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

Mac Pro 3,1 CPU Upgrade

DawgBone said:
I want to do an internet search for this maximum working temperature.
Click to expand...

According to Intel, maximum operating temp for 5472 is 67ºC (153ºF).
But this is external temperature (measured outside heat spreader).
Some PC overclockers reported 75ºC (167ºF) as thermal throttling barrier.

Some interesting info from Hardware Monitor developer:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/hwmon/coretemp
 
bjar said:
I just ran luxmark on CPU only and it seems like just the die off set temp is higher in one than the other. They also seem to level off one more (cooler one gets within 4C of the warmer one) as the test progresses. The heat sink temps are always within 4C of each other. So I guess air flow is not a problem.The warmer one got as high as 58C during the test (which is only 2 min long). This doesn't seem that high but I don't really know. I've always heard not to let anything get above 80C, but I don;t know what the consensus is on that. I'm not too worried about it I guess. I may run some longer tests and see what I get. I've read that if it gets too hot it should shut itself down and that hasn't happened to me yet. But I would like some comfort in knowing it won't reach that point if I ever do more processor intensive stuff. Now all I do is play x-plane and maybe edit some photos now and then but it is usually on about 16 hours a day depending on if it feels like going to sleep or not.. My eSata card seems to not let it do that sometimes.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like you are in good shape. I plan eventually to do some processor intensive stuff. If there are any developments, I'll post it here. You do the same.

----------
666sheep said:
According to Intel, maximum operating temp for 5472 is 67ºC (153ºF).
But this is external temperature (measured outside heat spreader).
Some PC overclockers reported 75ºC (167ºF) as thermal throttling barrier.

Some interesting info from Hardware Monitor developer:
http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/hwmon/coretemp
Click to expand...

Thanks for that info, 666sheep!
 
Does anyone know if the there is a 6 Core Xeon, which would be compatible with the 3,1 Quad MP?

**Apparently, there are not. This class of Xeon only was made in Quads.
 
Last edited:
starting with a dual processor 2.8 3.1, is there much real world benefit to upgrading to the 3.0 processors?
 
jeeplj8 said:
thanks, that is what I needed to know.
Click to expand...

I have a 3.1 and upgrading to SSD made huge difference and also ram (but it's silly expensive). Both of those, as well as potentially graphics card if you are using apps optimized for GPU will make FAR more improvement than a small bump in CPU speed.
 
pprior said:
I have a 3.1 and upgrading to SSD made huge difference and also ram (but it's silly expensive). Both of those, as well as potentially graphics card if you are using apps optimized for GPU will make FAR more improvement than a small bump in CPU speed.
Click to expand...

I just put in 32gb of Crucial server memory. It is 667 but it was so much cheaper. Waiting to see how it works out. I have had to replace a couple drives and am rebuilding still. also making the switch to MAverick if it all works out.
 
Upgrade that old MacPro super easy.

pprior said:
Waste of time and money
Click to expand...

I disagree.. I got the extra heat sink and a set of two X5482 processors and upgraded my single E5462 early 2008 MacPro (3,1) to dual X5482s for $225 shipped in parts from eBay. My Geekbench score went from 4300 to 13800 on Mavericks.

Well worth the $225 and 30 minutes I spent! :D

I did not have to re-install the OS or do anything.. just two about 2 extra minutes to boot the first time and my system actually runs 10-15 degrees cooler.. even running BOINC @95% cpu and all CPUs pegged out..when that isn't occurring it runs even cooler.

Total conversion time for me was about 30 minutes once I had the parts and tools. The 6-9" 3mm hex wrench is critical.

This video on YouTube shows how easy it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYvlojzqjS8

I also previously performed the SSD upgrade tapping off the motherboard and using one of the 5 1/4 bays as well as upgraded to a GTX 260. All recommended upgrades.
 
2.8 quad to 2.8 octo (dual-quad)

Well, gang... I'm taking the dive today. I've had my beloved quad-core for about 4 years now, and thought I'd see if I could breathe some new life into it. Been doing pro audio/video work for a while now, and can justify one of the new black monsters, but thought I should give this a shot before throwing in the towel.

Might still sell it anyway, but it just seemed like a "cause it's there" kind of project.

I've presently got the thing taken apart, just unbolted the unused heat-sink cage, and dropped the processor in place. I'm a little nervous about applying the heat-transfer-goop, so I thought I'd research it a bit before doing so.

I'll let you know.

Chip Tredo
 
Tesselator said:
They probably won't be orphaned for a looooong time to come. The reason MacPro1,1 models got the boot or didn't as is the case ;), is that the EFI on-board firmware is 32bit. That prevented them from moving forward with their 64bit roadmap and so... "so long MacPro1,1" said the mountain lion to the lion.





Which I've never seen happen. Has anyone here actually ever? And if you reply yes please prove that it wasn't due to some actual incompatibility. ;)
Click to expand...

My Mac Pro 3,1 is running OS X 10.12.6 Sierra just fine after using the Sierra Patcher tool. Not all features work due to hardware limitations, but not all features of El Capitan did either and it installed natively and worked fine. I see no incompatibility reason for Apple to remove support for this machine. I suppose they could argue that since the machines don't support their Metal graphics API, they won't be viable in near future releases. I also know that some of the Airport and Bluetooth modules used in the 3,1s are not compatible with the Mac OS past 10.10 Yosemite. This can be worked around with several different internal card and external USB dongle options. These issues are legitimate, but the current release works fine with a simple workaround or two. I think that Apple should offer the current OS to owners of these machines with the caveats about the Metal API and the potential for wireless and bluetooth issues. My machine has the incompatible Bluetooth module but I rarely find myself using Bluetooth, so it is moot for me. It didn't have an Airport Extreme card when I bought it, so I bought an Edimax Wireless USB dongle (EW-7811Un) on Amazon for $9 which has a driver package that support 10.7 Lion through OS X 10.12 Sierra and works great for me. There is actually an 802.11ac version of the adapter that is also OS X supported, although a bit more expensive. Apple's exclusion of these machines is (in my opinion) a money grab, an attempt to force an upgrade, pure and simple. If I could afford an upgrade to similarly capable hardware running the Mac OS, I would. That being said, even if I could afford an upgrade I would resent being forced to make one happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OS6-OSX
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