Post Parts for Custom Built PC equivalent to Mac Pro!!!

[Orange™]

Title says it all. Not looking for Hackintosh!
People say that they can build a PC that is comparable to a Mac Pro for half the cost. Could users who have done this please post the exact parts they used.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. Looking for 8 core (2x4), 6 core(1x6), or 12 core(2x6)!

[rmwebs]

What OS you looking to run? If its Linux, you will need parts that are compatible with your distro (unless you are ok with hacking away at the kernel!)

[nanofrog]

Title says it all. Not looking for Hackintosh!
People say that they can build a PC that is comparable to a Mac Pro for half the cost. Could users who have done this please post the exact parts they used.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. Looking for 8 core (2x4), 6 core(1x6), or 12 core(2x6)!
What OS (not only matters on parts as mentioned above, but Linux can also be downloaded for free, as where Windows requires you to purchase a license)?
What level of parity?

I ask, as there's wide variances on cases, boards, and PSU's for example.

[The Rominator]

Title says it all. Not looking for Hackintosh!
People say that they can build a PC that is comparable to a Mac Pro for half the cost. Could users who have done this please post the exact parts they used.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. Looking for 8 core (2x4), 6 core(1x6), or 12 core(2x6)!

A Mac made of "equivalent" parts IS a Hackintosh.

This is true primarily because there is no "equivalent" Logicboard...this is an Apple only part.

A Non-Hackintosh Hackintosh is like a Non-Reflective Mirror.

[slughead]

I'm not sure OP knows what a hackintosh is.

You should, however, read other threads on actual hackintoshes that include benchmarks. That way you know it's the same OS getting same or better performance, as opposed to trying to compare OS X and windows.

I don't like trolls that just default to "use forum search!"... but seriously: do.

[Invocation]

Erm.. Alright..

Here's an easily Overclockable (4GHz+) Intel Based Computer..

-Intel i7 930 (8 Logical Cores @ 2.8GHz [stock]) ~ $319.99
Note: Cores do not stack linearly. More isn't necessarily better.
-Antec 900 ~ $119.99 (Whatever fits your tastes. There are a plethora of cases available)
-Corsair H50 CPU Cooler ~ $79.99
-EVGA X58 3X SLI ~ $229.99
-Patriot 6GB @ 1333MHz Memory ~ $114.99
-WD 500GB Caviar Black 7200RPM ~ $59.99
-Corsair HX 650W PSU ~ $134.99
-XFX Radeon 5850 1GB GDDR5 ~ $329.99

Total: $1404.92

This thing'll destroy anything in its path.



Here's a base Mac Pro:

Base Cost: $3,299.00

Notable Differences:

-The two Xeon's in the Pro will be inferior to the i7 in the PC for anything practical.
-The PC has 1333MHz memory, vs 1066MHz Apple memory.
-The PC HDD has 140GB less space. Easily upgradeable with $30.
-The Mac comes standard with a GTS 120. This is a rebranded 9500GT, considered one of the worst cards of Q2 2009. The PC comes equipped with the strongest Single-GPU built Graphics card ever. The difference is so vast it's immeasurable.
-A Media drive is included with the Apple. Media drives are now ultimately useless as you can install OS' using a flash drive.

Happy OP?

3299 / 2 = 1649.50

1404.92 < 1649.50

[Invocation]

Wait, forgot to add SATA cables to the PC build.

*Add $20 to the PC build.

*Also note: neither come with a monitor.

*Moreover: all prices are in CND.

[nanofrog]

Wait, forgot to add SATA cables to the PC build.

*Add $20 to the PC build.

*Also note: neither come with a monitor.

*Moreover: all prices are in CND.
That board comes with SATA cables, so there's no need to add any. ;)

[Invocation]

That board comes with SATA cables, so there's no need to add any. ;)

But I like my special L-shaped pink ones!

[nanofrog]

But I like my special L-shaped pink ones!
There's a wierd one in every bunch... :rolleyes: :D :p

[Invocation]

Hey hey now, to each their own!



Alright, let's upgrade this PC now and keep it under half.

$1649.50 - $1404.92 = $244.58

We'll replace all the fans on the case with the Scythe Slip Stream (Kaze-Jyuni).

The fans move an impressive 110CFM of air.

Cost each: $9.99

We'll need:
-2 on each side of the H50 Radiator (tossing out the Corsair Fan)
-2 on the front of the case
-1 on the side of the case, cooling the HD 5870.

So 49.95 total.

$244.58 - $49.95 = $194.63

We'll fork the rest of that over to a Corsair Extreme Series 2.5in SATA II Solid State Drive, 32GB costing $179.99

That'll house whatever OS you desire, and your 500GB can house whatever else you want.

[Roman23]

Ok, compared to 1066 DDR3, how much of a percentage faster in PC terms is 1333? Btw, my mac pro uses desktop i7-975 as it used to be a xeon. I decided against the w3580 and ordered for 200 dollars cheaper a i7-975 which runs at 3.33 ghz.


Erm.. Alright..

Here's an easily Overclockable (4GHz+) Intel Based Computer..

-Intel i7 930 (8 Logical Cores @ 2.8GHz [stock]) ~ $319.99
Note: Cores do not stack linearly. More isn't necessarily better.
-Antec 900 ~ $119.99 (Whatever fits your tastes. There are a plethora of cases available)
-Corsair H50 CPU Cooler ~ $79.99
-EVGA X58 3X SLI ~ $229.99
-Patriot 6GB @ 1333MHz Memory ~ $114.99
-WD 500GB Caviar Black 7200RPM ~ $59.99
-Corsair HX 650W PSU ~ $134.99
-XFX Radeon 5850 1GB GDDR5 ~ $329.99

Total: $1404.92

This thing'll destroy anything in its path.



Here's a base Mac Pro:

Base Cost: $3,299.00

Notable Differences:

-The two Xeon's in the Pro will be inferior to the i7 in the PC for anything practical.
-The PC has 1333MHz memory, vs 1066MHz Apple memory.
-The PC HDD has 140GB less space. Easily upgradeable with $30.
-The Mac comes standard with a GTS 120. This is a rebranded 9500GT, considered one of the worst cards of Q2 2009. The PC comes equipped with the strongest Single-GPU built Graphics card ever. The difference is so vast it's immeasurable.
-A Media drive is included with the Apple. Media drives are now ultimately useless as you can install OS' using a flash drive.

Happy OP?

3299 / 2 = 1649.50

1404.92 < 1649.50

[gaspra]

Btw, my mac pro uses desktop i7-975 as it used to be a xeon. I decided against the w3580 and ordered for 200 dollars cheaper a i7-975 which runs at 3.33 ghz.

For the price, why don't you go for the new Hex-core although none of them supports ECC memory. If you were going to use 1333 memory, You could go for cheaper non-ECC ones anyway.

[Invocation]

Ok, compared to 1066 DDR3, how much of a percentage faster in PC terms is 1333? Btw, my mac pro uses desktop i7-975 as it used to be a xeon. I decided against the w3580 and ordered for 200 dollars cheaper a i7-975 which runs at 3.33 ghz.

Um.. Well, not exactly sure how 'PC terms' differ from standard math.

1333 / 1066 * 100% = 125%
So 1333 is 125% the speed of 1066.

The faster memory will be of relevance in memory-intensive applications. Large programs which wish to store large parts of themselves in your memory will benefit from faster memory.

But you'd be crazy to leave a PC with those specs at stock. Once you start upping the reference clock, you'll have to start lowering the multiplier for the RAM to make sure it doesn't melt. You could easily have 1333MHz memory at 1800MHz without breaking a sweat.

Wise choice on the i7 over the Xeon. The W3580 is seriously overpriced for the 'Q3 2009' punch it packs. An i7 isn't going to be anywhere near the bottleneck for your system. That hardware's overkill at that point.

Your bottleneck will probably be your HDD at this point. (vs an SSD)
Unless your GPU is brought into the equation, which is a severe weak point of most Macs. (GT 120's are rebranded 9500GT's)

[Invocation]

For the price, why don't you go for the new Hex-core although none of them supports ECC memory. If you were going to use 1333 memory, You could go for cheaper non-ECC ones anyway.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't even order a Mac Pro from Apple with an SSD.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a nVidia Card past the 9XXX line in a Mac Pro from Apple.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a 5XXX ATi GPU in a Mac Pro from Apple.

i9's are incredibly silly when the Mac Pro uses 1066MHz RAM. (DDR2 was available in that speed, that's not even real DDR3..)



Does no one understand what a bottleneck is? :mad:

You buy (a) $1(+)k Processor(s) and use almost none of it. Why would you do that?

[Umbongo]

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't even order a Mac Pro from Apple with an SSD.

Has no relevance at all, you can use SSDs in your Mac Pro as many do. None of the big certified workstation vendors offer SSDs on them. Even if Apple did you'd pay a lot for some brand they chose, unlikely you'd get even one of the best 3 choices around.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a nVidia Card past the 9XXX line in a Mac Pro from Apple.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a 5XXX ATi GPU in a Mac Pro from Apple.

If you are a gamer maybe. Many users don't need a powerful graphics card at all.

i9's are incredibly silly when the Mac Pro uses 1066MHz RAM. (DDR2 was available in that speed, that's not even real DDR3..)

Not even real DDR3? Only the top tier processors even support more than 1066MHz without overclocking. On a dual socket board with the second rank of DIMMs installed it won't run at more than 1066MHz unless you have a board that allows it to be reconfigured, and I only know of ASUS and Tyan ones that do.


Does no one understand what a bottleneck is? :mad:

You buy (a) $1(+)k Processor(s) and use almost none of it. Why would you do that?

You can can max out six 3.33GHz cores with 800MHz memory, a 5400RPM drive and integrated graphics. It just depends on what you are doing. Even if you can't utilize all 6 cores, you are still getting that 3.33GHz clock speed. Also there is no i9.

Sorry to break your post down like that, but you posted a lot of ill-thought out statements.

[gaspra]

Does no one understand what a bottleneck is? :mad:

You buy (a) $1(+)k Processor(s) and use almost none of it. Why would you do that?

Core i7-975 and Core i7 980X are similarly priced, they are both near $1K. It really depends on how you use multi-cores. For gaming, it's a non-issue. For parallel computing, more cores mean faster speed if the code is optimized properly. Indeed I don't find SSD is very useful since the code doesn't read/write disk often. The fastest SSD won't help 1% of my application.

Core i7 doesn't support ECC. Some CPU/Memory intensive applications could run for weeks even months. Without ECC support, such applications usually crash (largely due to memory error) in several days.

[Umbongo]

For the price, why don't you go for the new Hex-core although none of them supports ECC memory. If you were going to use 1333 memory, You could go for cheaper non-ECC ones anyway.

He upgraded his Mac Pro, and they don't actually support any 32nm processors at the moment and likely never will nor will they run 1333MHz memory. He also got his processor quite cheap as you can see. The 6 cores aren't really around in used quantity to have those lower prices yet.

[gaspra]

He upgraded his Mac Pro, and they don't actually support any 32nm processors at the moment and likely never will nor will they run 1333MHz memory. He also got his processor quite cheap as you can see. The 6 cores aren't really around in used quantity to have those lower prices yet.

Well, I thought it was a very recent upgrade:)

[jav6454]

I'm not sure OP knows what a hackintosh is.

You should, however, read other threads on actual hackintoshes that include benchmarks. That way you know it's the same OS getting same or better performance, as opposed to trying to compare OS X and windows.

I don't like trolls that just default to "use forum search!"... but seriously: do.

He is not trying to run OS X on it, so it is not a hackit0sh. (At least that is what he implies has he says PC) He is trying to build a PC that has equivalent or better performance than a Mac Pro. Which is doable.

A Mac made of "equivalent" parts IS a Hackintosh.

This is true primarily because there is no "equivalent" Logicboard...this is an Apple only part.

A Non-Hackintosh Hackintosh is like a Non-Reflective Mirror.

Read above, OP not trying to run OS X (implied).


Well, here OP. Custom made NewEgg build. You can furthur customize it the way you want OP. You can go the physical 8-core way, but that requires more expensive server parts. I also include a picture of the costs of server parts. However, factor it a new PSU also, and it's a hefty build.

[strausd]

How can you say a processor with 4 cores and 8 threads is equivalent to a system with 8 cores and 16 threads? When it comes to 3D rendering more cores is definitely good. Hyper threading only gives a 30% increase over the same processor if it wasn't hyper threaded.

[Cindori]

How can you say a processor with 4 cores and 8 threads is equivalent to a system with 8 cores and 16 threads? When it comes to 3D rendering more cores is definitely good. Hyper threading only gives a 30% increase over the same processor if it wasn't hyper threaded.

The 930 can be easily overclocked to ~4.2GHz. I'm not sure about all software, but generally that tears a 8x 2.26Ghz apart.

You could replace the 930 with a 980x if you're still picky about cores.

[jav6454]

The 930 can be easily overclocked to ~4.2GHz. I'm not sure about all software, but generally that tears a 8x 2.26Ghz apart.

You could replace the 930 with a 980x if you're still picky about cores.

Basically this. Remember, not every program is hyperthreading sensitive nor optimized, so in fact having 8 threads vs 16 threads can lead to a bigger performance jump. In many cases, multiple threaded CPUs tend to hurt performance.

Bear in mind, signle threaded performance is boosted more by a higher clock than more cores. A i7-930 is perfect because you can have the 8 threads if you need them there or you can turn HyperThreading off and have quality single threaded performance @ 4.2GHz if need be.

[Roman23]

I would.. but one problem, well two of them actually. Since the 2009 single-quads are capable of using all the bloomfield core i7 and xeon(w3520,w3540,w3565,w3570, and w3580), Apple did not leave room inside for the microcode needed to run the core i7-980x or its xeon brother.

This would require B1 stepping which I have D0 stepping.. Another factor is the situation that in order for the 980x to work in the single-quad core, the microcode would have to be flashed to the EFI chip inside the mac pro for it to be used and even if this can be done, there are no guarentees that the machine would even be bootable anymore, or it may boot but nothing would come up... Idk, has someone ever gotten ahold of the microcode to do this?

I didn't want to go PC, as building a hackintosh is complicated at this point.. Sure, I'd like to buy any PC and put mac os x on it, as I do own it(bought for 29.99), but not all PC's will support it.


For the price, why don't you go for the new Hex-core although none of them supports ECC memory. If you were going to use 1333 memory, You could go for cheaper non-ECC ones anyway.

Orig conf: w3520 2.66 quad-core single
6GB of ddr3 1066 memory
4 x1TB hard drives - total 4TB.
Two superdrives 22x
GPU: Radeon 4870 HP.. I know the GT120 is crap, therefore got rid of it.

But the other problem is even with my new processor and non-ecc memory, Apple still has 1066 locked in so going to 1333 isn't going to happen, at least on the mac pro.


Um.. Well, not exactly sure how 'PC terms' differ from standard math.

1333 / 1066 * 100% = 125%
So 1333 is 125% the speed of 1066.

The faster memory will be of relevance in memory-intensive applications. Large programs which wish to store large parts of themselves in your memory will benefit from faster memory.

But you'd be crazy to leave a PC with those specs at stock. Once you start upping the reference clock, you'll have to start lowering the multiplier for the RAM to make sure it doesn't melt. You could easily have 1333MHz memory at 1800MHz without breaking a sweat.

Wise choice on the i7 over the Xeon. The W3580 is seriously overpriced for the 'Q3 2009' punch it packs. An i7 isn't going to be anywhere near the bottleneck for your system. That hardware's overkill at that point.

Your bottleneck will probably be your HDD at this point. (vs an SSD)
Unless your GPU is brought into the equation, which is a severe weak point of most Macs. (GT 120's are rebranded 9500GT's)

And add to the fact that the i7-980x or its xeon brother won't even work in ANY 2009 quad-core single mac pro, as it uses B1 stepping plus one would need to flash the microcode needed for the processor to work.. Apple has this and I doubt even if a 2010 were to come out someone couldn't successfully on here copy over the microcode and develop a FLASH BIOS or EFI flasher to flash over the new microcode.. Impossible? Maybe.. I would pay someone for it, though not really worth it unless someone on here knows that it will work for sure when flashed.


i9's are incredibly silly when you can't even order a Mac Pro from Apple with an SSD.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a nVidia Card past the 9XXX line in a Mac Pro from Apple.

i9's are incredibly silly when you can't order a 5XXX ATi GPU in a Mac Pro from Apple.

i9's are incredibly silly when the Mac Pro uses 1066MHz RAM. (DDR2 was available in that speed, that's not even real DDR3..)



Does no one understand what a bottleneck is? :mad:

You buy (a) $1(+)k Processor(s) and use almost none of it. Why would you do that?

Ok, is there a way for me to use 1333 on my mac pro now that I have a i7-975 in my system? I thought Apple's firmware locked all of us even duals at 1066 ddr3.. is there a way to go beyond 1066 into 1333? The core i7 975 I have supports 1066 and 1333 as well as the w3580, but it seems Apple has us locked in at 1066 and can't go beyond that..

As for SSD drives? They are out of my price range!! How many years will it be for someone to walk into a Best Buy and buy at least a 1TB SSD drive? I have 4x1TB drives in my system right now.


Has no relevance at all, you can use SSDs in your Mac Pro as many do. None of the big certified workstation vendors offer SSDs on them. Even if Apple did you'd pay a lot for some brand they chose, unlikely you'd get even one of the best 3 choices around.



If you are a gamer maybe. Many users don't need a powerful graphics card at all.



Not even real DDR3? Only the top tier processors even support more than 1066MHz without overclocking. On a dual socket board with the second rank of DIMMs installed it won't run at more than 1066MHz unless you have a board that allows it to be reconfigured, and I only know of ASUS and Tyan ones that do.




You can can max out six 3.33GHz cores with 800MHz memory, a 5400RPM drive and integrated graphics. It just depends on what you are doing. Even if you can't utilize all 6 cores, you are still getting that 3.33GHz clock speed. Also there is no i9.

Sorry to break your post down like that, but you posted a lot of ill-thought out statements.

Given I don't use pro apps at all, name me some consumer apps that I would have trouble with using non-ecc memory?


Core i7-975 and Core i7 980X are similarly priced, they are both near $1K. It really depends on how you use multi-cores. For gaming, it's a non-issue. For parallel computing, more cores mean faster speed if the code is optimized properly. Indeed I don't find SSD is very useful since the code doesn't read/write disk often. The fastest SSD won't help 1% of my application.

Core i7 doesn't support ECC. Some CPU/Memory intensive applications could run for weeks even months. Without ECC support, such applications usually crash (largely due to memory error) in several days.

[AZREOSpecialist]

Ok, compared to 1066 DDR3, how much of a percentage faster in PC terms is 1333? Btw, my mac pro uses desktop i7-975 as it used to be a xeon. I decided against the w3580 and ordered for 200 dollars cheaper a i7-975 which runs at 3.33 ghz.

How is that i7-975 working out? If you read through my original thread on upgrading my 2009 Mac Pro, you probably saw that I started with a Core i7 and eventually went to the W3580 after the i7 caused severe wake-from-sleep issues. Many others who "upgraded" to the 3.2-3.3 GHz i7 part thinking it was identical to the Xeon equivalent also experienced wake-from-sleep issues on all upgraded Mac Pros. Everyone who upgraded to an i7, with the exception of one person that I know of, ended up getting rid of the i7 in favor of the W3580.

You'll note the parts have slightly different voltage ranges which may or may not cause issues depending on the bin quality of the i7 you purchased. Each batch has a slightly different voltage draw, while the W3580 has a more consistent specification (hence the higher price). This all happened over a year ago, so I'm not so good with the specifics anymore. I also thought the Core i7 975 did not turbo boost as well or to as high a frequency as the W3580 - I don't remember.

[jav6454]

How is that i7-975 working out? If you read through my original thread on upgrading my 2009 Mac Pro, you probably saw that I started with a Core i7 and eventually went to the W3580 after the i7 caused severe wake-from-sleep issues. Many others who "upgraded" to the 3.2-3.3 GHz i7 part thinking it was identical to the Xeon equivalent also experienced wake-from-sleep issues on all upgraded Mac Pros. Everyone who upgraded to an i7, with the exception of one person that I know of, ended up getting rid of the i7 in favor of the W3580.

You'll note the parts have slightly different voltage ranges which may or may not cause issues depending on the bin quality of the i7 you purchased. Each batch has a slightly different voltage draw, while the W3580 has a more consistent specification (hence the higher price). This all happened over a year ago, so I'm not so good with the specifics anymore. I also thought the Core i7 975 did not turbo boost as well or to as high a frequency as the W3580 - I don't remember.

Which is why the Mac Pro shouldn't be upgraded on desktop class CPUs.

[Hellhammer]

Which is why the Mac Pro shouldn't be upgraded on desktop class CPUs.

Especially when the equivalent Xeon is only few tenners more. I would understand it if it was severals hundreds more but it isn't plus you get ECC.

[jav6454]

Especially when the equivalent Xeon is only few tenners more. I would understand it if it was severals hundreds more but it isn't plus you get ECC.

Plus, if you get a Worstation call computer, it's best to keep it's internals to Workstation class or level components. Skimping is NOT the way to go on technology.

[Roman23]

Hey,

What do you mean by bin quality? The Processor was approved by Nanofrog and he told me so long it is D0 stepping, I am fine which it is. As for sleeping my mac pro, very rarely do I let it sleep.. my monitor blacks out after a certain time I specified and most of the time i leave it on 24 hours/7 days a week. I hardly put my mac to sleep though.

Turbo boot max for w3580 - Max Turbo Frequency 3.6 GHz
Turbo boot max for ci975 - Max Turbo Frequency 3.6 GHz

Voltage of w3580: Max TDP 130 W
VID Voltage Range 0.800V-1.375V

Voltage of i975: Max TDP 130 W
VID Voltage Range 0.800V-1.375V

Does it hyperthread? Yes! Here are the stats for this:

W3580: # of Cores 4
# of Threads 8

Core i7 975 - # of Cores 4
# of Threads 8

Conclusion: Based on the data at Intel's website, it can be seen that everything matches exactly as shown. Given this information it seems that the core i7-975(also called EXTREME) and the Xeon w3580 are EXACTLY alike, except for the fact that the w3580 makes use of ECC memory where as the 975 does not - Again, do I really need ECC memory?? What apps would require ECC versus those that don't? I am sure that ECC is not used very much inside the consumer realm, but it does seem to be used a lot in the business and server world as this type of memory is good for error checking when used within server or clustered enviornments.

Furthermore, I don't see what this wake from sleep issue is and what could be causing it, as you can see above.. everything is the same. Now, one thing that has me wondering: Is there a way to use DDR3 1333 memory on the mac pro using this core i7 975 I have, or am I stuck with 1066 as its a firmware issue and Apple as always, cripples firmware to not allow full specs of the hardware to run it?

[Roman23]

MP41.0081.B08

Does not suffer from this issue.. I just tested my sleep function and it seems to work great! Now, the only other issue I can think of.. is there a way known to man when it comes to the 2009's, of unlocking 1333 to be used on the mac pro, or are we stuck at 1066 as Apple crippled the firmware?

[Mackilroy]

I didn't want to go PC, as building a hackintosh is complicated at this point.. Sure, I'd like to buy any PC and put mac os x on it, as I do own it(bought for 29.99), but not all PC's will support it.
Actually, building a hackintosh is very easy. But Mac Pros are nice machines as well. :)

[Roman23]

My mac pro works great using the core i7 975 processor.. sleeps great, and works great.. I have listed below under these threads the voltages for both the w3580 and i7 975 - and according to the analysis: both are exactly the same.

Mind me asking: what boot rom do you have? Mine is kind of weird.. as it says: B08 where as most have B07 OR B06. Could it be that the B08 is why I am able to do this?



Plus, if you get a Worstation call computer, it's best to keep it's internals to Workstation class or level components. Skimping is NOT the way to go on technology.

[nanofrog]

How is that i7-975 working out? If you read through my original thread on upgrading my 2009 Mac Pro, you probably saw that I started with a Core i7 and eventually went to the W3580 after the i7 caused severe wake-from-sleep issues. Many others who "upgraded" to the 3.2-3.3 GHz i7 part thinking it was identical to the Xeon equivalent also experienced wake-from-sleep issues on all upgraded Mac Pros. Everyone who upgraded to an i7, with the exception of one person that I know of, ended up getting rid of the i7 in favor of the W3580.

You'll note the parts have slightly different voltage ranges which may or may not cause issues depending on the bin quality of the i7 you purchased. Each batch has a slightly different voltage draw, while the W3580 has a more consistent specification (hence the higher price). This all happened over a year ago, so I'm not so good with the specifics anymore. I also thought the Core i7 975 did not turbo boost as well or to as high a frequency as the W3580 - I don't remember.
Apple only did validation testing with the parts they're using on the boards. So you can run into issues with other parts, whether it be the microcode isn't correct (i.e. wrong steppings), or the voltage regulator outputs don't quite match/work well with other parts (could be other issues that crop up as well).

That's what the validation testing is for. So anything, even other Xeons in the same family, are untested unless a user takes on that role. Though usually it will work, assuming they're truly from the same family (where steppings crop up as problems, as those can change during production).

For example, the earliest i7 (LGA1366) were C0, and the Xeons D0. It may not matter in this instance (I don't recall if anyone tried with this stepping), but the 980X is B1, which won't work without new microcode.

[jav6454]

My mac pro works great using the core i7 975 processor.. sleeps great, and works great.. I have listed below under these threads the voltages for both the w3580 and i7 975 - and according to the analysis: both are exactly the same.

Mind me asking: what boot rom do you have? Mine is kind of weird.. as it says: B08 where as most have B07 OR B06. Could it be that the B08 is why I am able to do this?

Please don't tell me you read those voltages and TDPs from Wikipedia.

[Roman23]

Hey Nano!

Ok, as you remember I paid 603 dollars for the w3580, however I changed my mind at the last moment and decided to get the core i7 975 which the seller actually told me would be much better for my system.. I asked him what the stepping is for the core i7-975(the w3580 equi) - he told me it is D0 stepping just LIKE the w3580!

I have no issues with this processor at all.. I don't know why others would be having these issues, but also I noticed that my bootrom is different than everyone elses: Mine is a B08 where as the last firmware update for the mac pros of 2009 is B06 OR B07.. Could it be... that the B08 is allowing me to do this? Here is my bootrom info:

MP41.0081.B08

Strange.. when I downloaded all the firmware updates for my 2009 mac pro(audio bug problem, overheating problem) - it wouldn't install.. it IGNORED all of them! Could it be that since this machine was built last month, maybe just maybe I might have a higher revision based mac pro?

Oh, and also checked the intel website.. comparing numbers and specs with the w3580 and i7 975 - ALL OF THEM ARE EXACTLY THE SAME!!! Same D0 stepping.. the only thing that separates the XEON and i7 is ECC memory and I don't need it, not one bit.

As for the 980x, and its xeon brothers - yes.. B1 stepping won't work at all as the microcode would need to be flashed to the EFI chip and I am sure this would be a very tedious task even for most.. and I think it goes beyond the scope of these forums.

[Roman23]

INTEL.COM



Please don't tell me you read those voltages and TDPs from Wikipedia.

[jav6454]

INTEL.COM

Microcode then.

[Roman23]

Microcode? What do you mean? The i7 975 works in my machine without problems.. same stepping of D0 as the w3580.. just using non-ecc memory now.



Microcode then.

[Hellhammer]

INTEL.COM

That's the range of voltage, it cannot be more than a one number at a time lol. It might be more or less for the Xeon when in use, I don't know or care. The TDP is also the maximum power usage, it may vary so Xeon might be more or less power efficient, again, I don't know and care even less as the difference would be so small anyway

[Cindori]

I would.. but one problem, well two of them actually. Since the 2009 single-quads are capable of using all the bloomfield core i7 and xeon(w3520,w3540,w3565,w3570, and w3580), Apple did not leave room inside for the microcode needed to run the core i7-980x or its xeon brother.

it was an answer to OP, you are not OP, OP wants a PC

[Roman23]

W3580: VID Voltage Range 0.800V-1.375V, Max TDP: 130 W.
i7-975: VID Voltage Range 0.800V-1.375V, Max TDP: 130 W, also.

As you can see? Both the w3580 and i7-975 are exactly the same, except that the xeon uses ECC memory, while the i7-975 uses non-ECC memory.

Here is the exact site I got this info from:

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=39723 - W3580
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=37153 - i7 975

*Only one difference I saw was that the w3580 DOES support DDR3-1333, but since Apple crippled the firmware like it always does, we can't make use of DDR3 1333 memory.. unless someone has figured out a way to do it. But all in all, the specs for the w3580 and i7-975 are ALL the same.. so I don't see any irregularities at all.

That's the range of voltage, it cannot be more than a one number at a time lol. It might be more or less for the Xeon when in use, I don't know or care. The TDP is also the maximum power usage, it may vary so Xeon might be more or less power efficient, again, I don't know and care even less as the difference would be so small anyway

[Hellhammer]

W3580: VID Voltage Range 0.800V-1.375V, Max TDP: 130 W.
i7-975: VID Voltage Range 0.800V-1.375V, Max TDP: 130 W, also.

As you can see? Both the w3580 and i7-975 are exactly the same, except that the xeon uses ECC memory, while the i7-975 uses non-ECC memory.

Here is the exact site I got this info from:

http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=39723 - W3580
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=37153 - i7 975

*Only one difference I saw was that the w3580 DOES support DDR3-1333, but since Apple crippled the firmware like it always does, we can't make use of DDR3 1333 memory.. unless someone has figured out a way to do it. But all in all, the specs for the w3580 and i7-975 are ALL the same.. so I don't see any irregularities at all.

That's the range of voltage, it doesn't mean that they will be using the same voltage when in use. Same applies to TDP. Someone with both CPUs should test what voltage it's using when idle and when under full load. For example, i7 may have voltage of 1.3V while Xeon has voltage of 1.2V. All Bloomfield share the same range of voltage and TDP but it doesn't mean that they are actually using the same as the voltage is not a single number, it changes.

[Roman23]

It works in my machine. I can run a program called fractal and see how it reacts under heavy load, but as far as I can see everything is normal.. the good news is that if I decide to return the processor I can to Velocity Micro within 90 days and exchange if for the w3580 if need be.

But as mentioned in a few threads back, anything w36xx isn't going to work as the stepping is B1 and without the microcode from what will be hopefully a 2010 mac pro, this won't happen.

[TheStrudel]

I realize that nobody actually wants Xeons or the associated expense, but I just thought I'd point it out:

If your machine isn't using Xeons, it's certainly not equivalent to the Mac Pro. You can argue this out and claim the uselessness of Xeons until the cows come home, but no build is "equivalent" without them.

That having been said, I'm now curious as to total cost of an actual mostly equivalent build (Rominator's point about the motherboard) that is an actual Xeon system. You'd also need the kilowatt power supply, four PCIe slots, etc. I guess substituting a card for ports like firewire 800 would be acceptable, as I'm not sure how many motherboards carry them.

[jav6454]

I realize that nobody actually wants Xeons or the associated expense, but I just thought I'd point it out:

If your machine isn't using Xeons, it's certainly not equivalent to the Mac Pro. You can argue this out and claim the uselessness of Xeons until the cows come home, but no build is "equivalent" without them.

That having been said, I'm now curious as to total cost of an actual mostly equivalent build (Rominator's point about the motherboard) that is an actual Xeon system. You'd also need the kilowatt power supply, four PCIe slots, etc. I guess substituting a card for ports like firewire 800 would be acceptable, as I'm not sure how many motherboards carry them.

The only thing I have against Xeons are the high mark-up price. After that, its the same thing as the desktop CPU without a disabled QPI.

I posted a combo with that... here let me post it up again.

Pic

[WardC]

So the W5590 3.33GHz Xeon processor would work as a processor upgrade for an Early 2009 model Mac Pro? Say I had a 2.66GHz quad (with the 5520) and wanted to upgrade the chip to this W5590. Would it work? Much help appreciated.

Thanks! See below:

http://www.wardcurry.com/W5590.jpg

Edit, wait, wouldn't I need a W3580 instead? The dual processor machines use the 55xx series, right?

[jav6454]

Theoretically it should work because they are the same Gainstown CPU. Practially, no idea, I haven't done so myself.

[WardC]

I think this is the processor for the upgrade I should be looking at instead, about $500 - $600 cheaper:

http://www.wardcurry.com/W3580.jpg

[nanofrog]

I don't know why others would be having these issues, but also I noticed that my bootrom is different than everyone elses: Mine is a B08 where as the last firmware update for the mac pros of 2009 is B06 OR B07.. Could it be... that the B08 is allowing me to do this?
As I mentioned before, you may actually be a test subject with it (part of the validation testing). But if it wasn't specifically stated, you're not aware of it (i.e. general window about sending report data, without any specific mention/information on what's sent).

That's the range of voltage, it doesn't mean that they will be using the same voltage when in use.
Voltages are set in the board's firmware (controls the voltage regulators). So the VID is the same for whatever part that's in it (assuming it meets specs otherwise, such as the correct steppings).

OC capable boards usually allow for voltage adjustments (user accessible settings). Otherwise they're fixed.

If your machine isn't using Xeons, it's certainly not equivalent to the Mac Pro. You can argue this out and claim the uselessness of Xeons until the cows come home, but no build is "equivalent" without them.
From a purely technical POV, they're not. Just really close.

Where the issue for many comes in, is the fact that most users don't actually need ECC. In those cases, they can't but help notice the price differences in the retail market. In the component markets though, the prices are the same on Intel's published Quantity Price List, so the cost is theoretically the same (variations do actually occur, depending on the exact procurement method used, which is based on quantity purchased).

That having been said, I'm now curious as to total cost of an actual mostly equivalent build (Rominator's point about the motherboard) that is an actual Xeon system. You'd also need the kilowatt power supply, four PCIe slots, etc. I guess substituting a card for ports like firewire 800 would be acceptable, as I'm not sure how many motherboards carry them.
As in Xeon and ECC? Or i7's and non ECC?

In either situation, the PSU and case alone can be reduced spec wise to make a noticeable difference in price. BTW, the PSU rating in the MP is peak power (extremely common BTW), not continuous. So for a decent continuous rated unit, you'd only need to be looking at a 700W model, not a 1kW unit.

Just in case you get bored and take the time to cost out such a system/s. ;)

So the W5590 3.33GHz Xeon processor would work as a processor upgrade for an Early 2009 model Mac Pro?
If you have an Octad (Dual Processor) system, then the W5590 would work. Actually, it would work in the Quad as well, but is a waste of money, as the second QPI channel can't be used, and pushes the cost of the processor.

If the system is a Quad, then the W3580 would be the better choice, as it's quite a bit cheaper as you found out. ;)

[Roman23]

My w3580 was a lot less expensive than that from velocity Micro.. around 600 bucks.. though it is used.


I think this is the processor for the upgrade I should be looking at instead, about $500 - $600 cheaper:

http://www.wardcurry.com/W3580.jpg

[nanofrog]

My w3580 was a lot less expensive than that from velocity Micro.. around 600 bucks.. though it is used.
Getting functional used parts is a nice way to save money, but it's not reliable. There's also the fact that when comparing to a new system, new parts should be selected to get an accurate idea of cost comparison (ignores labor, R&D, validation testing, single source warranty, ...).

[Roman23]

tested it and its running great..


Getting functional used parts is a nice way to save money, but it's not reliable. There's also the fact that when comparing to a new system, new parts should be selected to get an accurate idea of cost comparison (ignores labor, R&D, validation testing, single source warranty, ...).

[jav6454]

tested it and its running great..

Understandable, but I'd rather want a new unit than a used one.

[Roman23]

give apple 200 dollars more because thats how much you will pay to go from a 2.66 to a 3.33 - I did it in less the time and money.. besides, the person who sold it to me tests his stuff before sending it out.. I AM running it now in fact.


Understandable, but I'd rather want a new unit than a used one.

[jav6454]

give apple 200 dollars more because thats how much you will pay to go from a 2.66 to a 3.33 - I did it in less the time and money.. besides, the person who sold it to me tests his stuff before sending it out.. I AM running it now in fact.

Who said anything about buying from Apple? Didn't you see the screenshot was from Newegg?

[nanofrog]

tested it and its running great..
The term "reliable" was in respect to finding the part used, and at a nice discount. Not regarding any ill effects on system operation.

[Hellhammer]

give apple 200 dollars more because thats how much you will pay to go from a 2.66 to a 3.33 - I did it in less the time and money.. besides, the person who sold it to me tests his stuff before sending it out.. I AM running it now in fact.

I've seen new i7-975 going for 600-700$ in eBay, W3580 goes for around $800ish

[Roman23]

There is a w3580 for 599 and its from velocity micro and yes, before the seller who happens to be the GENERAL MANAGER of velocity micro, put it on ebay he ran a 24-48 hour test on it. All tests came back negative(positive is bad).

I think for 603 dollars I did rather well.. compared to giving apple 1200.00 or intel 1000.00


I've seen new i7-975 going for 600-700$ in eBay, W3580 goes for around $800ish

[UltimaLink]

Though my gaming PC (Which I'm still building, by the way, I have to get a new motherboard) can't stand up to an 8 core I can happily say I built a quad core for 980$, it all came out to 1200 for Windows OEM and the Disc drive (Which is a blu-ray) It has one of the strongest graphic cards out there, a pretty strong motherboard (With a good warranty, though it was my fault it broke, I touched it without properly grounding myself) 4 gigs of ram, 1TB hard drive, and and I can probably hackintosh it if I hacked it to THE MAX.

Now I can buy a mac pro with similar specs for 3,000.

Mac Pro line is dead, and Stevey is denying it. Unless he downs the price and gives it the i5 and i7 processors, hackintosh is the best option.

EDIT: I also just added a Magic Mouse, Apple Wired Numeric Keyboard, and an Apple Cinema Display to make it exactly like my setup. It now costs 3,768. My whole setup costs 1500 right now. That includes my computer, 2200 if you count my laptop, tablet, and windows 7 upgrade disks that I used on my laptop and it STILL doesn't add up to 3,768$.

You just realized how overpriced macs are and that apple is not giving you want you deserve for the price.

[Roman23]

They should throw in applecare!! Thats way overpriced!


Though my gaming PC (Which I'm still building, by the way, I have to get a new motherboard) can't stand up to an 8 core I can happily say I built a quad core for 980$, it all came out to 1200 for Windows OEM and the Disc drive (Which is a blu-ray) It has one of the strongest graphic cards out there, a pretty strong motherboard (With a good warranty, though it was my fault it broke, I touched it without properly grounding myself) 4 gigs of ram, 1TB hard drive, and and I can probably hackintosh it if I hacked it to THE MAX.

Now I can buy a mac pro with similar specs for 3,000.

Mac Pro line is dead, and Stevey is denying it. Unless he downs the price and gives it the i5 and i7 processors, hackintosh is the best option.

EDIT: I also just added a Magic Mouse, Apple Wired Numeric Keyboard, and an Apple Cinema Display to make it exactly like my setup. It now costs 3,768. My whole setup costs 1500 right now. That includes my computer, 2200 if you count my laptop, tablet, and windows 7 upgrade disks that I used on my laptop and it STILL doesn't add up to 3,768$.

You just realized how overpriced macs are and that apple is not giving you want you deserve for the price.

[UltimaLink]

They should throw in applecare!! Thats way overpriced!

Applecare should be included with all Mac purchases for half price, since you can't fix a mac pro yourself, they should include some sort of fallback if your motherboard fails after a year/90 days.

[TheStrudel]

Unless your logic board went bad, theoretically you could fix it yourself. Those parts are prohibitively expensive, though.

[deconstruct60]

If you have an Octad (Dual Processor) system, then the W5590 would work. Actually, it would work in the Quad as well, but is a waste of money, as the second QPI channel can't be used, and pushes the cost of the processor.


Don't think the Single Package (quad) model has same support chipset as Dual Package model.

[nanofrog]

Don't think the Single Package (quad) model has same support chipset as Dual Package model.
The chipset is different (5520 chipset is used in DP systems), but with the DP processors, one of the QPI channels will shut down on a SP board, and function correctly.

But the reverse isn't possible (SP part in a DP board), as in that instance the second QPI is required, even if it's the only CPU on the board.

[Hellhammer]

There is a w3580 for 599 and its from velocity micro and yes, before the seller who happens to be the GENERAL MANAGER of velocity micro, put it on ebay he ran a 24-48 hour test on it. All tests came back negative(positive is bad).

I think for 603 dollars I did rather well.. compared to giving apple 1200.00 or intel 1000.00

I was talking about new, sealed in box version, not used. Of course you can get used ones for cheaper but at least I'm not a person who upgrades his 2500$ Mac Pro with used CPU as the first thing I do when I open the box. I know CPUs rarely fail (BTW, has anyone seen a CPU failure in Mac?) but it's just the idea of used part.

[Roman23]

It hasn't happened at all.. I just ran more tests and everything runs normally.. and quite fast I can say.. the i7 seems a bit faster than the xeon as the xeon has to check memory all the time for ecc errors..

But, again my needs are different than yours.. as for the w55xx series in my mac pro? Why bother if one of the qpi's is disconnected? Doesn't make sense ot have a w55xx in the machine when its only a single processor.. besides, i think the w3580 or i7-975 is the absolute max of the bloomfield family.. then comes the w36xx, stepping B1 requires modded microcode for use in a 2009 ot make those work..

I am trying to come up with ideas on how to create a flash efi bios type program where one can flash the new microcode of the soon coming 2010 mac pro over to the 2009.. I believe it can be done, but it is tedious..

Remember the days of AWDFLASH.EXE? Something similar to that.. except the 2010 mac pro's efi firmware would be named: 2010macpro.bin and using a program like AWDFLASH.EXE to simply flash it over.. Now, that would make everyone happy with an 09, i think.



I was talking about new, sealed in box version, not used. Of course you can get used ones for cheaper but at least I'm not a person who upgrades his 2500$ Mac Pro with used CPU as the first thing I do when I open the box. I know CPUs rarely fail (BTW, has anyone seen a CPU failure in Mac?) but it's just the idea of used part.

[Roman23]

Granted, if I were to use a w55xx processor in my single-quad, it would truly be a waste since its a dual channel processor and its expecting the 2nd channel which the single-quads don't have..

I think the w3580 and the 975 are much better suited for the singles.



The chipset is different (5520 chipset is used in DP systems), but with the DP processors, one of the QPI channels will shut down on a SP board, and function correctly.

But the reverse isn't possible (SP part in a DP board), as in that instance the second QPI is required, even if it's the only CPU on the board.

[nanofrog]

I think the w3580 and the 975 are much better suited for the singles.
Both were designed as SP parts, so they're definitely the way to go in an SP board (assuming the board has the correct socket and the firmware will actually support the part installed).

[Roman23]

Both were designed as SP parts, so they're definitely the way to go in an SP board (assuming the board has the correct socket and the firmware will actually support the part installed).

Both i7-975 or 9xx series are ALL as of now: D0 - mac pro supports this.
Firmware: supports both xeon 35xx series and i7 9xx bloomfield(req non-ecc)
Socket is LGA1366 of which both have..

I don't see why either wouldn't work.

[jav6454]

Both i7-975 or 9xx series are ALL as of now: D0 - mac pro supports this.
Firmware: supports both xeon 35xx series and i7 9xx bloomfield(req non-ecc)
Socket is LGA1366 of which both have..

I don't see why either wouldn't work.

The QPI port. You see on server models, the extra QPI port isn't disabled, while on the desktop versions (930, 940, 975) that extra QPI link is disabled.

Obviously the extra QPI link is for multiple CPU connections or other server stuff.

[nanofrog]

Both i7-975 or 9xx series are ALL as of now: D0 - mac pro supports this.
Firmware: supports both xeon 35xx series and i7 9xx bloomfield(req non-ecc)
Socket is LGA1366 of which both have..

I don't see why either wouldn't work.
It was worded as it was, as the 32nm parts won't work in 2009 MP systems due to the lack of the proper microcode to support them.

But in the case of the W35xx and i7 parts based on the respective Xeon part numbers (same clock speed), they'll work in the current models (correct steppings and sockets).

The QPI port. You see on server models, the extra QPI port isn't disabled, while on the desktop versions (930, 940, 975) that extra QPI link is disabled.

Obviously the extra QPI link is for multiple CPU connections or other server stuff.
A DP part will work in the SP boards, assuming the board was designed for the same socket and has the proper firmware support necessary (applicable to Nehalem architecture, which is also what the 32nm parts are based on). The second QPI channel will disable itself.

The SP parts only have a single, and will not work in a DP board, even if it's the only processor installed. The second QPI channel is necessary to connect to the chipset properly. In the case of the current MP, it's a 5520 (not to be confused with a E5520 CPU).

[jav6454]

A DP part will work in the SP boards, assuming the board was designed for the same socket and has the proper firmware support necessary (applicable to Nehalem architecture, which is also what the 32nm parts are based on). The second QPI channel will disable itself.

The SP parts only have a single, and will not work in a DP board, even if it's the only processor installed. The second QPI channel is necessary to connect to the chipset properly. In the case of the current MP, it's a 5520 (not to be confused with a E5520 CPU).

1. Interesting that the second QPI will disbale itself

2. 5520 can easily confuse hell of alot people.

[Roman23]

Assuming the ill-fated 2010 mac pro DOES come out.. my theory for flashing the efi bios or just EFI over from the 2010 would be through the use of a program I would call: macpro.exe or under mac as: macpro.app. How this would work is that it would capture the actual microcode on the 2010, and allow the program macpro.app to flash it to the 2009 mac pro's efi firmware - thus, allowing the westmere or gulftowns to work in a 2009 mac pro..

Consider it similar to Award Bios's AWDFLASH.EXE program where the biosnew.bin would be the new bios to be flashed.

I think it can work, but I would need input on how to exactly make it work.



It was worded as it was, as the 32nm parts won't work in 2009 MP systems due to the lack of the proper microcode to support them.

But in the case of the W35xx and i7 parts based on the respective Xeon part numbers (same clock speed), they'll work in the current models (correct steppings and sockets).


A DP part will work in the SP boards, assuming the board was designed for the same socket and has the proper firmware support necessary (applicable to Nehalem architecture, which is also what the 32nm parts are based on). The second QPI channel will disable itself.

The SP parts only have a single, and will not work in a DP board, even if it's the only processor installed. The second QPI channel is necessary to connect to the chipset properly. In the case of the current MP, it's a 5520 (not to be confused with a E5520 CPU).

[nanofrog]

1. Interesting that the second QPI will disbale itself
It is, but it's only possible for the specific means described previously (i.e. one direction; DP part in an SP board).

Nor is it financially sound given the SP and DP part cost, unless the intent is to add a second processor to a DP board at a later time (i.e. get as much of the final system planned in hand and running on a limited budget). Even then, I prefer waiting to fund the entire system at once (at least not peice-meal the processors). Add-ons like RAID, ... can be done at a later time when funds permit (assuming such methods are performed by individuals, not corporations).

2. 5520 can easily confuse hell of alot people.
Absolutely, and why I thought it a good idea to clarify it (finally :eek: :p).

[jav6454]

It is, but it's only possible for the specific means described previously (i.e. one direction; DP part in an SP board).

Nor is it financially sound given the SP and DP part cost, unless the intent is to add a second processor to a DP board at a later time (i.e. get as much of the final system planned in hand and running on a limited budget). Even then, I prefer waiting to fund the entire system at once (at least not peice-meal the processors). Add-ons like RAID, ... can be done at a later time when funds permit (assuming such methods are performed by individuals, not corporations).


Absolutely, and why I thought it a good idea to clarify it (finally :eek: :p).

1. Exactly. I would never build a 2 CPU system with only a starter CPU and then buy the other one. That's just asking for trouble. As per RAID, couldn't agree more. My current build is up and running (haven't updated the thread here in MR still until I get decent pics) but is lacking the 4 HDDs for the RAID. I am waiting for that since I want decent size HDDs (so I don't have to update later). Luckily, those WD RE3 1TB drives are going down in price pretty darn fast.

2. Yes, I was surprised at Intel for using a similar naming convention. I'd thought they'd at least use an extra letter or something to differentiate the CPUs.