Confirmed: 2687W v2 8-core CPU (150W TDP) works in 2013 Mac Pro

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by reflecti0nX, Mar 14, 2015.

  1. reflecti0nX macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    #1
    I swapped a 2687W v2 CPU into my nMP and it boots just fine.

    This is an 8-core CPU with 3.4GHz base clock, with up to 4.0GHz turbo on a single core and 3.6GHz turbo on all cores. 150W TDP.

    1680 v2, the 8-core CPU Apple sells with the 2013 Mac Pro is only 3.0GHz base clock, with 3.9GHz turbo on a single core and 3.4GHz turbo on all cores. 130W TDP.

    Any suggestions for how to best stress-test my Mac Pro to ensure that a 150W TDP CPU can be used 24/7, even with GPUs stressed to the max?
     
  2. mikeboss macrumors 65816

    mikeboss

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Location:
    switzerland
    #2
  3. omvs macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 15, 2011
    #3
    It won't stress the GPU's, but Prime95 is what I generally use for stress-testing memory and cpu's.

    Option menu: Torture Test
    I think the in-place test gives maxiumum heat. Let it run for an hour or so - it's self checking and will tell you if any errors are detected.

    Maybe that + some sort of heavy-gpu based program in the background would work....
     
  4. flehman macrumors regular

    flehman

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2015
    #4
    You can stress the CPUs using CPUTest. It hasn't been updated since 2007 but still works for Yosemite. It basically just runs Glucas tests. Assign 1 instance per core on your machine and set for unlimited repetition. You should see CPU load max out in Activity Monitor and you can monitor temps and fans with your app of choice.
     
  5. dmylrea macrumors 68000

    dmylrea

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    #5
    Comparing the two CPU's, I'm curious why you upgraded, unless, maybe, you happened upon the 2687W for free?

    It's, at most, only about 10% faster, which (except for benchmarks) you probably won't notice. Unless I'm missing something (not out of the realm of possibilites!), it doesn't seem worth the trouble to me unless you were just in the mood to tinker! :)
     
  6. flowrider macrumors 601

    flowrider

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2012
    #6
    ^^^^The OP never said he swapped and 8 core for an 8 core. He just mentions the stock 8 core Apple sells for reference. It's my guess he upgraded from a 4 core machine.

    Lou
     
  7. dmylrea macrumors 68000

    dmylrea

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    #7
    A bad assumption on my part! Thanks for pointing that out.
     
  8. areluke macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    #8
    I´m thinking about upgrading to the same CPU in my nMP soon. I would love to hear all about your experience with it, can you please get in contact with me OP?:)
     
  9. reflecti0nX thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    #9
    This CPU seems to work well in my Mac Pro. No instability issues.

    Even after running Prime95 stress test for hours, CPU keeps running at a reasonable temperature and 3.4 GHz (base frequency).

    If I run a GPU stress test on both GPUs while running Prime95, then I do see throttling fairly quickly. I don't know if a regular 130W TDP would also throttle in this use case, but I suspect that it would.

    Overall, I am happy with this upgrade.

    Let me know if you have any questions. I can't send you a PM. Try enabling Enable Private Messaging and Receive Email from Other Members in your settings.
     
  10. reflecti0nX thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    #10
    I agree that upgrading Apple provided 8-core CPU to a 2687W v2 wouldn't make much sense, even if it is slightly faster.

    On the other hand, you can save some cash and get a slightly faster CPU if you upgrade a 4-core Mac Pro to 8-core 2687W v2 yourself. It's not an easy upgrade, but it can be done.
     
  11. ZombiePhysicist macrumors 6502

    ZombiePhysicist

    Joined:
    May 22, 2014
    #11
    Cool, thanks for sharing. Would it be possible to swap two of these in dual processor units to get 16 cores instead of 12?
     
  12. MacVidCards Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    #12
    For nMP that's a mean joke.
     
  13. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #13
    There is no dual CPU 2013 MP. The 12 core model is a single CPU.
     
  14. reflecti0nX thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2015
    #14
    Not into a Mac Pro, or any other Mac. There are no dual socket Ivy Bridge Macs.

    You should be able to build your own dual socket Ivy Bridge Hackintosh. A quick Google search shows it has been successfully done in the past for Sandy Bridge.
     
  15. MacVidCards Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    #15
    It's just a mean joke.

    Sadly, it appears there won't be another Dual Socket Mac.

    The engineers to make it happen were all needed to design the perfect Facebook button.
     
  16. TzunamiOSX macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2009
    Location:
    Germany
    #16
    To stress the System i would use:

    SystemLoad for max. CPU stress
    http://www.bresink.com/osx/SystemLoad.html

    plus

    Furmark for one GPU (perhaps you can stress both nMP GPUs with 2x Furmark. Is the second GPU also for Video out?)

    plus

    Luxmark or OpenCL Galaxy for the second GPU

    Run all at the same time and wait. If the system shut down its bad, if not its goooooood.
     
  17. mikeboss macrumors 65816

    mikeboss

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Location:
    switzerland
    #17
    nope, the second graphics card is just for GPU computing tasks, no video out.
     
  18. ZombiePhysicist macrumors 6502

    ZombiePhysicist

    Joined:
    May 22, 2014
    #18
    Ah, sorry fellas, my bad. I assumed the 12core was actually 2 processor sockets. So if they wanted to, we could have had a 24 core, 48 virtual core machine!?! Yeash. Man talk about one step forward two steps back...
     
  19. AidenShaw macrumors P6

    AidenShaw

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Peninsula
    #19
    ... and 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes and 24 DIMM slots...
     
  20. ZombiePhysicist macrumors 6502

    ZombiePhysicist

    Joined:
    May 22, 2014
    #20
    Sorry, I suspect you're being sarcastic, but I'm being genuine in my question. Could they not have built a box with two processor sockets supporting up to 24 cores? Meaning if they stuck with a construction more like the classic mac pro?
     
  21. MacVidCards Suspended

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Location:
    Hollywood, CA
    #21
    He wasn't being sarcastic.

    When they clipped the 2nd CPU they greatly limited the machine.

    It shouldn't be possible to make a 2009 better and faster than a nMP, but by holding it back as a FCPX console they have done so.
     
  22. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #22
    Of course! That's exactly what I'd like. But that's a touchy subject around here. :mad:
     
  23. HumpYourWayUp macrumors regular

    HumpYourWayUp

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Location:
    Europe
    #23
    Except in Bootcamp using Crossfire :cool:
     
  24. iamMacPerson macrumors 68030

    iamMacPerson

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Location:
    AZ/10.0.1.1
    #24
    My best guess is the thermal envelope of the machine. The metal loaf heatsinks of the Nehalem/Westmere Mac Pros are almost the same size as the new Mac Pro entirely.

    FWIW, I think the nMP is an amazing machine. In most cases its faster them my 4,1->5,1 Mac Pro for what I do in a lot smaller format. While I do sometimes miss the upgradability of the older machines its hard to beat the power to size ratio of the nMP.
     
  25. fuchsdh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2014
    #25
    Without being an engineer of the caliber of Apple or other tech guys it's hard to say how much of the vision drove the design, or the other way around. It's possible you could scale the thermal core concept to a larger, dual-CPU configuration, or it might be that the design only works at certain sizes and two CPUs would simply be too much heat—although I wouldn’t say that the old Mac Pros were necessarily the best example, since the heatsinks on the Z840s at work are minuscule in comparison, purely from a size standpoint.
     

Share This Page