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

BJonson

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 26, 2010
866
147
Um, wow. Had a dual 2.4ghz 8 core 5,1 and wanted an upgrade. Picked up on ebay 2 x 2.93ghz Nehalem quad core cpus for $125 each. Dropped them in just now and increased my geekbench 32bit score from 13000 to 16279. That has got to be the best dang upgrade for the money I have ever seen.

I know I went from a 32nm cpu to a 45nm but the temps are the same, fans are the same and watts only increased from 80 to 95 for each cpu. The increase of 3300 in geekbench is amazing. If you have a dual 4,1 or 5,1 and you don't have at least these cpus you are not having fun. Next step up is going 6 core but those puppies start at $500 each. Can't beat $125 each.
 
Last edited:
Congrats, thats a great price and a great performance boost.
The 2.93 8 core mac pro is the fastest 8 core mac pro apple made and it still has a lot of pop.

I agree that is a great bang for the buck upgrade.

Good luck with it.
 
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1523036/

I did same thing too. back to Jan $190 each. T_T

Just upgraded my 8-core 2.26Ghz to 2.93Ghz as well.

As far as HD's...boot is OWC 480GB 6G SSD / two PCIe Acelsior 480GB cards...one as work drive,
...other as scratch disk for photoshop. / & three 4TB Caviar black HD's (work, storage and backup drive)

Just loaded her up with 96GB of OWC ram goodness and ran some big photoshop tests.
In the middle of a 2 hour Digilloyd memory stress test run as I type this.

So far everything is looking good and looking forward to putting her back
in service with all the new advanced weaponry onboard.:D:D
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2013-07-31 at 8.30.06 PM.png
    Screen shot 2013-07-31 at 8.30.06 PM.png
    73.8 KB · Views: 112
  • Screen shot 2013-07-31 at 8.29.03 PM.png
    Screen shot 2013-07-31 at 8.29.03 PM.png
    41.1 KB · Views: 86
  • Screen shot 2013-07-31 at 8.28.51 PM.png
    Screen shot 2013-07-31 at 8.28.51 PM.png
    596.2 KB · Views: 105
This thread, posted less than a month after I bought my new 5,1 Mac Pro was the impetus that got me thinking about a processor upgrade to my brand new machine. My machine was the same as the OPs, a 5,1 2.4GHz DP 8 core 2010 model. I began researching both here, on other Mac forums and the Geekbench site. I decided rather than use the X5570s that the OP used I would try W5590s. 2.93GHz vs. 3.33GHz. I knew the TDP would increase from from the stock 80 watts to 130. The X5570 the OP used has a TDP of 95 watts, and as has been stated were used by Apple in it's top processor in 2009 on the dual CPU models. I was also aware that I would be "downgrading" from a newer generation 56XX series process to the older generation 55XX processor.

But, from my research, I believed my machine could safely handle the extra TDP of the processors, and the W5590s would provide a nice speed bump. The X5690 is still priced too high on the market for me to think about at this time, maybe a couple of years in the future.

As far as price goes, the "upgrade" cost me almost nothing. The 2010 and later Mac Pros, use regular lidded (IHS) CPUs, and unlike the lidless CPUs used on the 2009 dual CPU Models, the used IHS CPUs are actually worth something. I bought and sold both sets of CPUs on eBay for virtually the same price.

The installation went very smoothly. I have installed smcFanControl and upped the fan speed slightly to compensate for the added TDP.

I got a nice speed bump as the attached shows. It also was puzzling to me to see that the Geekbeench score is higher on Lion than in Mountain Lion. I am very happy with my decision.

Lou
 

Attachments

  • E5620 Geekbench.jpg
    E5620 Geekbench.jpg
    71.2 KB · Views: 88
  • My W5590 Geekbench.jpg
    My W5590 Geekbench.jpg
    71.1 KB · Views: 75
  • W5590 in 10.75 Geekbench.jpg
    W5590 in 10.75 Geekbench.jpg
    73 KB · Views: 86
  • Hardware.jpg
    Hardware.jpg
    40.6 KB · Views: 102
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.