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

dcnblues

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 23, 2007
38
0
I'll be getting a Mac Pro, and probably go for the 3.0 GHz. A couple of quick questions:

-There's a wikipedia page of tech specs for the Harpertown chips
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xeon#5400-series_Harpertown_and_5200-series_Wolfdale

which shows that the 2.8 and 3.0 chips run at 80 watts, but while the 3.2 runs a TDP (thermal design power) of 120 watts. If I put a premium on running cool and quiet, is it correct to think that's good reason to choose the 3.0 over the 3.2 (I'm aware I'd lose about 7% in speed)?

-Were some of the G5's water cooled? I remember seeing one of the mac tower's tech specs, and seeing water cooling, and being grateful the design had evolved to that efficient and quiet place. My old G4 sounds like a 767, and I'm worried my new Mac Pro will get there too, once it fills with dust. I can't see anything about the new one's being water cooled. Am I wrong?

-I'm assuming one simply tries to reduce dust (I'll be keeping it off the ground at desk height, but don't know what else I can do) and blow it out with compressed air now and again to keep it cool and quiet. Any other tips would be welcome.

-I seem to remember a suggestion, don't know from where, about putting some lube into the (noisy) fan. One noisy fan really could drive me up the wall, and if a judicious drop of silicone in the right place could fix this, I'd love more info. Is this a practical solution?
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
The Mac Pros are air cooled. You'll just need to blow the dust out of it. I haven't found them to be noisy but most of the fan issues normally require a replacement vs. lubrication.
 

Sherman Homan

macrumors 6502
Oct 27, 2006
463
0
Only the dual 2.5 GHz G5 was water cooled... it didn't go over very well! None of the MacPros are water cooled.
IMHO the 7% speed difference is not worth the money, spend it on ram!
There was a model of G4 (Mirror Door) that was nicknamed the Wind Tunnel because its fans were so loud.
Keeping it dust free is a good thing, compressed air in one hand and a vacuum cleaner in the other.
I wouldn't squirt anything into a fan...
:eek:
 

garymilgrom

macrumors newbie
Jan 15, 2008
5
0
My new Mac Pro (got it Jan. 12) seems essentially silent. It is much quieter than the dual core G5 it replaced.

Should I use vacuum or compressed air for cleaning my old G5?
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
My new Mac Pro (got it Jan. 12) seems essentially silent. It is much quieter than the dual core G5 it replaced.

Should I use vacuum or compressed air for cleaning my old G5?
I suggest compressed air. I do have an "electronics" vacuum for my rack but I'm still wary of using it.
 

product26

Cancelled
May 30, 2005
777
9
One of apples reasons for going intel was power efficiency.

Water cooling was not an advancement. It was more like drastic measures being taken to try and effectively cool an inefficient processor (the G5).
 

Sherman Homan

macrumors 6502
Oct 27, 2006
463
0
One of apples reasons for going intel was power efficiency.

Water cooling was not an advancement. It was more like drastic measures being taken to try and effectively cool an inefficient processor (the G5).
Quoted For Truth.
How about them G5 laptops!
 

Reach

macrumors 6502a
Sep 7, 2006
577
0
Norway
Just sold my Dual 2,5 G5 today, at least I never experienced any issues with the watercooling. Worked great for me.
 

Bass108

macrumors member
Oct 20, 2007
94
0
um there are X5472 chips right? they are not even listed on that wiki. the only confirmation of a chip in the 3.0 is on these asian sites that have X5472 (which to my understanding is a 120w chip) next to the 3.0GHz model.

wtf?!

i think the only safe bet is the 2.8

which was my plan cause i could not clear of up the confusion

and calling apple is a dead end
 

dcnblues

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 23, 2007
38
0
um there are X5472 chips right? they are not even listed on that wiki. the only confirmation of a chip in the 3.0 is on these asian sites that have X5472 (which to my understanding is a 120w chip) next to the 3.0GHz model.

wtf?!

i think the only safe bet is the 2.8

which was my plan cause i could not clear of up the confusion

and calling apple is a dead end

Well, in hindsight, I thought this was interesting enough for it's own topic, but the d-b moderator didn't agree and locked it. But the initial post has (so far) 146 views, so maybe the d-b moderator should unlock it (Mac Pro 3.0 at 80 watts, 3.2 at 120). So much for this being an informative site...:mad:
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,190
386
Indianapolis
This should help a little. Straight from Intel but no TDP numbers.

My Google work shows the E5472 (3.0 GHz) at 120W and the X5482 (3.2 GHz) at 150 W. Improved steppings are not taken into account, etc.
 

Attachments

  • intel_xeon.png
    intel_xeon.png
    59.5 KB · Views: 200

newtech

macrumors 6502
Jun 2, 2007
317
0
The 2.8 and 3.0 share a common motherboard and cooling components, therefore they must be close in TDP. Ergo 3.0 MUST be an E5472 ( 80W TDP ) and NOT an X5472 ( 120W TDP ), the japanese site has it totally WRONG!

The 3.2 is absolutely an X5482, weather it has a TDP of 120W or 150W is not clear. But it is a fact that the 3.2 has a different MLB and uprated cooling components vs the 2.8/3.0, If the 3.0 were X5472 it would share MLB and cooling components with the 3.2

Also Apple is in a position to get top rated components from intel so it makes more sense Apple would choose E5472's over X5472's.
 

thevibesman

macrumors regular
Oct 26, 2007
139
0
But it is a fact that the 3.2 has a different MLB and uprated cooling components vs the 2.8/3.0, If the 3.0 were X5472 it would share MLB and cooling components with the 3.2

Shortly after I ordered my 2.8x2, I called Apple to see if they were the same MLB, because I was curious about CPU upgrades in the future--although at this point I'm leaning towards eBay/buying new the next time I need an upgrade. The woman I spoke with said she wasn't sure and put me on hold to ask a superior. If I was given an answer on the spot I wouldn't have trusted this, but I had hope I could believe it since she claimed to try to find out the correct answer.

Is this a FACT? Where is this fact coming from? Do you know what the differences are? I figured the X5482 would get a beefier heatsync, but are there other differences in the boards between the Mac Pro models?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.