Mac pro 1,1 cpu swap impressions x5365 from 5160

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Wolf1982, Aug 10, 2012.

  1. Wolf1982 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    #1
    Phew! So iT's done.

    Swapped out my dual 3.0ghz 5160 in my mac pro 1,1 with 2x quadcores 3.0 got them for 400. Slaed model matching pairs. Upgraded firmware to 2,1 before the upgrade.

    Soooooo......my thoughts.

    1. Taking out gpu hardrives and memory trays no problem so i wont even touch those.

    2. Taking apart the piece that covers the two heat sinks wasnt bad at all. First remove the 4 screws holding in the memory cage.

    Push back the memory cage towards the back and push the cover back with the cage so the plastic slots holding it in place on the front side pop out. Slide it back to the front... Pop it out from the back.... Really... Just give it a lil wiggle love.

    3. Taking out the little screw holding the fan assembly was a little tuff. Felt like it turned forever.

    4. The fan was Easy to take out....slides out with CONSISTENT force upward if case is on its side..:. Not powerfull jerks. Was sooooo happy to clean these fans and under the board:)

    5. Then remove the two little cpu heat sink cables. 1 in bottom of memory cage 1 near the wifi card. They are both labeled on board.

    6. Then 8 screws for the heat sinks. Always remove in an x pattern top left bottom right bottom left top right. As long as its an x not one side at a time to make sure nothing warps.

    7. Cleaned off the heat sinks filthy!!!!!!! First time i couldnt get everything off. Couple little dots.... Smaller than grains of sand.... Got lazy after 30 min of cleaning 98 percent clean.... (may redo them in a week)

    8. Swapped the processors......Applied new thermal paste(as5) in a horizontal line.( unfortunately was a little bit of a messy job...)

    9.Reapplied top heat sink, forgetting i needed to do the bottom first..... ah! Thermal paste overboard......after removing the heatsink the cpu i just applied new thermal paste to had a bit of overflow.... Nowhere near the contacts or board ao should be no problem....cleaned around the cpu cover... And reattached everything....didnt apply new thermal paste to the one i messed up....

    10. Got back to the memory cage and they trays didnt slide back in......:(

    Eventually realized one of the (4870) cables was stuck under the cage...ugh! .... Took it out...yelled a lil...closed it up.

    Strarted it up.....no chime.....checked the lights on the logic board...ugh red lights.... Chucked it in the work bench to see what lights went off.....and it suddenly it worked after powering it off an on again!!!!

    Then kernel panicd after a min of the os running.....

    Started it back up again all is fine:)

    Geekbenched and stressed it out for a few hours and no panics!!:)

    6369------>11716

    Temps are running a little high. After ten min of stress test most cores were around 80-85... A lil hot... Although the thermal paste still needs to mature.

    At rest an basic activites in photoshop and aperture im running aound 50-54deg.

    May reapply in a week or two if temps dont improve.

    Any questions or concerns for next time or the next person??? Love to hear some feedback and questions:)

    -wolf
     
  2. cmykvsrgb macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2012
    Location:
    nyc
    #2
    Great insights, I have the the same machine and would love to do the same but I'm a little scared. Can you share your resources for this project?
     
  3. Mengele macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2012
    #3
    You would have gotten a better deal to sell the 1,1 for $1000 and use the $1400 to get a 3,1 that already comes with 8x2.8ghz. More power per MHz, faster RAM, faster GPU slot and can run ML.
     
  4. ashman70 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    #4
    It would be tough to sell a 1,1 for $1000.00 these days, they go for more around $700 on Ebay now and are less popular then the 3,1's as its more or less common knowledge among those looking to buy or sell Mac Pro's that the 1,1 and 2,1 won't natively run ML but the 3,1 will, its likely made the 3,1 more desirable and bumped the price up a little.
     
  5. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #5
    Your market must be different. A 1,1 should fetch more like $600-700 (700 being maybe a 3.0 version). A 3,1 shouldn't be over $1200, and it would come with unknown history. It's not like these things never break down. CPUs are one of the less likely parts to break. Regarding ram, if he has enough at this point, he's in a good place. The 1,1 through 3,1 used extremely expensive ram. If you need to max either out, that alone can justify a 4,1 or newer. If this one is already upgraded, that's not so bad. Unless this cost a lot, I'm not in favor of selling one old machine to buy another old machine. I'd rather stick with one that I know is in good working order or jump to something fully up to date.
     
  6. Wolf1982 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    #6
    I actually thought about doing something similar(was gonna either do a 3,1 ) or splurge on a hex but I was unsure with what I would be able to get for my current 1,1 mac pro. A few years ago I broke the PCIe slot tab too hahah :( Still works....just doesnt clip in.

    Plus I truthfully love taking this thing apart time and time again....I have a gaming PCs I do that with but its no MP.

    I am giving this computer to my GF once a new MP is released hopefully sometime in the next year.

    ----------

    Thinking about reapplying the thermal paste next week so I may document the whole thing...video and pictures.

    Pretty straight forward:) and super glad I did the install.
     
  7. Wolf1982 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    #7
    Ya, im not a fan of picking up old machines, i dont like the idea of picking up a used mac pro that someone may have worked on....sooo many concerns....esp if they are careful about esd issues.

    Its running 16gb which is pretty good but id be lying if i said i wouldnt benifit from a faster machine with faster ram. As a photographer i work with 36 megapixel files from my d800 and 200mb--->1 gb files from my scans of medium format film and work with hundreds to thosands of files per project at times.

    I love my 1,1 though:) if i was still shooting 12-16 megapixels and wasnt working with film scans i believe this computer could still last me for a while.
     
  8. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #8
    Okay part of the problem there is photoshop scales horribly past 4 cores even with CS6. CS6 picked up the very nice advantage of leveraging the gpu in a few functions like liquify and a couple of the filters, and the OpenGL drawing no longer lags. Your problem isn't so much the number of cores but just the general age of the machine. Like before I wouldn't suggest trading in one old machine for another. That's seriously silly. Are you on at least CS5? If not that ram isn't doing you much good. The best thing you could really do for yourself while on that computer is tune the hell out of it. I'd turn off spotlight indexing wherever scratch disks are set. If it's on the system boot drive, run disk warrior on it if you have it. All of that seeking through directories tends to lead to many beachballs. You can tune the amount of ram PS uses in preferences. It's somewhat of a balancing act there. Lowering history states can help. If necessary disable histogram and navigator. Turn off thumbnails on all palettes. I could go on with this. You can really reduce a lot of lag this way.

    I'm suggesting having at least CS5 installed due to the 64 bit thing. Make sure to upgrade this year if you're on anything prior to CS5. They are pulling upgrade eligibility at the end of the year. If you're super precise like me, the brush updates alone make it worth it. They fixed a lot of bugs that used to annoy me endlessly. I felt they were restrictive.
     
  9. mbernardo, Oct 30, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2012

    mbernardo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #9
    I was debating whether or not to sell my Mac Pro 1,1 and buy a used 3,1 or upgrade my 1,1 to an X5365. I have a Mac Pro 1,1 3.0 Ghz Dual Core (Original Quad).

    I found a Mac Pro 3,1 for sale in Toronto for $1,300 but it only had a single 2.8 Ghz Quad Core CPU. For an Eight-core, I imagine that would cost around $1,500. My system would sell for around $700. Which means I would need $800 out of my pocket. Based on price alone, I would be saving money if I just upgraded my CPU.

    So I started comparing Geekbench scores between the 2 systems and I found something interesting. An upgraded 1,1 X5365 is FASTER than a 3,1.

    GeekBench Scores as of Today:
    Mac Pro 1,1 X5365 3.0 Ghz (8-core) - 9768 <-- Me Real Soon
    Mac Pro 3,1 E5462 2.8 Ghz (8-core) - 9526
    Mac Pro 1,1 X5160 3.0 Ghz (4-core) - 5911 <-- Me Now
    Mac Pro 3,1 E5462 2.8 Ghz (4-core) - 5766

    So not only will I be saving money by upgrading the CPU, my 6 year old Mac Pro 1,1 would actually be faster than a Mac Pro 3,1 2.8 Ghz... On Geekbench anyway.

    So I bought a pair of X5365 SLAED off eBay for $350 literally just an hour ago. I can't wait. I hope I don't get any kernel panics lol.
     
  10. Omnius macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #10
    Mac Pro 1,1 usually sell for much lower than $600. Substantial upgrades can always increase the cost but we're talking about machines that benchmark much worse than current model minis and are effectively considered obsolete. It's not unusual for a 1,1 to sell for under $400 in the US.
     
  11. mbernardo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #11
    I'm sure they could sell for much less than $700 especially if they are stock and I also agree that the 1,1 is now obsolete. But for an additional $350, I have effectively brought its potential up to speed, and it's still more upgradable than a Mac Mini:

    Mac Mini (Late 2012) Core i7 - 10,549
    Mac Pro 1,1 X5365 3.0 Ghz (8-core) - 9768
    Mac Mini (Mid 2011) Core i7 - 8527
     
  12. Lesser Evets macrumors 68040

    Lesser Evets

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2006
    #12
    I have a 1,1 here next to a new Mini. Those benchmarks are ridiculous judgements of a computer's worth. I hate working on the mini because it is always jammed up with a process while the 1,1 works smoothly since it has a dual processor.

    The 1,1 is still a superior machine, but it was overclocked with an upgraded set of processors. Unless you rely on Mountain Lion and beyond, the 1,1 is not obsolete. I doubt it will be truly obsolete until around 2014 when it will become a machine locked in time, but it will still be a good video/audio server and web browser for a decade, depending. The biggest blow coming to the 1,1 (and all current Pros) will be the inclusion of TB and USB3 in the next version. We hope.
     
  13. Omnius macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #13
    the 1,1 doesn't support hyper threading. It has to be upgraded to handle the same number of threads as a mid level mini. It is a huge power drain compared to a 2012 mini and uses much older and slower cpus. It only has SATA II speed as compared to SATA III in the new mini. It lacks thunderbolt and USB 3.0. It can't run Mountain Lion (w/o substantial modification). The ram for the 1,1 mac pro is also extremely expensive. 16GB of ram for the mini is cheaper than getting 4gb on the 1,1.

    You can put in more internal HDs but the SATA II speeds of the 1,1 are slower than USB 3.0 speeds on the mini.

    If you're spending as much on the 1,1 mac pro as you could for a new model mini, you're making a very odd expenditure.

    People have been asking 600-700 for 1,1 Mac Pros for a while. I note they have been ASKING. Often those same people have been asking for that price for several months. They usually sell for substantially less. This has been pretty well documented.

    The myth of stock 1,1 mac pros going for $600+ is similar to the myth of stock 2007 mac minis still being worth $300. It's unsupported. In fact in both cases, it's well documented that the people asking for those prices are "selling" for several months before they settle for prices substantially below their asking price.

    The only old model machines commanding better prices have been heavily upgraded. i.e.: 8 cores, ram 8gb - 32gb, after market gpu, decent sized SSD .

    We've even had discussions that people asking for $600+ are often trying to get those prices by loading their machines up with pirated adobe software because they've come to the conclusion that they can't get $600 for a stock 1,1.

    The 1,1 isn't a complete pile of crap but it's time to stop pretending it's 2007 or imputing the power of more modern Mac Pros on the 1,1.
     
  14. mbernardo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #14
    I have a 2012 Mac Mini (and 2 other MBP's) but messing with my 1,1 is so much fun.
     
  15. Omnius macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #15
    they're fun little project machines to experiment with. Personally, I love tinkering with my 2,1 mac mini. The only thing left that I can do to upgrade it further is to get a 2.33ghz core 2 duo cpu for that.

    A box to tinker with is always fun.
     
  16. GermanyChris macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #16
    USB 3 Card?

    SATA 3 Card?

    would fix both issues and add 2 to 4 more HDD which would take it to 9 or so.
     
  17. TableSyrup, Nov 1, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012

    TableSyrup macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #17
    Some of us CAN'T use USB for drives, so throw USB3 under the bus
    Some of us benefit more from SATA (Even 1 or 2) or PCIe for Drives than FW or TB
    Some of us need PCIe - so use the Mini as a coaster for your coffee
    Some of us need multiple internal Drives - so, let your daughter play games on your Mini
    Some of us need Optical drives, so go buy an external for your Mini
    Some of us need or benefit from multiple processors
    Some of us need heat dissipation for hours or days of intense tasks
    Some of us need more RAM than the Mini can even take

    I could go on, but won't, and forgive the sarcasm, but this gets so old.

    I'm so tired of Mini and Laptop advocates dogging the MP's (regardless of 1,1 through 5,1)
    They are completely different worlds, and in reality, the majority of Pro's - and I'm not talking people simply using a computer to make money, I'm talking Pro's doin the big major stuff - NEED the Mac Pro - a Mini won't even run some of our softwares, a Mini can't even use some of our hardware
    (Not that people using other machines aren't pro's, but you follow - the major major stuff requires more than Lappy's and Minis are capable of)

    Get what works for YOU, and don't be nieve of other peoples needs and uses, it makes you look stupid.

    I run a 5,1 Quad with 32GB RAM, 128 & 256 SSD's via SATA and PCIe, Two 2TB HDD's, 5770 (Paid $1275) :)

    I can't even run a Mini, and so if there were no other option, a 1,1 still makes me happy and is sufficient for my work

    I sold my 1,1 not long ago, installed a pair of 5355's, had 16GB RAM, 5770, SSD in SATA and SSD in PCIe with HDD's for storage
    Thing handled everything I threw at it, only sold it cause I have the 5,1 now and wasn't using it, but it was still a very capable machine - in fact, my 5,1 is running the same drives - same installs - just in the 5,1 now
     
  18. Omnius macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #18

    Nobody is advocating laptops and minis. We're discussing the fact that people doing real pro work aren't shelling out big sums of money for an ancient mac pro simply because they think the name "mac pro" magically imputes horse power.

    The general consensus here is that the 5,1 Mac Pro is antiquated and the 4,1 is the effective minimum for saying you're using at least a modern mac pro.

    The 1,1 and 2,1 Mac Pros, however, are really ancient. That they're being surpassed in horsepower by the casual user machines in every facet that matters to the majority of professional and casual users is an undeniable fact. Much of what you stated is debatable.

    The bottom line is, the 1,1 and 2,1 mac pros are not cost effective at some of the prices people quote. Your arguments to the contrary ignore the fact that 32gb on a 1,1 mac pro is going to cost you as much as a mac mini.

    Is anyone going to invest thousands of dollars on a machine that apple has already ceased supporting? No. It's obviously more cost effective to buy a new mac pro.
     
  19. ashman70 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    #19
    At the end of the day what people want to spend their money on is their business. The point in this thread is that there are people who want features in a Mac that the mini cannot meet, at a price point that is not several thousand dollars, which is what they would be looking at for a a newer Mac Pro. It may not make sense to you to buy and use an 'ancient' Mac Pro but it may to others, and that is neither right or wrong. If people want the modular features the Mac Pro offers, installing multiple drives, different or multiple video cards, lots of RAM, that is up to them, and not for us to criticize, we can offer our advice or even our opinions however. Many people don't care that Apple is no longer supported the older MP's, they are happy running SL or Lion, and are aware of the performance of these older machines. They aren't for everyone, but can be a lot of fun for some people and more then enough power for many.
     
  20. TableSyrup macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    #20
    I agree.

    I realize I have miss-interpreted some Mini comments. My mistake.

    32GB for a 1,1 or 2,1 or even 3,1 for that matter are pretty nutty I agree, although, there are some cheaper alternatives such as non-oem or non-oem approved that work perfectly well (I ran some for a long time without issues) - but yes, undoubtedly more expensive than modern RAM and it is a big issue in regards to final cost of these machines

    I also agree, People are asking absurd prices for 1,1 2,1 and 3,1 models (more-so the 1,1 and 2,1 whereas the 3,1 is slightly more valid being 64 bit EFI), and unless you really get a screaming deal on one, the final upgrade cost to 8 Cores and 16/32GB RAM puts you really close to a 'GREAT DEAL' price of a 4,1 or 5,1 (Quad) - so, it's a tight budget build if it's practical at all

    My 1,1 sold for $1400 - but keep in mind it had 8 Cores (2.66), 16GB RAM, and $400 worth of SSD's, and, in comparison, I paid only $1275 (Which I feel was a great deal) for my 5,1 - which is a far more practical machine (Though I did shell out for new SSD drives, to clone to)

    They (1,1 and 2,1) are certainly falling far off, but are still very capable machines, so long as you don't need to be above Lion (And don't wanna be patching your OS together)

    I think the money to update one is well spent if it still serves you well and if it will for a couple years

    Again, only reason I sold my 1,1 was the ML issue (For longevity sake, even though it doesn't effect me now), and that I have the 5,1 (For longevity sake and simply having a bit more functional/up-gradable machine)

    1,1 and 2,1 are still winners in my book :)

    (Sorry for the Mini confusion)
     
  21. mbernardo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #21
    +1
     
  22. mbernardo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    #22
    I did the swap last night without a problem. I'm not hitting the 11,000 like the OP is getting, only 10,500 but it's still nearly double the potential now compared to before. Overall, I'm quite happy for bringing my 2006 system up to 2010 standards. Now I can throw my old 5160's into an old web server.
     
  23. RobertRoll macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2012
    Location:
    Sunny Southern Cal
    #23
    X5355 or X5365 for a Mac Pro 1,1?

    Since they're promising us new Mac Pros in 2013, I've decided to get my hands dirty with an upgrade while I save up for a shiny new Mac.
    Meanwhile, I've seen a couple of good prices come and go on ebay for the quad- and eight-core processors.
    Should I play it safe and get the '55s, or go crazy with a pair of X5365s?
    I've watched a couple of good tutorials on the installation and am ready to rock.
    Any advice from the group?
    Thanks.
     
  24. GermanyChris macrumors 601

    GermanyChris

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2011
    Location:
    Here
    #24
    5355's, 5365 in my experience are over twice the price and do not yield twice the performance.
     
  25. BitterCreek macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Location:
    Denver
    #25
    The 5160 is the best bang/buck. For $80 you get a noticeable increase in performance. But a pair of x5365 would cost around $400 and you would need to be using very threaded apps to take advantage of more than a few of the cores.
     

Share This Page