Finally got time to install X5365's!

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by TheEasterBunny, May 13, 2013.

  1. TheEasterBunny macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #1
    I found a pair of X5365's on eBay for $100.00 or so, and couldn't pass them up!

    Tonight I put them in!

    So far everything has doubled in performance, they do run warmer.

    I have done a few bench marks.

    Geek Bench 2 was 5601 now it's 10657

    Power Fractal

    was 37.004 GFlops
    now 84.540 GFlops

    I tried xBench and it would not run right, I may need a re-install

    I did some timings on a 7z compression software. The compressions weren't really any faster (16 sec. per 1GB folder of jpegs), but now I can do more of them at a time, in the same time.

    I still have a photoshop test to run but I am happy with the results. This puts my cost at almost $600.00 for this Pro, and I can live with that.

    As time permits I will run more benchs and put them here.
     
  2. mwhities macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Location:
    Mississippi
    #2
    What did you replace? What year MP?
     
  3. Snowshiro macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2008
    #3
    It would be a 2006 (1,1). The 2007 (2,1) models already came with X5365s.
     
  4. mwhities macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Location:
    Mississippi
    #4
    Thank you.
     
  5. TheEasterBunny, May 14, 2013
    Last edited: May 14, 2013

    TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #5
    Sorry, sometimes I assume people know this routine with 1,1's. I have a document with the history of my Pro, it isn't complete but has most of the steps I've taken.

    Original Specs:
    1,1 Mac Pro (2006)
    4GB RAM
    Dual 5150's dual core@2.66Ghz (total 4 cores)

    HDD:
    2) 128GB SSD's in a RAID0 array (added upon delivery)
    250GB 7200 RPM

    Video Card:
    NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT

    Geek Bench 2 (32bit)

    1st Run 5514 (Orig. Spec.)
    2nd Run 5579 (RAM upgrade)
    3rd Run 5587 (RAM upgrade)
    4th Run 5601 (RAM upgrade)

    Power Fractal

    37.004 GFlops

    PS CS5 test from Macrumors:
    Post #1027
    Link
    27 seconds

    Updated to:

    2,1 Mac Pro (netka's, firmware updater)
    12GB RAM
    2) 128GB SSD's in a RAID0 array (Crucial M4's)
    1) 250GB 7200 RPM (22,000 hrs) (original shipped drive)
    1) 500GB 7200 RPM (45,000 hrs) (imported from wintel drive farm on network)
    1) 1TB 7200 RPM (35,000 hrs) (imported from wintel drive farm on network)
    1) 2TB 7200 RPM SATAIII (500 hrs) (recent purchase)

    Video Card:
    Nvidia GeForce GT 430

    PS CS5 test from Macrumors:

    20.7 seconds Shaved almost 7 seconds!!

    Geek Bench 2 (32bit)
    1st Run 10657

    Power Fractal

    84.540 GFlops

    My Pro is used as a file server as well at anytime up to three other devices can be connected to it.
    All tests were performed while these connections were open with file sharing running.
     
  6. brenden macrumors regular

    brenden

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Location:
    Texas, USA
    #6
    Very nice score! i'm pulling in around 9500 but you have a better CPU.
     
  7. mwhities macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Location:
    Mississippi
    #7
    As you may know (you do as you posted in my thread), I'm a complete MP newbie. :)

    I'll do this upgrade sometime but, it will be way later on. Thanks for posting the specs before/after up. Very helpful.
     
  8. TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #8
    I did some drive speed tests here are the screen shots. When I was doing the 2TB drive time machine decided it was time for a back up, so it is off by about 40 to 50 MB/s. Hovering over each tells about the drive.
    The SSD is 2 drives in a RAID0
     

    Attached Files:

  9. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #9

    Kewl! My x5355 processors get about 75GFlops on average - varying between 73 and 78GFlops.
     
  10. applegeek897 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    #10
    Why are the hours next to the hard drives, what do they mean?
     
  11. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #11
    Those are the number of hours he's had those particular drives in operation.
    The give-away is of course: "1) 2TB 7200 RPM SATAIII (500 hrs) (recent purchase)". :)
     
  12. TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #12
    Tesselator is right, of course.
    Sorry I'm late to the party, work intervened with a trip to NYC yesterday.
    Thanks for stepping in for me Tess

    ----------

    Peak was 87 GFlops, 82 being the bottom, but 84 was a consistent median as opposed to an average.
     
  13. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #13
    Yeah, median is probably the right word in my case as well.


    It would be interesting to see what the 2012 MP5,1 at 2.66GHz got in that test. :)
     
  14. TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #14
    I agree!
    I'm also curious what my Mini's and my pro on a Pooch node would do!
    When I ran Power Fractal, it was aware of those Macs on my network.
    I set up 6 older macs (Motorola chips), one G3, and a G4 once. I didn't get anywhere near what my Pro gets! The set up was fun to do though. Even though the network then was 10Mb. Now I'm at 1Gb.
     
  15. applegeek897 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    #15
    How do you tell how many hours the drives have been running for?
     
  16. Tesselator, May 16, 2013
    Last edited: May 16, 2013

    Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #16
    They record it themselves. You can read it with a S.M.A.R.T. reader. You can see it displayed either via the information button in DiskUtility or via something like SMART Utility. SMART isn't supposedly supported over USB tho so if it's a USB drive you'll need a special reader which claims to support SMART.

    Here's the Information Button's output for example:
    Code:
    	Name : 	ST3000DM001-1CH166 Media
    	Type : 	Disk
    
    	Partition Map Scheme : 	GUID Partition Table
    	Disk Identifier : 	disk1
    	Media Name : 		ST3000DM001-1CH166 Media
    	Media Type : 		Generic
    	Connection Bus : 	SATA
    	Connection ID : 	"Bay 3"
    	Device Tree : 		IODeviceTree:/PCI0@0/SATA@1F,2/PRT2@2/PMP@0
    	Bay : 			"Bay 3"
    	Writable : 		Yes
    	Ejectable : 		No
    	Location : 		Internal
    	Total Capacity : 	3 TB (3,000,592,982,016 Bytes)
    	Disk Number : 		1
    	Partition Number : 	0
    	S.M.A.R.T. Status : 	Verified
    	Raw Error Rate : 	00000C6B97F0
    	Spinup Time : 		000000000000
    	Start/Stop Count : 	000000000026
    	Retired Sectors Count: 	000000000000
    	Seek Error Rate : 	000100934CBD
    	Power-On Hours : 	00000000082A
    	Spinup Retries : 	000000000000
    	Power Cycles : 		000000000026
    	Emergency Retracts: 	000000000012
    	Load/Unload Cycles : 	00000000C6A2
    	HDD Temperature : 	00120000001D
    	Pending-Sparing Cnt: 	000000000000
    	Uncorrectable Sectors: 	000000000000
    	UltraDMA CRC Errors : 	000000000000
     
    And here's what SMART Utility looks like:
     

    Attached Files:

  17. applegeek897 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2011
    #17
    Thanks so much that was a great help.
     
  18. TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #18
    It is helpful to know how many hours they have on them. Somewhere between 35000 and 50000 is about all they are good for. Depending on the use of course. My 500GB is about done. It has had errors too, I managed to clear some bad blocks but I know that is temporary, that's why I got the 2TB as a replacement.
    Once all the data disks are the same size, I will RAID0 them.
    I don't have a need for anymore storage than about 6TB.
     
  19. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #19
    I wouldn't wanna mix drive ages by more than a few weeks maybe. That's like planning a trip from California to NY and back using three new tires and one well worn one. I'd rather start out with all new tires or all of about the same age so I know what to expect.
     
  20. TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #20
    Forgot this shot, first one I took
     

    Attached Files:

  21. CptSky macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2013
    #21
    Most archivers don't support multi-threaded compression. You only benefit from the marginal clock upgrade (2.66 to 3.00 ?). So, it's not a reliable test on multi-core or multi-processor systems.
     
  22. TheEasterBunny thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2013
    Location:
    Delaware
    #22
    This one does!
    1 to 4 archives at a time each get %145 to %150 CPU
    as the number of archives go up, they each get slightly less until all 8 cores are at %100.

    That is why I chose Keka, MP aware, free download, 7z algorithm (better compression for my purposes).
     
  23. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #23
    Ya, mine does the essentially same thing. It will compress or uncompress multiple archives actively up to the number of cores available. In my case I see up to 8 active and the rest still listed but idle until a core opens up. A single archive seems to use 1.5 to 2 cores in total.
     

Share This Page