Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Not currently possible. The only Mac Pros that can be overclocked currently are 2006/7 and 2008 Mac Pros. In OSX that is. Even with those you couldn't achieve much since you couldn't up the voltage.
 
Something tells me Xeon chips with ECC ram were not really designed for over clocking. How many companies really have over clocked servers? I am willing to bet not many. If you have a fascination to over clock then PC's are for you.
 
Something tells me Xeon chips with ECC ram were not really designed for over clocking. How many companies really have over clocked servers? I am willing to bet not many. If you have a fascination to over clock then PC's are for you.

True although ECC can be quite nice for overclocking.

Mm, I agree. Nehalem was so significant step from Core architecture including QPI and no FSB etc, so its unlikely that that tool would work

Yeah and I don't think there's that big a demand for a Mac Pro overclocking tool. Shame.
 
upgrade cpu in 2010 mac pro

could you at least upgrade the processors later on? because i ordered a 12 core 2.66ghz in hopes that later i could upgrade it to the 2x3.33ghz
 
Yup, that shouldn't be a problem. As I said to someone else a few days ago, my guess is that such an upgrade would cost about $1000 in four year's time seeing as it currently costs about that much to upgrade a 2006 Quad core Mac Pro to a 3GHz Octo Mac Pro.
 
could you at least upgrade the processors later on? because i ordered a 12 core 2.66ghz in hopes that later i could upgrade it to the 2x3.33ghz

I am in the same boat as you, the only thing that has me worried is the 3.33 are 130W vs the 95W the 2.66 draw. Wonder if the power supply can handle it. This could be why you can't order dual 3.33 now.
 
I am in the same boat as you, the only thing that has me worried is the 3.33 are 130W vs the 95W the 2.66 draw. Wonder if the power supply can handle it. This could be why you can't order dual 3.33 now.

well at least you can always upgrade to the 2.93 chips when their a lot cheaper in a few years... but with all that hassle for only a 270mhz upgrade it might just be better to just buy a new mac pro, i guess it depends on how much the chips will be then.

but wasn't the 3.33ghz Nehalem more watts then the 2.93ghz? because people are able to put 2x3.33ghz in the 2009 mac pro
 
Thanks for the info, too bad it would sure be nice to go past 3.6 for single threaded stuff, but I guess that's just being greedy...
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.