Mac Pro 3,1 vs 5,1 - performance

[mikiotty]

Hi everyone!
I have the option to get either a Mac Pro 3,1 or a 5,1.
The 3,1 is the 2.8GHz 8-core version, while the 5,1 is the 2.8GHz 4-core version from 2010.
Considering that they both have 16GB of RAM, the same HD7950 and the same NVMe SSD (bootable on both with OCLP), which one has the best real world performance in Monterey for day to day use?
I've seen some benchmarks but they don't tell the whole story. According to those, they are quite close. I know the 5,1 has more upgradability, but it is more expensive to buy.
Tell me your experiences. Thank you!!!

 

[theMarble]

I would 100% get the 5,1 if possible. These are the main differences between the 3,1 and 5,1.

CPU choices
The 3,1 has much older "Harpertown" Xeons, which consume more power and output more heat than the 5,1's "Bloomfield", "Gulftown" & "Westmere" Xeons. The best CPU config you could have in the 3,1 is 2x X5482 (4 cores, 4 threads - 8 cores total with no hyper threading) running at 3.2GHz (no turbo boost). The best CPU config for the single CPU 5,1 is the X5690/W3690 (6 cores, 12 threads with hyper threading) running at 3.46GHz (turbos up to 3.73GHz). While you have more physical cores on the 3,1, you only have 8 threads compared to 12 on the 5,1.
The 5,1 also has SSE4.2 support, which quite a few apps and drivers need on newer OS's.

Memory
The 3,1 uses DDR2 FB-DIMM memory, which is still way more expensive than the normal DDR3 ECC that the 5,1 uses. 3,1 supports up to 64GB (62GB is the max without instability and bugs) while the 5,1 supports up to 64GB (full amount usable). Also, RAM speed goes from 800MHz to 1333MHz (1066 on Bloomfield).

Expansion
The 5,1 is equipped with all PCIe 2.0 slots, while the 3,1 only has 2.0 on Slot 1 & 2 IIRC, 3 and 4 are the slower PCIe 1.0. Also, the optical drives on the 3,1 are IDE/PATA, while the 5,1 has SATA. This means that you can run SATA drives and SSDs in the optical bay to get 5 total drives (excluding PCIe drives).

GPU upgrades
The 5,1 is a much better option if you want to run more modern GPUs since support for RX series cards doesn't require any hacking to get working. This is because the new AMD drivers require SSE4.2, which the 3,1 doesn't have. Also, thanks to the superior CPU and memory performance, there will be less of a bottleneck running fancy cards like the RX 6000 series (6600, 6600 XT, 6800, 6800 XT, 6900 XT). The RX 580 is the best you can properly get running on the 3,1, which is in a whole different league to the 6600 XT, or even the Vega 56/64.

Running modern OS's
The 5,1 will have a much better time running new macOS versions like Monterey since the single-threaded performance of the 5,1's CPU is much superior to the 3,1 thanks to the higher clock speed and turbo boost supports. So at max, you're comparing 2.8GHz to 3.73GHz.

Running old OS's
The only real advantage to the 3,1 (apart from price) is that you can run Tiger and Leopard. However, on Tiger you are limited to a small number of ancient (and very slow) ATI graphics cards. On the 5,1, the minimum is Snow Leopard, which will be crazy fast with an SSD, W36xx/X56xx CPU, and a Radeon 5770/5870. I thought Snow Leopard was fast on my 17" '06 MBP and 13" 2010 MacBook, however with my 2011 13" with a Sandy Bridge-based i5, general OS performance is so much snappier and instant. You will feel this on the 5,1 as well. This is because these were the last generation of Mac hardware that ran Snow Leopard.

Can you tell I love the 5,1

 

[TheShortTimer]

Can you tell I love the 5,1

Oh, just a tad.

 

[GMShadow]

100% get the 5,1 over the 3,1.

 

[Hrududu]

How expensive is more expensive for the 5,1 vs 3,1? Honestly, neither is worth much at this point. I don't have a 5,1 personally but I've got the 8x 2.8 3,1 and a couple 6,1 Mac Pros. The 3,1 is a tricky beast. Up to Catalina, it does great. I've really struggled with OCLP though, and aside from a really buggy Big Sur install, I've had no luck with Monterey and that's with a GeForce 630 (Metal supported) GPU and SSD. I'd not spend money on one at this point. The 5,1 really is far superior in every way, and I understand getting Montery and Ventura is a much easier option. But even so, I wouldn't actually put up cash for one in 2023.

 

[mikiotty]

I would 100% get the 5,1 if possible. These are the main differences between the 3,1 and 5,1.

CPU choices
The 3,1 has much older "Harpertown" Xeons, which consume more power and output more heat than the 5,1's "Bloomfield", "Gulftown" & "Westmere" Xeons. The best CPU config you could have in the 3,1 is 2x X5482 (4 cores, 4 threads - 8 cores total with no hyper threading) running at 3.2GHz (no turbo boost). The best CPU config for the single CPU 5,1 is the X5690/W3690 (6 cores, 12 threads with hyper threading) running at 3.46GHz (turbos up to 3.73GHz). While you have more physical cores on the 3,1, you only have 8 threads compared to 12 on the 5,1.
The 5,1 also has SSE4.2 support, which quite a few apps and drivers need on newer OS's.

Memory
The 3,1 uses DDR2 FB-DIMM memory, which is still way more expensive than the normal DDR3 ECC that the 5,1 uses. 3,1 supports up to 64GB (62GB is the max without instability and bugs) while the 5,1 supports up to 64GB (full amount usable). Also, RAM speed goes from 800MHz to 1333MHz (1066 on Bloomfield).

Expansion
The 5,1 is equipped with all PCIe 2.0 slots, while the 3,1 only has 2.0 on Slot 1 & 2 IIRC, 3 and 4 are the slower PCIe 1.0. Also, the optical drives on the 3,1 are IDE/PATA, while the 5,1 has SATA. This means that you can run SATA drives and SSDs in the optical bay to get 5 total drives (excluding PCIe drives).

GPU upgrades
The 5,1 is a much better option if you want to run more modern GPUs since support for RX series cards doesn't require any hacking to get working. This is because the new AMD drivers require SSE4.2, which the 3,1 doesn't have. Also, thanks to the superior CPU and memory performance, there will be less of a bottleneck running fancy cards like the RX 6000 series (6600, 6600 XT, 6800, 6800 XT, 6900 XT). The RX 580 is the best you can properly get running on the 3,1, which is in a whole different league to the 6600 XT, or even the Vega 56/64.

Running modern OS's
The 5,1 will have a much better time running new macOS versions like Monterey since the single-threaded performance of the 5,1's CPU is much superior to the 3,1 thanks to the higher clock speed and turbo boost supports. So at max, you're comparing 2.8GHz to 3.73GHz.

Running old OS's
The only real advantage to the 3,1 (apart from price) is that you can run Tiger and Leopard. However, on Tiger you are limited to a small number of ancient (and very slow) ATI graphics cards. On the 5,1, the minimum is Snow Leopard, which will be crazy fast with an SSD, W36xx/X56xx CPU, and a Radeon 5770/5870. I thought Snow Leopard was fast on my 17" '06 MBP and 13" 2010 MacBook, however with my 2011 13" with a Sandy Bridge-based i5, general OS performance is so much snappier and instant. You will feel this on the 5,1 as well. This is because these were the last generation of Mac hardware that ran Snow Leopard.

Can you tell I love the 5,1

That was actually quite clear ahah.
Every point you made is good and these are the main reasons why I asked.
I had the chance to test for a few days the 5,1 and I love it, but I never tried a 3,1 so I had to ask.
I actually also have an RX6600 that I tried, but didn’t work. I later found about the ROM patch needed to fix the graphics initialization, I could try that if I keep the 5,1.
Regarding older OS’s, I also have a 2,1 in house so everything up to El Capitan is going there!

 

[mikiotty]

How expensive is more expensive for the 5,1 vs 3,1? Honestly, neither is worth much at this point. I don't have a 5,1 personally but I've got the 8x 2.8 3,1 and a couple 6,1 Mac Pros. The 3,1 is a tricky beast. Up to Catalina, it does great. I've really struggled with OCLP though, and aside from a really buggy Big Sur install, I've had no luck with Monterey and that's with a GeForce 630 (Metal supported) GPU and SSD. I'd not spend money on one at this point. The 5,1 really is far superior in every way, and I understand getting Montery and Ventura is a much easier option. But even so, I wouldn't actually put up cash for one in 2023.

The 3,1 is 100€, the 5,1 is 300€.
I actually plan to use it as my main machine and retire my hackintosh to only windows games (I don’t plan on gaming on the Mac Pro, I know the bottleneck from the CPU would be too much for modern titles).
I might try and get some discount over the 5,1 and later upgrade it to the dual CPU tray if I ever come across a good deal for the riser card.

 

[Project Alice]

I would go for the 5,1. I own both, and my 5,1 replaced my 3,1 which was also an 8-Core 2.8GHz model.

The 3,1 is definitely useable but I ran into a lot issues with upgradability and the Penryn based CPUs it uses lack quite a bit of instructions compared to the CPUs the 5,1 will take.

I had to do a few janky upgrades to get the 3,1 where I wanted it. $300 isn’t a terrible price for a single CPU 5,1.
As others stated, a 5,1 with an X5690/W3690 will run circles around a 3,1.
In fact, my second 5,1 MP which also started its life as a 4,1 ran circles around my 3,1 before I upgraded it to a 5,1 with X5675s. I think it had 2.93GHz quad cores in it originally.

The 3,1 essentially has two Core 2 Quads in it.

 

[mikiotty]

So 5,1 it is! Thank you all, I’ll let you know how it goes.

 

[chaosbunny]

I actually plan to use it as my main machine and retire my hackintosh to only windows games (I don’t plan on gaming on the Mac Pro, I know the bottleneck from the CPU would be too much for modern titles).

I played Horizon Zero Dawn and Cyberpunk 2077 on high settings at 2560x1440 px on the upgraded 5,1 in my signature. Just to let you know that it's certainly possible should the need arise.

 

[Project Alice]

I actually plan to use it as my main machine and retire my hackintosh to only windows games (I don’t plan on gaming on the Mac Pro, I know the bottleneck from the CPU would be too much for modern titles).

I played Horizon Zero Dawn and Cyberpunk 2077 on high settings at 2560x1440 px on the upgraded 5,1 in my signature. Just to let you know that it's certainly possible should the need arise.

I game on my 5,1 all the time too. I just finished hogwarts Legacy on it, mix of high and medium settings at 1920 x 1200. I also played CP2077 on it too.

So far the bottleneck has been my GPU, not the CPUs. Debating on sticking a Radeon IIV in it one of these days since they’re cheap and no one else wants them.

 

[Hrududu]

$300 isn’t a terrible price for a single CPU 5,1.

Uh, $300 is a terrible price for a 5,1 in 2023. They're literally at e-waste value almost everywhere at this point.

 

[Project Alice]

Uh, $300 is a terrible price for a 5,1 in 2023. They're literally at e-waste value almost everywhere at this point.

Okay.

 

[Hrududu]

Okay.
View attachment 2161064 View attachment 2161066 View attachment 2161065

Lol, okay if eBay is the only place you can source a Mac Pro, I suppose you’ll find some people willing to pay. You just can’t convince me that 14 year old tech that sucks power and hasn’t had a supported OS in 2+ years is with that kind of money. Make no mistake, the 5,1 was a great workstation for a long time, but you’ll never catch me telling someone to throw that kind of cash at one now. It’s not 2018 anymore. Maybe it’s severely different in Europe, but in the states these things are being tossed out left and right by education institutions and businesses because it makes no sense to keep them. Even the 6,1 has dropped significantly in price. I personally have picked up 2 of them under $200 since October. Doesn’t mean they still don’t sell for more, but the point is prices change every time Apple releases a new OS, updates the product line, introduces a new CPU. If you’re in the market for a Mac, be realistic about what it’s capable of in the moment, not what people were paying and using them for 1, 3, or 5 years ago.

 

[mateo14]

Lol, okay if eBay is the only place you can source a Mac Pro, I suppose you’ll find some people willing to pay. You just can’t convince me that 14 year old tech that sucks power and hasn’t had a supported OS in 2+ years is with that kind of money. Make no mistake, the 5,1 was a great workstation for a long time, but you’ll never catch me telling someone to throw that kind of cash at one now. It’s not 2018 anymore. Maybe it’s severely different in Europe, but in the states these things are being tossed out left and right by education institutions and businesses because it makes no sense to keep them. Even the 6,1 has dropped significantly in price. I personally have picked up 2 of them under $200 since October. Doesn’t mean they still don’t sell for more, but the point is prices change every time Apple releases a new OS, updates the product line, introduces a new CPU. If you’re in the market for a Mac, be realistic about what it’s capable of in the moment, not what people were paying and using them for 1, 3, or 5 years ago.

I can agree that isn't the best computer for the recent versions of macOS because you have to use OP. It's not a solution for everyone

However, it doesn't looks so bad when you decide to use Linux or Windows.

What is the most powerful Mac Pro 5,1?

Mac Pro 2012
12 Core 2 x 3.46 Ghz
256 GB RAM
AMD Radeon RX6900 XT 16 GB GDDR6
Storage - a lot of options

It applies to a small group of users that have enough money to upgrade it. In 2025, many users will lose the warranty for their M1 Macs that bought in 2020, and these are dead machines in the next two years. These group of users will be selling many Macs with broken parts that are soldered into logic boards:

- dead SSDs
- broken graphic cards
- RAM issues
etc.

Mac Pro gradually will be losing users, and no one can stop this process. In 2025, it will be impossible to fix the M1 Mac from 2020, but you can easily fix majority of the Mac Pro computers that could run Ventura (or higher), Linux or Windows.

I think that everyone should make a right decision. Personally, I would keep using Mac Pro 5,1 until Apple drops a support for Ventura, or a last version of macOS for Intel. I hope that Apple will release a Mac with the replaceable SSD, which will be a better option than the current M1/M2 Macs.

 

[eyoungren]

You just can’t convince me that 14 year old tech that sucks power…

I'm not going to argue about pricing, I'm just taking some exception to this (emphasis mine).

I used a Quad G5 alongside a 2.3DC G5 for three years. You probably knew that as you've been here on MR three years longer than I have. Anyway, any of my Macs or PCs that are powered-on stay that way. I don't turn my computers off and I don't allow them to sleep. I allow monitors to sleep, but that's it. So, with the exceptions of rebooting or powering down because I need to remove/add/replace parts or physically move computers, all my computers are running full power 24/7/365.

In all of this, do you know how much my electric bill went up during the years I was using the Quad and the 2.3DC? $20 a month.

Now, if $20 a month additional on your electric bill is a deal-breaker, you are either single or counting your pennies (or both). But compared to my 5-ton A/C unit (which broke), and my five portable A/C units that I've had to use since, this is nothing. My electric bill hits north of $500 a month during the summer. I live in Phoenix, Arizona. Do you know what's causing my electric bill to spike so high? It's sure not computers being left on sucking a lot of power. You know how I know that? Because during the winter my electric bill hovers around $100. For a two-story, three bedroom house.

So compared to my air conditioning, this is nothing.

Now, I use a MacPro 5,1 (a 4,1 updated). It too is left on 24/7/365. Between my 5,1 and my G5 Quad, which 'old tech' is doing the most sucking of power? Hint: it's NOT the MacPro.

Yes, compared to a much more modern Mac or PC, my MP is drawing a lot more power. But, if the most power hungry Macs ever made drive up an electric bill by only $20 a month, is the power draw of an old MP 5,1 really that much of a concern?

I didn't lose any sleep with what the Quad and the 2.3DC drew (plus all my other computers), I don't lose any sleep over what the MP draws either. This is really a non-argument to me.

 

[Hrududu]

I can agree that isn't the best computer for the recent versions of macOS because you have to use OP. It's not a solution for everyone

However, it doesn't looks so bad when you decide to use Linux or Windows.

What is the most powerful Mac Pro 5,1?

Mac Pro 2012
12 Core 2 x 3.46 Ghz
256 GB RAM
AMD Radeon RX6900 XT 16 GB GDDR6
Storage - a lot of options

It applies to a small group of users that have enough money to upgrade it. In 2025, many users will lose the warranty for their M1 Macs that bought in 2020, and these are dead machines in the next two years. These group of users will be selling many Macs with broken parts that are soldered into logic boards:

- dead SSDs
- broken graphic cards
- RAM issues
etc.

Mac Pro gradually will be losing users, and no one can stop this process. In 2025, it will be impossible to fix the M1 Mac from 2020, but you can easily fix majority of the Mac Pro computers that could run Ventura (or higher), Linux or Windows.

I think that everyone should make a right decision. Personally, I would keep using Mac Pro 5,1 until Apple drops a support for Ventura, or a last version of macOS for Intel. I hope that Apple will release a Mac with the replaceable SSD, which will be a better option than the current M1/M2 Macs.

I am 100% in agreement that the Mac Pro is definitely a machine that took care of its users. I’m certainly no fan of the Apple Silicon Macs integration of CPU, GPU, RAM, and what they’ve done with storage. Heck, I’m not a fan of T2 either and the ewaste it’s created. But at some point we’re all going to have to accept that Apple is producing disposable computers now. If we want to keep using Macs, eventually one of these SOC devices is going to be on our desk.

As for options of Windows or Linux, it’s a stretch to say a Mac Pro 5,1 is a more logical choice than generic PC hardware that’s brand new with a warranty, or used at a fraction of the cost.

I think it’s also important to note I’m not suggesting people chuck the 5,1 under their desk. There is a big difference between rolling with & pushing the machine you already own and invested in, and going out today and buying one. My stance is that in 2023, $300+ is better spent on something else.

 

[Hrududu]

I'm not going to argue about pricing, I'm just taking some exception to this (emphasis mine).

I used a Quad G5 alongside a 2.3DC G5 for three years. You probably knew that as you've been here on MR three years longer than I have. Anyway, any of my Macs or PCs that are powered-on stay that way. I don't turn my computers off and I don't allow them to sleep. I allow monitors to sleep, but that's it. So, with the exceptions of rebooting or powering down because I need to remove/add/replace parts or physically move computers, all my computers are running full power 24/7/365.

In all of this, do you know how much my electric bill went up during the years I was using the Quad and the 2.3DC? $20 a month.

Now, if $20 a month additional on your electric bill is a deal-breaker, you are either single or counting your pennies (or both). But compared to my 5-ton A/C unit (which broke), and my five portable A/C units that I've had to use since, this is nothing. My electric bill hits north of $500 a month during the summer. I live in Phoenix, Arizona. Do you know what's causing my electric bill to spike so high? It's sure not computers being left on sucking a lot of power. You know how I know that? Because during the winter my electric bill hovers around $100. For a two-story, three bedroom house.

So compared to my air conditioning, this is nothing.

Now, I use a MacPro 5,1 (a 4,1 updated). It too is left on 24/7/365. Between my 5,1 and my G5 Quad, which 'old tech' is doing the most sucking of power? Hint: it's NOT the MacPro.

Yes, compared to a much more modern Mac or PC, my MP is drawing a lot more power. But, if the most power hungry Macs ever made drive up an electric bill by only $20 a month, is the power draw of an old MP 5,1 really that much of a concern?

I didn't lose any sleep with what the Quad and the 2.3DC drew (plus all my other computers), I don't lose any sleep over what the MP draws either. This is really a non-argument to me.

Yeah, you and I rode the PPC wagon until the wheels fell off. My quad G5 was my primary desktop until 2018 when I picked up an 8 core 3,1 Mac Pro for $60. The G5 still resides on the desk next to the MP as I never did a transfer of files, Just setup the Pro as new and keep the G5 handy for my iTunes library and iPhoto, plus the decade of other files living there. I've always been a guy who prefers rocking the old vs buying new. The newest Mac I own is a 2015 11" Air and the most powerful is my recently acquired Mac Pro 6,1 (I keep the other at work).

Sure the annual cost isn't insane. For some reason I'm still running Plex off of an Xserve. But the heat and noise generated is beginning to push me towards moving to another device. To suggest a Mac Pro 5,1 is going to break the bank isn't really my goal. Plenty of new gaming PCs run circles around PowerMacs and Mac Pros when it comes to total consumption. Power consumption is probably lowest on my list of reasons NOT to buy a 5,1 or older Mac Pro these days. #1 is OS support. As a PPC guy yourself, you know what happened when Apple finally released Snow Leopard. That was the end of the road. Didn't matter that the Quad G5 was a $3000 box and the Core Solo mini was a $500 device. Security patches and mainstream app support ended fast. Developers rapidly dropped Universal binaries, PPC was cut from Xcode etc. When Apple finally kills support for Intel systems, there isn't going to be an OCLP that'll make it work anymore. Counting on OpenCore to drag the cMP along enough to make the investment worth it is awful risky, and not something I would recommend someone do. Down the list of reasons not to buy, we get into reliance on hardware that's been in use for a decade plus, risk of failure. Dated PCI 2.0, SATA, RAM, and IO on the board that just isn't going to get better with age.

If money doesn't matter, and someone just wants to fork out big money for a cMP, that's ultimately their business. I'd just hope they really consider what they're getting into and just because a Mac that might have been a great buy just 3-5 years ago doesn't mean it is now.

 

[Project Alice]

Lol, okay if eBay is the only place you can source a Mac Pro

eBay isn’t the first place I would look for anything. Both my 5,1s were acquired from FB marketplace. One $50, the other along with a ThinkPad X230t i7, $150 combined.

eBay is the main place and the only one I can think of to show how much something is actually selling for. Sure if you look hard enough you can find good deals on things.

Yeah, you and I rode the PPC wagon until the wheels fell off. My quad G5 was my primary desktop until 2018 when I picked up an 8 core 3,1 Mac Pro for $60. The G5 still resides on the desk next to the MP as I never did a transfer of files, Just setup the Pro as new and keep the G5 handy for my iTunes library and iPhoto, plus the decade of other files living there. I've always been a guy who prefers rocking the old vs buying new. The newest Mac I own is a 2015 11" Air and the most powerful is my recently acquired Mac Pro 6,1 (I keep the other at work).

Sure the annual cost isn't insane. For some reason I'm still running Plex off of an Xserve. But the heat and noise generated is beginning to push me towards moving to another device. To suggest a Mac Pro 5,1 is going to break the bank isn't really my goal. Plenty of new gaming PCs run circles around PowerMacs and Mac Pros when it comes to total consumption. Power consumption is probably lowest on my list of reasons NOT to buy a 5,1 or older Mac Pro these days. #1 is OS support. As a PPC guy yourself, you know what happened when Apple finally released Snow Leopard. That was the end of the road. Didn't matter that the Quad G5 was a $3000 box and the Core Solo mini was a $500 device. Security patches and mainstream app support ended fast. Developers rapidly dropped Universal binaries, PPC was cut from Xcode etc. When Apple finally kills support for Intel systems, there isn't going to be an OCLP that'll make it work anymore. Counting on OpenCore to drag the cMP along enough to make the investment worth it is awful risky, and not something I would recommend someone do. Down the list of reasons not to buy, we get into reliance on hardware that's been in use for a decade plus, risk of failure. Dated PCI 2.0, SATA, RAM, and IO on the board that just isn't going to get better with age.

If money doesn't matter, and someone just wants to fork out big money for a cMP, that's ultimately their business. I'd just hope they really consider what they're getting into and just because a Mac that might have been a great buy just 3-5 years ago doesn't mean it is now.

I’m sorry no where in any of my comments did I specifically “recommend” someone purchase or seek out a MP5,1 over anything else. I, much like everyone else in this thread simply answered OP’s question.

Whether you believe it or not, $300 is not a terrible price for one. It isn’t the best price you’d be able to find, but sometimes with old computers we have to take what we can get and decide if it’s worth it to us. Buying something like that locally, for $300 knowing it works and is in good condition is to me worth it. It may not be 2018 anymore, but I still see these Mac Pros on Marketplace local to me with asking prices of $500+ especially if it’s a dual CPU like both of mine.

To touch on some of the other points, again, nobody in here is going out and recommending to the general public to get an old Mac Pro and use OCLP on it to stay up to date. We do that because we are tinkerers. And yes the Mac Pro has plenty of power and life left in it. Even if Apple drops x86 support all together next year, it is still way more powerful than the cheapest PCs and it does more than I need it to do. Including playing brand new triple A games at decent settings, decent FPS, running Windows 11.

My second 5,1 is my plex server running TrueNAS Core with 6 HDDs. It’s quiet, contrary to what I keep reading it really doesn’t produce much heat. And I haven’t noticed a change in my power bill at all since I hooked it up. FreeBSD doesn’t care that my server is 14 years old. It works for me so there it will stay. Perhaps OP has a similar mindset as me.

 

[eyoungren]

As a PPC guy yourself, you know what happened when Apple finally released Snow Leopard. That was the end of the road. Didn't matter that the Quad G5 was a $3000 box and the Core Solo mini was a $500 device. Security patches and mainstream app support ended fast. Developers rapidly dropped Universal binaries, PPC was cut from Xcode etc. When Apple finally kills support for Intel systems, there isn't going to be an OCLP that'll make it work anymore. Counting on OpenCore to drag the cMP along enough to make the investment worth it is awful risky, and not something I would recommend someone do. Down the list of reasons not to buy, we get into reliance on hardware that's been in use for a decade plus, risk of failure. Dated PCI 2.0, SATA, RAM, and IO on the board that just isn't going to get better with age.

That is quite possibly my problem.

I've always just made it work for me, whatever I had to do. I didn't go through the Intel transition, I was too busy making PowerPC Macs work. I skipped it by jumping into systems that are newer than Snow Leopard but older than the current versions. I'm now making those work.

When the company I work for finally gets around to giving me a replacement for the 2015 MBP they issued me, I'll probably be upgrading OS and software again to keep current (or as current as I can). Right now I have hardware that I can still do that with.

This all puts me 10+ years behind the current stuff and I'm okay with that, because between what I have, I've always made it work and I've upgraded when it no longer does.

 

[m1maverick]

Sure the annual cost isn't insane. For some reason I'm still running Plex off of an Xserve. But the heat and noise generated is beginning to push me towards moving to another device. To suggest a Mac Pro 5,1 is going to break the bank isn't really my goal. Plenty of new gaming PCs run circles around PowerMacs and Mac Pros when it comes to total consumption. Power consumption is probably lowest on my list of reasons NOT to buy a 5,1 or older Mac Pro these days. #1 is OS support. As a PPC guy yourself, you know what happened when Apple finally released Snow Leopard. That was the end of the road. Didn't matter that the Quad G5 was a $3000 box and the Core Solo mini was a $500 device. Security patches and mainstream app support ended fast. Developers rapidly dropped Universal binaries, PPC was cut from Xcode etc. When Apple finally kills support for Intel systems, there isn't going to be an OCLP that'll make it work anymore. Counting on OpenCore to drag the cMP along enough to make the investment worth it is awful risky, and not something I would recommend someone do. Down the list of reasons not to buy, we get into reliance on hardware that's been in use for a decade plus, risk of failure. Dated PCI 2.0, SATA, RAM, and IO on the board that just isn't going to get better with age.

I think you're looking for the Mac Pro forum and not the "Early Intel Macs" forum which you are in now.

 

[theMarble]

I think you're looking for the Mac Pro forum and not the "Early Intel Macs" forum which you are in now.

I think it works here too. Sure not the main forum, but a 5,1 is still an Early Intel Mac. (Pre Core-i, runs Snow Leopard)

 

[m1maverick]

I think it works here too. Sure not the main forum, but a 5,1 is still an Early Intel Mac. (Pre Core-i, runs Snow Leopard)

I agree. Note I was not responding to the OP but rather someone who doesn't appear to be taking into consideration what forum they're posting in.

 

[Amethyst1]

[...] a 5,1 is still an Early Intel Mac. (Pre Core-i, runs Snow Leopard)

The Xeons in the 4,1/5,1 are related to Core iXs though.

 

[theMarble]

The Xeons in the 4,1/5,1 are related to Core iXs though.

Forgot that Gulftown/Westmere was based on Nehalem. Then as well the 2009/2010 iMac's and 2010 15"/17" MBP's were Nehalem-based too.