Mac Pro 1,1

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by Bpro33, May 14, 2014.

  1. Bpro33 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #1
    Hi all,

    Sorry if this has been talked about but I have the opportunity to buy a 2006 Mac Pro and am wondering if it is worth it.
    Here are the specs:
    2.66 CPU , 21gb ram, 250 gb hdd, nvidia 7300 gt.

    I am able to pick it up for $200, and want to know if I should just buy a new Mac mini.

    Thanks for any help, it is much appreciated.
     
  2. sarthak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #2
    I'd say that's a steal. Drop in X5355s for another $50 USD and you're looking at a 2009 comparable machine.
     
  3. Fuchal macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    #3
    Yep, and a cheap used nvidia card like GTX 460 for $50 on ebay and you can do anything!
     
  4. Bpro33 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #4
    Is it relatively simple to witch our the processor? I was reading about it and saw that some models did not recognize the 8 cores.
    Thanks for the quick replies.
     
  5. NOTNlCE macrumors 6502a

    NOTNlCE

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2013
    Location:
    DMV Area
    #5
    You'll need a firmware flash using a tool on Netkas, it flashes the Firmware to the 2,1 firmware so it accepts the 53XX cpus easily. The CPUs aren't super tough to replace in that model. Just remove the fan relay, remove the heatsinks, pop the processors out, stick the new ones in, reapply thermalpaste and replace the fan relay. Pretty straightforward if you've ever worked with computers. There are guides on YouTube/iFixit.

    I concur with the above statements, $200 is a good buy, especially with 21GB of RAM. That means there are some 4 gig sticks in there which are quite nice to have. Swap out the GPU with a newer NVIDIA card and use Tiamo's bootloader to get Mavericks on that baby. I say go for it. Good luck!
    -N
     
  6. HuntingPudel macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Location:
    California
    #6
    The 5355 should be recognized by the 1,1 firmware. If you have any reservations about the 1,1 firmware, you could always upgrade the firmware to 2,1 firmware, which recognizes a whole bunch more processors.
     
  7. Bpro33 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #7
    Would this set up be good for a few more years? I just don't want to buy it and have to upgrade in a year or two.
     
  8. CASLondon macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Location:
    London
    #8
    My honest opinion is that its a good buy at a good price, but no, it doesn't have a long future. At least in terms of OSX updates, graphics cards options, drivers, etc.

    I'd argue for getting a more current MP, or a more current mini.
     
  9. sarthak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #9
    At least a 2009 as the '08 models are next to go. With a more "eye candy" intensive next-generation OS**, the stock graphics card in the 2008 end up putting the machine on the vintage list.

    I can confirm this. I am using a 1,1 with dual X5355s. Previously the machine had Dual 3GHz Dual Core chips. It was a matter of a simple swap of the processors, they work as they should.

    The 1,1 firmware however, needs a simple edit of "About this Mac" files using TextEdit to change from 2 X 2.66GHz Unknown -> 2 X 2.66GHz Quad Core for cosmetics.
     
  10. Bpro33 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #10
    So I was looking around the forums and have noticed that many users still have their 1,1 but would not advise any work being put into it. Is there a reason for this? I will be running final cut, but I keep thinking the 21gb of ram is worth it.
    Will this machine be quick, comparable to other, say, $300-400 desktops? Is it necessarily a bad thing to use it with Lion on it?

    Thanks for all your feedback! It is much appreciated.
     
  11. Bpro33 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #11
    Also how long would you foresee this machine lasting?
    Sorry for the numerous questions
     
  12. Neodym macrumors 68000

    Neodym

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2002
    #12
    If you accept it as-is (i.e. comparably slow interfaces both internally and externally and worn hardware that may start to show its age after 7-8 years), it may serve you a couple more years as budget FC editing station (though 4k video will probably bring the machine to its limits at times, even with 21GB and octocore upgrade).

    Don't necessarily expect future FC versions to still support it and be prepared to pay a hefty energy bill.

    Many younger Macs offer similar computing power with less energy consumption and more modern interfaces (especially with huge video files a faster internal SSD or Thunderbolt/USB3 interfaces could make a significant difference), though become disturbingly loud under load.

    Any big box MP is a solid basis for tinkerers, but only the 4,1 (2009) models onward should be considered as production machines.
     
  13. CASLondon macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Location:
    London
    #13
    I would forget about this as a Final Cut machine. Final Cut X is getting written to take advantage of GPU/multiple GPU as well as multiple core power all the time, background rendering, etc. Plus, its going to require more up-to-date versions of OSX and you will be stuck at Lion. You will not run this as an editing machine for very long, you'd do better with a more modern laptop, or frankly, a more recent hi-spec iMac.

    The ram doesn't make much difference to this equation. More modern Mac Pros use cheaper standard ram, anyway. Ram won't be your limiting factor.

    Plus, there are many places to hit bottlenecks, and you are going to hit most of them fast. I'd view this as an interesting project machine, you'll have a fast snappy personal computer but not a video editing machine

    Money you spend on this project is dead money, as its not buying you a future. Just an interesting present.

    ----------

    it may serve you a couple more years as budget FC editing station (though 4k video will probably bring the machine to its limits at times, even with 21GB and octocore upgrade)

    I'm not even sure this machine is going to handle 4k video at all, I'm not well versed in how people are keeping up on the graphics cards, but its going to be a pain to keep up with which ones will work, and manually getting drivers working for them, as you won't be getting the drivers through the OSX updates.


    You'll have to be a hands-on tinkerer with this thing to get those years out of it. You'll have much better FC performance on a recent iMac.

    If you like the idea of a MP, listen to the hordes and only consider 09 forward
     
  14. sarthak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Location:
    Canada
    #14
    It's only $200 for the OP. I'd jump on it any day of the week as a spare rendering machine because they have depreciated that far (considering the amount of money I've spent on the 1,1). You're comparing (even with upgrades) a $400 Mac Pro with Eight Cores and an upgraded Video card to a "High Spec iMac or modern Laptop" that runs a few thousand dollars.

    -> Toss in two X5355s for Eight Core performance (GB: ~10,400) which is faster than stock 4,1 Quad performance or almost as good as 4,1 Eight Core 2.33GHz procs. This is sufficient for most applications though probably nothing beyond 1080p editing in FCP, DaVinci resolve, AE or Premiere.

    -> With the 1,1 you're not stuck on Lion. You CAN install ML or Mavericks with 64on32, Boot.efi and other methods.

    -> You just need to upgrade the video card to something better than the stock 7300GT especially for FCP.

    Overall for the OP: ~$400 with the CPU and Video Card upgrades.

    I wouldn't compare this to a few thousand dollar machine but rather, treat the Mac Pro 1,1 for "what it is".. That being, capable of 1080p in Apple Pro Apps and Creative Suite Apps.
     
  15. HuntingPudel macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Location:
    California
    #15
    You obviously won't be getting the best quality user experience out of a 1,1 as compared to some of the newer oMPs (performance isn't quite there in comparison). That said, I am fully expecting my 1,1 to last me at least 2-3 more years before I retire it to doing nothing but web surfing/email, maybe as a video jukebox as well.

    Upgrading the video card is a big deal. I got a HD5770 some years back and have now replaced that with a HD7950 (both Mac versions). If you expect that you will need your boot screen to switch startup volumes, you need a video card with Mac firmware on it. If you do not, you can obtain a flashed PC version of the video card for significantly less money than a card that is a "Mac Edition."

    Upgrading processors with more cores will probably help you, since FCP is aware and capable of using them.

    The OS you run may or may not be a big deal to you. I am running Mavericks because a couple of the pieces of software I had dropped support for Lion. I am using Tiamo's boot.efi method for running Mavericks.

    RAM helps out a little too. This is an area that I need to add to soon.
     
  16. TacticalDesire macrumors 68020

    TacticalDesire

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Michigan
    #16
    For $200 I would jump on that immediately. Core 2 windows desktops are still going for that much. At least on the business end of machines. That is a steal.

    A maxed out 2006 Mac Pro will handle most common tasks without a sweat. It would also work fairly decent as a budget editing station although rendering times will pale in comparison to newer models. But that is how technology goes. Future software support may be limited by Lion still has some life in it and like another user said, there are still methods of installing newer versions of OSX. You'll definitely be getting your moneys worth.

    All in all I say jump on it.
     
  17. Bpro33 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #17
    Is it that bad on hydro? Worse than any other desktop?
     
  18. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #18
    I have an upgraded Mac Pro 1,1 that I can't give away.....
     
  19. Bpro33 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 14, 2014
    #19
    What do you find so terrible about it?
     
  20. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #20
    1. Can't run OSX past Lion (without a hack), thus no iMessage
    2. Memory is expensive even buying used (if you want to use 4GB sticks)
    3. Doesn't have Native USB 3.0.
    4. Doesn't have SATAIII or PCIE SSD
    5. Even upgrading to dual quad core 2.66ghz GPUs, I still can't get it over 10K in Geekbench (my mid-2012 Mini with a quad core 2.3ghz scores 11500).
    6. Power consumption
    7. I run a lot of hard drives so "only" having 4 internal bays really didn't help me much over a Mini (since both require a lot of external enclosures regardless).

    It was a great machine when I bought it second hand a couple of years ago, but it is time to put it to pasture. Unfortunately no one seems all that interested in a Mac Pro 1,1 in my circle of family and friends. Most want laptops and/or smaller/faster towers. Right now it sits in a corner collecting dust.
     
  21. NOTNlCE macrumors 6502a

    NOTNlCE

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2013
    Location:
    DMV Area
    #21
    Many of those things could be "terrible," but it depends on what the machine will be used for. Sure, a newer machine would be better for a main workstation that would have those features, but the machine in question has 21GB of RAM already (which would mean at least two of the sticks are at least 4GB sticks) and hacks can result in functional iMessage. And the "hacks" aren't complicated anymore, with Tiamo's method, my 1,1 runs Mavericks flawlessly with a simple file replacement. PCIe SSDs and USB 3.0 can be added for minimal expense. Sure, the Geekbench is limited and the lithography on the CPUs can be limiting (FSB, L2 Cache) but even modern i5 CPUs peak at just over 11K Geekbench.

    Again, it depends on what you use it for. That being said, it's very good to inform OP of the limitations. Be aware of everything paulrbeers has listed, as they are very true. But for $200? I would still go for it. Incredible computer for the price, especially if you've got a workflow for it.
     
  22. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #22
    Oh yeah and the other thing: It's a 7-8 year old machine thus a ticking time bomb for a major failure. Even a power supply failure can be expensive to replace on a Mac Pro (as well as a pain in the @$$).
     
  23. NOTNlCE macrumors 6502a

    NOTNlCE

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2013
    Location:
    DMV Area
    #23
    Also very true. I had the Geforce 7300 GT fail in my 1,1 which is why I was able to acquire it at a low price. Fortunately, it was an easy fix. The previous owner of my 3,1 had the logic board replaced at one point (I got the computer without a serial number embedded in the logic board, needed to serialize the thing.) Failures would suck for sure. But 21GB of RAM, functional 1,1 riser cards and Xeon processors could certainly help you recoup your losses if something dies.
     
  24. JesterJJZ macrumors 68020

    JesterJJZ

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    #24
    1,1 is an awesome machine, especially for $200. I still have mine but I keep it on Snow Leopard for some legacy software my newer machines can't run. Upgraded my processors to 8 core as well.
     
  25. Fuchal macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    #25
    iMessage works perfectly fine for me in 10.9.2 on my 1,1... might have to do with installation method, but it can work fine. My install was extremely easy with basically no hacked installs or spare boot drive.... just install onto a hard disk from a supported mac and then replace boot.efi file via Finder.

    You can install a natively supported USB 3 card for $25, or $49 for a PCIe SATA SSD controller. You won't get top notch speeds but it'll be miles ahead of the included USB 2 or SATA I.
     

Share This Page