Xeon X5680s Now $45... October 2018

[buhardilla]

Is a nice price, but If you have already updated to a W3680 you must read this comparation between X5680/W3680 before buy and waste time in a new installation
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php ... cmp[]=1274

[James Steele]

Is a nice price, but If you have already updated to a W3680 you must read this comparation between X5680/W3680 before buy and waste time in a new installation
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php ... cmp[]=1274

The link looks messed up. I have the original processor in my MacPro 4,1 that it shipped with, so I don't think this applies to me.

[buhardilla]

The link looks messed up.

Oops! perhaps a screen capture will look better

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fydxa0n9tw8q0 ... .tiff?dl=0

[HCMarkus]

The link looks messed up.

Oops! perhaps a screen capture will look better

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fydxa0n9tw8q0 ... .tiff?dl=0

I think I see your point, but judging from your post, you are talking about less than a 1% difference. Not noted is the fact the X5600 series can address 64 gigs of Ram compared to the W3600 which can address, if I recall, address "only" 56 gigs. Regardless, at current prices ($200 vs $275) the X5680 is a better deal.

Looking a little closer, I note that the sample size for the W series was 51 units, while there are only two X series CPUs sampled. Although I have not personally done the kind of testing required to create a meaningful statistic, study has me understanding that individual CPus of the same model number can vary in performance due to manufacturing imperfections. A sample size of two units, compared to 51, leaves open the question of whether the difference in performance depicted is statistically significant.

[James Steele]

Yep... and point still remains that for someone who has the MacPro 4,1 with the original quadcore chip in it, the X5680 for $200 is still a good upgrade!

[James Steele]

Just completed the swap. One of the easiest things ever. Pull out the Mac processor tray, remove the heat sink, release the retaining clip on the old chip, swap in the new one, close the retaining clip, clean the old thermal paste off the heat sink contact, spread new thermal paste on the top of the processor, put the heat sink back on, tighten it down, pop the tray back into the Mac and I'm done.

Below are the before and after comparison using Geekbench. Note that I had already ran the firmware updater prior to swapping the processor so in the "Before" test the Model is also shown as MacPro5,1, even though it's the original Quad processor.

I haven't loaded a DP project, but that's my next stop!

[James Steele]

One little interesting detail: my instance of B4II loaded with a notice that I had to launch Service Center and reauthorize it (as well as my other Native Instruments plug-ins). Apparently it detected the hardware change (new processor) which triggered reauthorizing. All my serial numbers were filled in in advance when I launched Service Center, however Komplete 5 failed. However, Komplete 6 worked so probably okay there.

It'll be interesting to see if any other copy-protected plug-ins will be "un-nerved" by the processor swap.

[HCMarkus]

Just completed the swap. One of the easiest things ever. Pull out the Mac processor tray, remove the heat sink, release the retaining clip on the old chip, swap in the new one, close the retaining clip, clean the old thermal paste off the heat sink contact, spread new thermal paste on the top of the processor, put the heat sink back on, tighten it down, pop the tray back into the Mac and I'm done.

Below are the before and after comparison using Geekbench. Note that I had already ran the firmware updater prior to swapping the processor so in the "Before" test the Model is also shown as MacPro5,1, even though it's the original Quad processor.

I haven't loaded a DP project, but that's my next stop!

Yahoo! Nicely done sir.

[James Steele]

Just completed the swap. One of the easiest things ever. Pull out the Mac processor tray, remove the heat sink, release the retaining clip on the old chip, swap in the new one, close the retaining clip, clean the old thermal paste off the heat sink contact, spread new thermal paste on the top of the processor, put the heat sink back on, tighten it down, pop the tray back into the Mac and I'm done.

Below are the before and after comparison using Geekbench. Note that I had already ran the firmware updater prior to swapping the processor so in the "Before" test the Model is also shown as MacPro5,1, even though it's the original Quad processor.

I haven't loaded a DP project, but that's my next stop!

Yahoo! Nicely done sir.

Thank YOU for the heads-up about these processors dropping below $200 on eBay! And for the links and such. Couldn't/wouldn't have done it without you!

[Michael Canavan]

^^^ Nice James! Almost twice as fast!

You can use 1333 RAM now if you want, though with 24GB of 1066 unless you really need the speed it's kinda not a big deal.

[James Steele]

^^^ Nice James! Almost twice as fast!

You can use 1333 RAM now if you want, though with 24GB of 1066 unless you really need the speed it's kinda not a big deal.

Yeah... I can't really afford to get new RAM now. Guy I bought it from cautioned me against buying 1333 at first. Should have ignored him. Still, probably won't make much difference.

[HCMarkus]

^^^ Nice James! Almost twice as fast!

You can use 1333 RAM now if you want, though with 24GB of 1066 unless you really need the speed it's kinda not a big deal.

Yeah... I can't really afford to get new RAM now. Guy I bought it from cautioned me against buying 1333 at first. Should have ignored him. Still, probably won't make much difference.

Difference would be nominal, likely imperceptible. Don' worry, be happy.

One thing: try SMC reset and zapping PRAM (or whatever it's called). Sometimes memory that is labeled 1066 is actually 1333, and a reset allows the Mac with a processor that supports 1333 to recognize it as such.

[kgdrum]

fwiw I was told by a tech @ OWC that even if you add 1333 ram (which I did)it will be read as 1066 because of the architecture of the ram bus or something like that, and it would be virtually impossible to actually be able to tell a difference to a user in either case.

[James Steele]

Yeah. It seems like it would be imperceptible. So far I'm very happy with this upgrade!

[HCMarkus]

fwiw I was told by a tech @ OWC that even if you add 1333 ram (which I did)it will be read as 1066 because of the architecture of the ram bus or something like that, and it would be virtually impossible to actually be able to tell a difference to a user in either case.

Read as 1066, no. My RAM, with the exact same computer upgraded reads the Ram (labelled 1066 btw) as 1333 just fine. The W3680-90 or X5680-90 CPU upgrades allow this.

Imperceptible, yes.