the x5675.

In other words, if you would like your MP to function like a normal machine as Apple intended, go with x5675. If you would like to push this machine to the highest capabilities, go with an x5680 or 90, depending on how much you want to save. I went with the x5680 because at the time, the x5690 was about $300 more than the x5680 and it's not much of a difference between those two processors...maybe about 5-6%. Very negligible. I'd rather save the $300. But I think now the x5690 is very affordable because a bunch of people running servers had leases that expired and they put them up on eBay.

Haha yes, I figured this, TDP overall is lower, but in your initial post you said:

Yeah, pretty good. But try to get a X5675 instead if you don't want the fans kicking in. That's the last official CPU "supported" by Apple, as in, the TDW is lower than lets say x5680 and x5690. Thought I think the latter is fine and once in a while the fan whirring is ok.

Which made it seem as if the fans would kick in with the X5670 while being lower clocked than X5675 and having the same TDP. That's what caused some confusion for me.

I went ahead and closed the deal, thanks for the advice on memory. It's second hand, I'm ok with no return-policy at this price-point certainly regarding the seller's overall positive feedback.
 

scottsjack

macrumors 68000
Aug 25, 2010
1,906
311
Arizona
Yeah, pretty good. But try to get a X5675 instead if you don't want the fans kicking in. That's the last official CPU "supported" by Apple, as in, the TDW is lower than lets say x5680 and x5690. Thought I think the latter is fine and once in a while the fan whirring is ok.

What? bokkow is talking about a W3530/6GB machine. Wouldn't a "W" indicate a single processor model. Many on this forum have installed W3690s or X5690s in their since CPU 4,1>5,1 and 5,1s and have not reported any fan issues.

I installed a W3690 in my 2012 months ago and have not noticed any difference in the fans.
 

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Haha yes, I figured this, TDP overall is lower, but in your initial post you said:



Which made it seem as if the fans would kick in with the X5670 while being lower clocked than X5675 and having the same TDP. That's what caused some confusion for me.

I went ahead and closed the deal, thanks for the advice on memory. It's second hand, I'm ok with no return-policy at this price-point certainly regarding the seller's overall positive feedback.
What? bokkow is talking about a W3530/6GB machine. Wouldn't a "W" indicate a single processor model. Many on this forum have installed W3690s or X5690s in their since CPU 4,1>5,1 and 5,1s and have not reported any fan issues.

I installed a W3690 in my 2012 months ago and have not noticed any difference in the fans.

Oh. that is a different story then. I thought he wanted to buy a dual tray and install x series processors (dual).
 

OB-NZ

macrumors newbie
Jul 8, 2015
22
0
New Zealand
Yes, x5670 will be just as quiet as the x5675. It's a matter of the TDP. Higher clock speeds and more cores require more cooling. It is connected to the thermal sensors that are all over the MP. It's a nice piece of machinery. The higher speed fans spin up when temperature hits 80 degrees. You will get to 80 degrees MUCH less later on the x5675 than on the x5680. I have even re-applied thermal paste twice and it didn't make a difference for me. The fans spin up if I start hitting the 80 degrees mark. I sometimes use MacsFanControl to have boot controlled temperatures.

The x5680/5690 are 40W higher than the other ones, that is almost twice the amount of Wattage than the x5675.

In other words, if you would like your MP to function like a normal machine as Apple intended, go with x5675. If you would like to push this machine to the highest capabilities, go with an x5680 or 90, depending on how much you want to save. I went with the x5680 because at the time, the x5690 was about $300 more than the x5680 and it's not much of a difference between those two processors...maybe about 5-6%. Very negligible. I'd rather save the $300. But I think now the x5690 is very affordable because a bunch of people running servers had leases that expired and they put them up on eBay.
Ok, so this higher fan speed on the 130W processors leaves me wanting to know what sort of typical situations or loads the fans ramp up on, is it whilst rendering video or are they doing this on much more mundane tasks where you wouldn't expect them to?
If it's only happening on heavy loading of all cores surely that cant be of too much concern, but to be honest I wouldn't want to get the feeling that my Mac has to go into overdrive and sound like a jet engine testing facility every time Photoshop or the like has a bit of work to do?

Ollie
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
From what I've seen from the others, the boosters may go up to around 2200RPM range when under full load. which is audible, but only 50% of the max speed. So still plenty of room for the cooling system to handle the extra heat. You may use some fan control software to hard tune that RPM to check if you can stand for it.
 

SDAVE

macrumors 68040
Jun 16, 2007
3,578
601
Nowhere
Ok, so this higher fan speed on the 130W processors leaves me wanting to know what sort of typical situations or loads the fans ramp up on, is it whilst rendering video or are they doing this on much more mundane tasks where you wouldn't expect them to?
If it's only happening on heavy loading of all cores surely that cant be of too much concern, but to be honest I wouldn't want to get the feeling that my Mac has to go into overdrive and sound like a jet engine testing facility every time Photoshop or the like has a bit of work to do?

Ollie

I would say from my professional experience (I use this machine for AE, PSD and Premiere.) it ramps up when the loads are pretty high on ALL cores. If you hit 100% on both CPU's (ALL cores) it will ramp up. Once in a while I notice it ramps up for a little bit then cools down.

Photoshop won't cause it to ramp up. After Effects won't either, unless you run BG Renderer or something. By default AE uses a few cores. Even if you enable multi-processing natively, it's shoddy and doesn't work well.

If you are going to use some video converting app like Handbrake prepare to get some fan ramping if it starts using all cores at 100%. However like mentioned above, it's not very audible. The Mac Pro at full speed sounds like a rocket, but it's pretty good at running at lower RPM's. Install MacFansControl and you can have it start with the machine and run at a higher RPM just to compensate and have a steady fan speed with barely audible fan speeds.
 

someoldguy

macrumors 68030
Aug 2, 2009
2,806
13,993
usa
Another satisfied customer !!! Just got done taking a 2.66 quad 4.1 that I picked up from a local Uni. to a 3.46 6 core. Piece of cake! Flashed the EFI to 5.1 , dropped the new cpu in , bumped memory up to 24 G. from the 8 it came with , flashed ATI 7950 for some graphics , and added 2 256 Crucial SSD's ( 1 OS X , one Win7 ) on an Apricorn Velocity Solo , plus 1 & 2 TB drives for documents and photo archive . Runs real well , <30 sec. boot in OS X , bit longer in Windows. Got a 30" ACD with the machine , so I'm using that for now , don't know how long it'll last . Great to get away from the damn glossy screens of the iMac's I've got.

Untitledgeekbench3.jpg

about.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jon-PDX
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.