Calling all Mac Pro Nehalem Quad Core Owners!

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by colinthejanitor, Mar 13, 2009.

  1. colinthejanitor macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #1
    So by now there must be at least one Nehalem Mac Pro Quad owner among us. If that person is you then PLEASE take a photo of your cpu tray. I really want to know what the quad core tray looks like in comparison to the octo tray (there only being one cpu on the quad tray i am wondering if it is perhaps half a board etc).

    If you take a photo than thank you so much! The thought of this had been bugging me for ages and Apple seem to not know what it looks like!

    Thanks.

    C4.
     
  2. grue macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere.
    #3
    There's already been a picture posted. It doesn't have a second socket, and thus cannot be upgraded with a second processor.
     
  3. Tallest Skil macrumors P6

    Tallest Skil

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #4
    That's an eight core. It has nothing to do with the quad.

    There is a picture of the eight core on Apple's Mac Pro page, and a picture of the four core on Apple's PR page... for some reason.

    There you can see that the four core heatsink is HUGE compared to the eight core heatsinks.

    Also, comparisons exist in the digital manual on Apple's support page.

    At any rate, you can't add a second processor. At all.
     
  4. colinthejanitor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #5
    Glad you got what i was asking tallest, do you hapen to have a link to that pr page for the pic of the quad system?
     
  5. colinthejanitor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #6
    [​IMG]

    This is the only image i have been able to find. Anyone with a quad please help us out with some better pics of the quad tray :)
     
  6. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #7
    Whoops. :D Missed that one. Thanks for the catch!


    Yup. :p
     
  7. colinthejanitor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #9
  8. dmw007 macrumors G4

    dmw007

    Joined:
    May 26, 2005
    Location:
    Working for MI-6
    #10
    Guess that Apple wanted to fill up the dead space left by the absence of a second socket/heatsink. :eek: :)
     
  9. thelongmorrow macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #11
    HERE! I have it saved on my desktop but forgot where i got it from.....
     

    Attached Files:

  10. colinthejanitor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #12
    Interesting picture allows for better visibility. Just look at all that dead board space! I'm still getting a quad at the end of the month i was just curious as to how the layout differed. Curiosity satisfied :).
     
  11. Abidubi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal
    #13
    The quad is supposed to be 130W compared to the octos that are 90W each. Makes sense they'd use a bigger heatsink. And if they aren't tight for space (which they obviously are for the octo since they overlap quite a bit) why not take advantage to improve the cooling?
     
  12. colinthejanitor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #14
    The larger heatsink does make sense, the question is will we see idle/load running cooler on the quad than on the octo? I guess time will tell.
     
  13. thelongmorrow macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #15
    The quad is also 2.66 standard so does that mean it will run hotter than an 2.26? Plus the Octo's do looked cramped. I will be getting my Quad Pro around the 19th and I will post my unboxing and I will get it from every angle.... (even tho some1 will prob beat me to it but I'll do it any way!)
     
  14. colinthejanitor thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2009
    #16
    Your getting yours a good couple of weeks before me so i cant wait for your thoughts on the temperature questions. Also if you aren't afraid of pulling out your cpu tray i would love some juicy shots. thanks!
     
  15. Abidubi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal
    #17
    More heat produce + better and more spacious cooling = same temp.

    I would expect the quads to run at the same, or slightly bellow their equivalent octos. If you think about it, in the lower half of the case there is about 130W of cooling necessary VS 180W... and for the 180W there is 1 more fan and about 1.25 times the heatsink.
     
  16. thelongmorrow macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #18
    Absolutely! I am just as interested in what it looks like as you are! Seems everyone else is occupied with the Octo, there's not that much on the quad as of yet. (The unwanted step-child kinda thing that turns out to be Cinderella)

    Seriously... why do I always use crappy analogies?
     
  17. Abidubi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal
    #19
    Not unwanted by me. I don't need 8 (16 virtual) cores, 4 will be absolutely perfect for me. And I'll gladly trade the extra RAM and extra cores for $2900 in my pocket.
     
  18. thelongmorrow macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #20
    I don't need the extra cores either, I do do video editing, but not enough to justify 8 cores of use. Plus Ill use the saved money for the 4 core to justify getting my new 24" ACD display!:D:D and extra ram and HD
     
  19. Justibackwardsn macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
  20. VirtualRain macrumors 603

    VirtualRain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #22
    Cool thread guys!

    Two thoughts on that CPU board...

    1. I give the quad's a much higher chance of actually being able to use Turbo Boost given the size of that heat sink... it should run cooler giving it the added TDP headroom necessary to have Turbo Boost kick in.

    2. It's a shame they didn't use that extra board real-estate to offer more DIMM slots. At any rate, 8GB should be plenty for now and perhaps affordable 4GB DIMMS will give us more down the road.
     
  21. CrisMatthews macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    #23
    You got it from one of my posts, that's my Quad in the picture :)

    I am really happy with my quad 2.66, it's more than enough power for me and I get the added bonus of expansion and future proofing to some extent.

    The machine does run quite hot though, I have seen CPU temps hit 59. Also it's quite power hungry, when using all 8 threads at 100% my system using just over 500w, but that does include 2 24" monitors (one Apple, on Dell) and a Drobo.

    Cheers

    Cris.
     
  22. grue macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere.
    #24
    That's it? I wish mine was that low. :D

    I idle at over 350… for just the tower! :(
     
  23. Abidubi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal
    #25
    Well my dual 1.8 G5 has always ran at 45-50 C when just idling and going up to about 65-69 under load.
     

Share This Page