Mac Pro CPU Upgrado (Quad to Hex)

[Macquero]

Hi, I have a Mac Pro 5.1 2010 (Quad 2.8) and recently bought an Intel W3680 3.33GHz to become a hexacore, but I have a question: I currently own a kit of DDR3 ECC PC8500 12GB (3x4GB) of RAM I have purchased from OWC. This memory is compatible with the processor W3680? Or I need to buy a PC10600 DDR3 ECC Kit?

Right now I have the budget, it is recommended that I update with this type of memory and then acquire the PC10600? Or should I wait to get the money for PC10600 memory and can upgrade both components?

Thank you in advance for your help.

[DanielCoffey]

The soon-to-be-hex-core will be perfectly happy and will simply run the 12Gb kit at its stated 1066 speed without any issues.

When you later have the opportunity to get some 1333 Memory, you will need to replace all of the current kit otherwise it will all still run at the speed of the slowest type of memory.

[Macquero]

Originally Posted by DanielCoffey

The soon-to-be-hex-core will be perfectly happy and will simply run the 12Gb kit at its stated 1066 speed without any issues.

When you later have the opportunity to get some 1333 Memory, you will need to replace all of the current kit otherwise it will all still run at the speed of the slowest type of memory.

Thank you Daniel, I will make the upgrade asap, and the next month I will to replace my Memmory for a 1333 kit from Macsales.com (OWC).

Rgds.

[spoonie1972]

unless you're buying larger capacity dimms, it may be a waste of $.

[PowerPCMacMan]

There is hardly any difference in performance between 1333 and 1066, unless your eyes can actually see it in action.. Thinking about possibly the number crunching and rendering where you would see a difference to the naked eye between 1066 and 1333.

[Macquero]

Originally Posted by PowerPCMacMan

There is hardly any difference in performance between 1333 and 1066, unless your eyes can actually see it in action.. Thinking about possibly the number crunching and rendering where you would see a difference to the naked eye between 1066 and 1333.

Thanks for your replies guys. I use my MacPro to Web programming and development of some other application in ASP.NET via Parallels on Windows 7 x64 with Visual Studio 2010 and SQL Server 2008.

The only heavy load I do with my processor is edit some home movies with iMovie, enhance my MP3 with Adobe Soundbooth and rip CDs, DVDs and Blurays in iTunes, Handbrake and Max.

You think I can have a substantial increase in productivity by adding this new CPU? Of course it's more powerful, but you think it was worth the sacrifice have made this purchasing?

----------

Originally Posted by spoonie1972

unless you're buying larger capacity dimms, it may be a waste of $.

Hi Spoonie1972, I have thought of buying a 16GB DIMM Macsales.com and then gradually add 2 more to get to 48GB.

[larrylaffer]

Originally Posted by Macquero

You think I can have a substantial increase in productivity by adding this new CPU? Of course it's more powerful, but you think it was worth the sacrifice have made this purchasing?

I think with HandBrake you might. I also have a 5,1, but mine is hexcore, and some HandBrake workflows will get my CPUs pretty close to 100%, and that's with hyperthreading enabled.

With my machine though, I'm finding most tasks I perform don't really utilize too much CPU. This is usually because the software in question simply isn't designed to use this many CPUs, but also because I'm still using a regular hard drive.

If you haven't replaced your disks with SSDs yet, you might want to spend your money on this instead as it would mean huge performance increases across the board since you a lot of CPU horsepower and memory already.

[Macquero]

Originally Posted by larrylaffer

I think with HandBrake you might. I also have a 5,1, but mine is hexcore, and some HandBrake workflows will get my CPUs pretty close to 100%, and that's with hyperthreading enabled.

With my machine though, I'm finding most tasks I perform don't really utilize too much CPU. This is usually because the software in question simply isn't designed to use this many CPUs, but also because I'm still using a regular hard drive.

If you haven't replaced your disks with SSDs yet, you might want to spend your money on this instead as it would mean huge performance increases across the board since you a lot of CPU horsepower and memory already.

Hi Larry, I Already upgraded my hard drives, I have two OWC 120gb SSDs, one I use for OS and the other I have hosted virtual machine windows 7 That I use with Parallels. The truth is that it works like a charm.

I bought the processor to give a little more power to my computer, I thought maybe reduce the conversion time between Handbrake files and the compiled application in Visual Studio would be carried out in less time.

[larrylaffer]

Originally Posted by Macquero

I bought the processor to give a little more power to my computer, I thought maybe reduce the conversion time between Handbrake files and the compiled application in Visual Studio would be carried out in less time.

Like I said before, HandBrake will probably benefit. Not sure about Visual Studio, but Xcode certainly slams CPUs too.

[PowerPCMacMan]

Any video rendering or encoding software will make a difference as it will use all your cores.. but if you are asking if you can VISUALLY see a difference between 1333 and 1066 I think not.. Now, its possible you might see something if you were benchmarking 1066 and 1600.. but thats like saying 1600 DDR3 which does not exist on the Mac Pro compared to 1333 DDR3 - again, not seen by the naked eye.

The only way you will gain benefit from 6-core and or 12-core processors is using software and apps meant for hyperthreading and multi-core capable. Photoshop uses some of your cores, not all for instance and Microsoft Office wouldn't use anything.

Its all in your video rendering and encoding software.. FCP X, Logic 10, Handbrake especially - ALL USE YOUR CORES and will give you the best performance and fast rendering times.

[philipma1957]

your handbrake will improve a lot. as for the ram go to activity monitor and look at your memory activity. on my machine I have almost never swapped 16kb out of 10 gb.


I have 0 pageouts so I don't need more ram. If you have a tiny amount of pageouts and swaps do not worry about the ram.

if your pageouts and swaps are high you will need to buy x 8gb sticks. gives you 24gb.

the 1066 vs 1333 is not a big deal

[Macquero]

Originally Posted by PowerPCMacMan

Any video rendering or encoding software will make a difference as it will use all your cores.. but if you are asking if you can VISUALLY see a difference between 1333 and 1066 I think not.. Now, its possible you might see something if you were benchmarking 1066 and 1600.. but thats like saying 1600 DDR3 which does not exist on the Mac Pro compared to 1333 DDR3 - again, not seen by the naked eye.

The only way you will gain benefit from 6-core and or 12-core processors is using software and apps meant for hyperthreading and multi-core capable. Photoshop uses some of your cores, not all for instance and Microsoft Office wouldn't use anything.

Its all in your video rendering and encoding software.. FCP X, Logic 10, Handbrake especially - ALL USE YOUR CORES and will give you the best performance and fast rendering times.

Thank you PowerPCMacMan, I will switch processor because I acquired it, and it would be a substantial improvement in my Mac Pro, but let's 12Gb of RAM to see how it works. Although so far I have not needed more memory, and 12 GB with my Mac works fine. In the future I will try to add more RAM, but as I noted, it is not worth making the jump to 1333 yet.

----------

Originally Posted by philipma1957

your handbrake will improve a lot. as for the ram go to activity monitor and look at your memory activity. on my machine I have almost never swapped 16kb out of 10 gb.


I have 0 pageouts so I don't need more ram. If you have a tiny amount of pageouts and swaps do not worry about the ram.

if your pageouts and swaps are high you will need to buy x 8gb sticks. gives you 24gb.

the 1066 vs 1333 is not a big deal

Hi philipma1957,

Thanks for your excellent comment, I admit that when I decided to upgrade my processor was after seeing your post, really very good guide to follow. I hope that this work will be as good as I was you, I'm waiting for the tools hex you placed your link to Amazon, since I own are very short and I can not make a good job of loosening the screws brings placed the heatsink. Now I have the Arctic and cotton.

I will take your advice, I'll let the memory 1033 and in the future by changing the DIMS go up to 24GB, maybe I put 3 DIMS encourage 16Gb OWC brand to reach 48Gbs.

I'll be posting the results.

Regards.

----------

Originally Posted by philipma1957

your handbrake will improve a lot. as for the ram go to activity monitor and look at your memory activity. on my machine I have almost never swapped 16kb out of 10 gb.


I have 0 pageouts so I don't need more ram. If you have a tiny amount of pageouts and swaps do not worry about the ram.

if your pageouts and swaps are high you will need to buy x 8gb sticks. gives you 24gb.

the 1066 vs 1333 is not a big deal

Sorry my friend, I forgot to ask you the name of the application that you have in the status bar, which tells you the activity of the cores, temperature, voltage, etc.

Thanks in advance.

[SadChief]

... the name of the application that you have in the status bar, which tells you the activity of the cores, temperature, voltage, etc.

Thanks in advance.

iStats Menu. Worths having it.

[rcook55]

You could also save money by not paying the OWC tax: NewEgg DDR3/ECC/1333 ram and yes it works just fine.

[Macquero]

Originally Posted by rcook55

You could also save money by not paying the OWC tax: NewEgg DDR3/ECC/1333 ram and yes it works just fine.

Thank you man. It is a great contribution to my cause!

[MacProFreak]

I have the same mac pro model, and will be dropping a W3690 (3.46GHz) in it, and want to put 48Gb of RAM. Does Kingston offer 3x16GB kits, or just OWC? Those are expensive, more than what I paid for my W3690 on eBay.

[xcodeSyn]

Originally Posted by MacProFreak

Does Kingston offer 3x16GB kits, or just OWC? Those are expensive, more than what I paid for my W3690 on eBay.

Mac Pro is only one of the many servers/workstations that use Intel Xeon and chipset, so technically there is no such thing as Mac Pro-specific memory. Most ECC RAM with thermal sensor is MP compatible and the first four items in this link should work with 2009-2012 MP, they just represent normal and low voltage models. The 3x16GB kit actually costs more than buying 3 individual sticks, but still cheaper than what OWC is charging.

[MacProFreak]

Originally Posted by xcodeSyn

Mac Pro is only one of the many servers/workstations that use Intel Xeon and chipset, so technically there is no such thing as Mac Pro-specific memory. Most ECC RAM with thermal sensor is MP compatible and the first four items in this link should work with 2009-2012 MP, they just represent normal and low voltage models. The 3x16GB kit actually costs more than buying 3 individual sticks, but still cheaper than what OWC is charging.

Lots of options on the link you've posted. But the 16GB sticks need to be from the same batch correct? According to OWC, the kit gives worry-free operation, but I'm not sure if that is just marketing.

[rcook55]

Originally Posted by MacProFreak

Lots of options on the link you've posted. But the 16GB sticks need to be from the same batch correct? According to OWC, the kit gives worry-free operation, but I'm not sure if that is just marketing.

Of course it's marketing, OWC preys on the fact that your already willing to pay more for the privilege of owning a Mac so they say whatever they need to convince you that you NEED the expensive RAM.

An Apple Macintosh is still a PC, just because they want you to believe that unicorn farts and fairy tears were used to make them they aren't special. The same reason you can drop in a PC nVidia graphics card allows you to use spec similar PC ECC RAM. If the specs are the same, buy the cheapest you can find.

Hell I have a MP1,1 with FB-DIMMS, there is no way that I'd ever pay OWC prices. Currently I'm running pulled RAM from several Dell workstations. Funny enough while I can run the Dell RAM the Dell's can't run the Mac specific RAM with the larger heat spreaders -- figure that out..

[Tesselator]

I wonder if the people here saying that there's no detectable difference between 1333 and 1066 have actually tried both?

You should indeed be able to detect the difference IMO. Remember absolutely everything in your system uses RAM. Caching and paging, App loading, App I/O, everything. And the difference really is exactly 267MHz or somewhere around a 20% increase which is nothing to scoff at - especially when you're talking about that 20% affecting everything, all the time.

[AlphaDogg]

Originally Posted by Tesselator

I wonder if the people here saying that there's no detectable difference between 1333 and 1066 have actually tried both?

You should indeed be able to detect the difference IMO. Remember absolutely everything in your system uses RAM. Caching and paging, App loading, App I/O, everything. And the difference really is exactly 267MHz or somewhere around a 20% increase which is nothing to scoff at - especially when you're talking about that 20% affecting everything, all the time.

I switched my 2011 MBP from 4GB of 1333MHz RAM to 8GB of 1066MHz RAM. Then I switched it to 8GB 1333MHz RAM. Any perceptible difference going from 8GB 1066MHz to 8GB 1333? Nope.

[MacProFreak]

Originally Posted by AlphaDogg

I switched my 2011 MBP from 4GB of 1333MHz RAM to 8GB of 1066MHz RAM. Then I switched it to 8GB 1333MHz RAM. Any perceptible difference going from 8GB 1066MHz to 8GB 1333? Nope.

I believe it's hard to notice any difference because the CAS on 1066 could be 7,7,7,20 while on the 1333 could be 9,9,9,24.

Smaller numbers = faster (less latency), even though the clock speed is slower on the 1066.

But again I don' t know if on Macs the latency matters. I know user can't tweak CAS, but the settings of the memory itself matter I guess.

Lower latency with slow clock and higher latency with faster clock will be very close in terms of performance.