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

Advice I received from macforums about 2006 Mac Pro

Read this.

It's the Ars Technica review of Snow Leopard.

Yes, I know it's 23 pages.

If you really want to understand where OS X is and where it's headed, then you need to read as much of it as your brain can absorb.

Oh, alright. The part relating to 64-bit is on page 5.
 
lovehaight said:
Yes I promise to love it! one final query, will this model run a 64 bit kernel natively? thanks
Click to expand...
OS X will run the 32bit Kernel. Once OS X goes strictly 64 bit Kernel, you won't be able to update to that version. Not without a firmware update to EFI64, which doesn't really have any hope of happening. Apple is lousy with firmware support.

64bit windows can be made to work, but it's not the easiest thing to do.
 
WOW! It looks like such a small difference but that one will really perform.

Besides, they made these until 2008 so they don't look as ancient suddenly =\

@nanofrog How come we can boot to 64bit mode now by holding the super secret noob-proof key combo with our current EFI version?
 
my friends says his 2009 mackbook runs SL in 64 native...is he mistaken? edit-never mind i just got to page 5
 
MrCheeto said:
WOW! It looks like such a small difference but that one will really perform.

Besides, they made these until 2008 so they don't look as ancient suddenly =\

@nanofrog How come we can boot to 64bit mode now by holding the super secret noob-proof key combo with our current EFI version?
Click to expand...
What machine are you using?

The '08 on is using EFI64, but the older systems ('06 - '07) uses EFI32.

More detail:
K32/K64
XNU in Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard (Darwin version 10) comes in two varieties, a 32-bit version called K32 and a 64-bit version called K64.[3] It should be noted that K32 can run 64-bit applications in userland. What's new in Mac OS X 10.6 is the ability to run XNU in 64-bit kernel space. K32 is the default kernel for 10.6 Server when used on all machines except newer Mac Pro and Xserve models (2008 and later)[4] and can run 64-bit applications. K64 has several benefits compared to K32:[5]

Can manage more than 32 GB RAM, as the memory map would consume an disproportionately large area of the 32-bit kernel space.
Cache buffer sizes can be larger than what the 32-bit kernel space allows, potentially increasing I/O performance.
Performance is increased when using high performance networking devices or multiple GPUs, as the kernel can map all of the devices in 64-bit space even if several have very large DMA buffers.
Booting while holding down 6 and 4 will force the machine to boot K64 on machines supporting 64-bit kernels.[6] K64 will run 32-bit applications but it will not run 32-bit kernel extensions (KEXTs) so these must be ported to K64 to be able to load.
Click to expand...

Source.
 
OK I didn't realize they had already implemented a new EFI version.

There are downsides to running 64bit on certain systems, like I said it isn't the answer to everything.
 
Now I have (if i can) hook the pro to a 10 yr old tube monitor, as I have spent my allowance for the rest of the year :D..if i get a dvi adaptor will it work? just temporary until I get a decent one..
 
Your MacPro has digital DVI ports. Your tube has most likely analogue VGA. Most MPs actually had an adapter in the original scope of supply for DVI to VGA. If its lost buy one for 10$.
 
I'm jumping in to this thread as I have a similar dilemma. I was set on buying a 21,5" iMac, but I recently came over a 2006 Mac Pro 2x2.0 Dual core, with a 7300 GPU at almost the same price (a little bit more expensive in total, as it needed some more RAM and a bigger HD). A 21" Cinema Display was included. How do these machine compare with regards to performance? I've seen some geekbench scores which put the new iMacs ahead of the 2.0 mac pro, but how is it in day to day usage? My main usages are programming, web/mail/IM, iWork, Aperture - how are these affected by 4x2,0 cores vs 2x3,0?

I would love to have a machine that's easily upgradable - but how "upgradeable" is the original mac pro 1,1? Can it use the newest GPUs? From what I've found on the forums, there seems to be some disagreement. What about CPUs?

Any advice is much appreciated!
 
It all depends of the application. Single thread apps generally run faster if the CPU frequency is higher. Multithreaded apps will be faster if the combined CPU power is higher. So a new dual core iMac should beat a 2,0 GHz MacPro1,1 in single apps but will be slower in handbrake or rendering.

There are cheap upgrade x5160 CPUs in the market which push the MacPro to 3,0 GHz and that will beat the iMac any time. Those Xeons can be bought on ebay for very little money.
 
Inferior even compared to the 9400m? About the CPU, can you put any 771 socket xeon processor in there, or does it have to be one that has been used in one of the Mac Pro models? Say, could I install two Xeon E5420? 4 cores on each, with higher clock speeds for a "reasonable" price...
 
The MacPro1,1 and 2,1 only run 65 nm 5100 Woodcrest and 5300 Clovertown CPUs. The 5400 Harpertowns only run in MP3,1. It is a firmware issue. The early MPs do not have the micro code enabled to run the die shrinked 45 nm chips.

I'm not an expert on Nvidia GPUs but the stock model in the MP1,1 was a 7300GT.
 
what would you guys recommend for my 2007 2.66? it has 4gram, I believe everything else is standard..what can be done to it? economically if possible..upgrade the video card? the processors? please have patience with me, am a complete newbie!
 
lovehaight said:
what would you guys recommend for my 2007 2.66? it has 4gram, I believe everything else is standard..what can be done to it? economically if possible..upgrade the video card? the processors? please have patience with me, am a complete newbie!
Click to expand...
What are you going to be doing with it (and please be specific)?

It will matter, otherwise you could end up spending money on things you don't need. ;)
 
well right now mostly movies, music, photos, web but would like to expand my horizons...
 
lovehaight said:
well right now mostly movies, music, photos, web but would like to expand my horizons...
Click to expand...
Upgrade the graphics to an HD4870 if you want a Mac card (no Flashing or injectors needed). Even if you flash, the 4870 is easier to deal with.

Try the existing memory, and see if you actually need more, as your usage is light. If your uses change, you can add later.
 
i'm ignorant-what is a mac card? injectors or flashing? any idea of cost to upgrade card to HD4870 ?
 
short version? pc graphic cards will not boot osx cause they use BIOS and macs use EFI

solution:
use software to emulate efi support (injector)
or
flash a pc card with efi modified firmware (flashing)


this forum basically consists of 35% flashing posts, you should have no trouble finding them.
 
havent started using the pro yet, will the standard card play hd video as is? or regular for that matter?
 
ofc it can play video... as for HD,its hard to say when you never told us what graphics card the computer has. -.-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back