Maverics or El Capitón 2006 Mac Pro?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by IanT720, Jan 23, 2016.

  1. IanT720 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #1
    hey guys I did some searching and basically found too much info, I just want to know the basics on what I need to do. We have had this Pro for a while now, and figured it's about time she got some love. It has 2, 2.66 4 core chips I believe, and I want to say 16gb of ram. It's a powerhouse. Currently running Lion. Would you guys recommend Maverics over Capitón? I just don't like the flat style. Also would I have any trouble swapping to an SSD? And finally what graphics card should I get that meets the new OS X requirements? Should I care about Metal support? Thanks a bunch! I want to get this puppy chooching again!
     
  2. 666sheep macrumors 68040

    666sheep

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Location:
    Poland
  3. IanT720 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #3
    I did read it thank you. But there's talk about multiple graphics cards, multiple boot loaders and the thread is over 70 pages! I figured I'd ask if someone just knew the winning combo. That's all.
     
  4. devon807 macrumors regular

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #4
    IMO, Mavericks would probably run better than El Cap. I had a C2D Macbook with Mavericks, and it ran better than Yosemite so it would probably run better than El Cap. as well. But you do have to do some wrangling to get any OS from 10.8 to 10.11 (El Cap.). And as far as graphics cards go, what do you do mostly, play games? Edit video? Here is a list of recommended video cards for the 1,1 that are supported. http://www.macvidcards.com/store/c9/Recommended:_Mac_Pro_1,1_and_2,1.html
     
  5. Mr. Zarniwoop macrumors demi-god

    Mr. Zarniwoop

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    #5
    Comparing an unsupported MacBook with an unsupported Mac Pro for ability to run El Capitan is not a good comparison.

    El Capitan loaded via Pike's boot loader is flawless on the 2006/2007 Mac Pro if you upgrade to a more modern graphics card. Unless you have a reason not to be on the latest OS, such as compatibility with some legacy hardware or software that can't work with the latest OS X, then there's excellent performance on El Capitan with these Mac Pros when the graphics cards are replaced.

    An unsupported original MacBook is a whole other bag of pain due to multiple levels of incompatibility, with graphics, sound, and even sleep issues.
     
  6. devon807 macrumors regular

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #6
    I agree 100%.I was speaking out of use of the GMA 950, no sleep issues, and no audio. It wasn't even worth it after all was done.
     
  7. ubuntunerd macrumors newbie

    ubuntunerd

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2016
    #7
    I have a 2006 mp running EL Capitan with the modified EFI and a ATI radeon 5770 apple edition graphic card i got from ebay running perfectly !!!
     
  8. Surrat macrumors 6502

    Surrat

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2014
    Location:
    United States
    #8
    I have two 2006 mac pro, that I upgraded to the original style 3ghz 5160, 12 and 16gig ram, have tried an apple 8800gt card, apple 5770, and apple 5870. All run fantastic with ElCapitan. I would never choose an older OS on a 2006 as long as you have a newer vid card and enough ram.

    I do have 10.7.5 Lion installed on another drive on the 2006 so its easier to fix the boot.efi if an update breaks it.

    I'm using the Piker 3.1 boot.efi.
     
  9. IanT720 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #9
    Thanks for the replys! Those are answers I'm looking for. As for use it's basically home use. I'd like to run 3D cad programs occasionally. That's all. Should I worry about Graphic cards that support Metal? If so, any you recommend on a budget? Also for a boot SSD... I know our G5 had a 1.5 gb/s limit. What does the pro limit it at?
     
  10. devon807 macrumors regular

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #10
    The 1,1 is limited to SATA 3Gb/s and PCIe 1.0, is the limit. As far as Metal goes, you can get a 7950 or 7970 and flash it for a bootscreen, these GPU's also support metal. The 7950 would be a good if on a budget.
     
  11. IanT720 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #11
    Flashing it is just for the boot screen right? Also I heard the card will perform slower. Is it fine to just install it with out flashing? Could I use the PC varient?
     
  12. Zwhaler macrumors 603

    Zwhaler

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2006
    #12
    Does this mean my R9 280X flashed works as is with Metal on 10.11? Curious
     
  13. IanT720 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2009
    #13
    Unrelated to the Graphics question, but how do you download 10.11?? I try, it just says my computer is unsupported and won't let me...
     
  14. devon807 macrumors regular

    devon807

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Location:
    Virginia
    #14
    I am not too familiar with flashing cards, but you can seek help from the guys over at netkas.org. But yes, it will only be for the boot screen. I may work without flashing, but you probably won't get a boot screen.
     

Share This Page