MOTUnation.com

HCMarkus wrote:I feel like a proud papa.

"Gee, Dad.... It's a Wurlitzer!™"

I've though a lot about what we, musicians producing for the variety of media that we do, need in a computer, and I have to agree with Jim that, for many, the "old" Mac Pro offers a perfect combination of design and functionality. When the CPU upgrade became so affordable, the value proposition became simply unbeatable.

Although I have yet to hit the CPU wall in a project since updating my four-core 4,1 to hex in 2012, I must admit to being more than a tad envious of those like Jim who have the 8 core 5,1... Like him, I'd drop in a couple of those x5680s or 90s' in a jiffy. Combined with SSD storage, it is a dream music machine!

This stated, there are some very real advantages the new MP (6,1) offers, notably Thunderbolt (which is really only needed because newer audio hardware supports it and not Firewire) and very quiet operation. Not that the old MP is extremely loud, but it is better when placed in a machine room, closet or box. I am curious as to how well the new MOTU hardware performs in real world scenarios when interfaced via USB.

HCMarkus wrote: This stated, there are some very real advantages the new MP (6,1) offers, notably Thunderbolt (which is really only needed because newer audio hardware supports it and not Firewire) and very quiet operation.

That's not the only thing, these modded Mac Pros are comparable in multi track performance, but the newer CPUs in the new Mac Pro are going to be noticeable in the single track performance issues. So if you're stacking multiple FX on a track, then the new Mac Pro is the way to go.


For instance my mod scores 2626 in 64 bit single core. If you're only using a dozen tracks and not worried about upgrades the fastest single core performance belongs to the i7 chip in the iMac at 4344, almost twice the CPU power per track.

DP processes each track to a separate core? I know that each instance of a VI - Kontakt or whatever - is assigned to a different core, but I didn't know that DP handled tracks the same way.

Not a problem, though... I work in a hybrid mixing style, using a lot of outboard and in-console effects. I almost never have more than two plugs on a track. I needed more breadth, not depth.

Gravity Jim wrote:DP processes each track to a separate core? I know that each instance of a VI - Kontakt or whatever - is assigned to a different core, but I didn't know that DP handled tracks the same way.

Not a problem, though... I work in a hybrid mixing style, using a lot of outboard and in-console effects. I almost never have more than two plugs on a track. I needed more breadth, not depth.

Magic Dave mentioned this in a thread about not overburdening a single instance of Kontakt with a dozen instruments and multis, that it's actually easier on the CPU to have a couple instances of Kontakt rather than one instance with multiple instruments loaded into it.

I'm mostly in the box except for a few FX and instruments, so this upgrade is a big help!

Yeah, that's how I know that VIs work like that, from Dave's comments here. But I was wondering if DP handles all audio tracks that way. Not like it matters... Like I say, I've never had a problem with single core performance, even on my old 3,1 (and I use a lot of virtual instruments.. I just don't run huge effects chains on audio tracks as a rule). I'm just curious if that's how it works.

Two more little things:

1. I had seen reports of high temps and loud fan action post upgrade. I must have done the thermal paste right, as I have no increased fan activity, and the CPUs are running at a cool 37-42°C, with DP running. Sweet!

2. Anybody reading this who wants to try it, I HAD an offer for you... but the free 3mm 9" long hex key has been awarded to our own kgdrum. No more calls, we have a winner.

I ordered my chips today.

If you want new chips, here’s the cheapest link I found- http://www.ebay.com/itm/371227309222?_t ... EBIDX%3AIT
Can I get some Salsa with that order?...

Thanks to all at the forum, excited to see the speed increase .....

Gravity Jim wrote: I had seen reports of high temps and loud fan action post upgrade. I must have done the thermal paste right, as I have no increased fan activity, and the CPUs are running at a cool 37-42°C, with DP running. Sweet!

My guess is a good portion of those people are running 2009 4,1 Mac Pros with the hardware hacks to get the lidded chips to fit. The 2009 machines were designed with un-lidded chips in mind. Plus you can download all kinds of thermostat monitoring apps that will let you know things that could scare you. The Northbridge chip in the Mac Pro tends to run hot, it's upper range is reportedly 83º C so people tend to flip out about it. My fans are at a super low speed as I write this, barely audible, and the Northbridge is reporting 68ºC, within normal range.

All that said, for maintenance purposes, at some point replacing the thermal paste on the Northbride chip would be good preventative maintenance on a machine that's 6 years old.

My Northbridge chip is running in the low 60s, but that's not a bad idea.

If anyone is looking for a good deal on clean chips, this on eBay now:

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.vi ... 1480527681

And I saw pairs pulled from HP servers for $300-330 the pair! They've still got old Arctic Silver clinging to them, but heck... If this had been around last week, I could have saved $80.

Michael Canavan wrote:

Gravity Jim wrote: I had seen reports of high temps and loud fan action post upgrade. I must have done the thermal paste right, as I have no increased fan activity, and the CPUs are running at a cool 37-42°C, with DP running. Sweet!

My guess is a good portion of those people are running 2009 4,1 Mac Pros with the hardware hacks to get the lidded chips to fit. The 2009 machines were designed with un-lidded chips in mind. Plus you can download all kinds of thermostat monitoring apps that will let you know things that could scare you. The Northbridge chip in the Mac Pro tends to run hot, it's upper range is reportedly 83º C so people tend to flip out about it. My fans are at a super low speed as I write this, barely audible, and the Northbridge is reporting 68ºC, within normal range.

All that said, for maintenance purposes, at some point replacing the thermal paste on the Northbride chip would be good preventative maintenance on a machine that's 6 years old.

This makes me think that I’d better put the RIGHT amount of thermal paste on! What is the exact amount? That is the question.

toodamnhip wrote: This makes me think that I’d better put the RIGHT amount of thermal paste on! What is the exact amount? That is the question.

The Apple service manual is available and recommends a thin O with a I through it.
You should have the manual just for reference. The link is in this article if you have the 2009.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1827902

Michael Canavan wrote:

toodamnhip wrote: This makes me think that I’d better put the RIGHT amount of thermal paste on! What is the exact amount? That is the question.

The Apple service manual is available and recommends a thin O with a I through it.
You should have the manual just for reference. The link is in this article if you have the 2009.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1827902

Nice link man, lots of data to read before I do the install..Appreciate it man.

My CPU temp has always been fine, but I run my fans a tad faster to keep Northbridge chip nice and cool. A little faster makes a big difference. My Mac is in an air-conditioned machine closet, so noise it not an issue.

I've also seen reports of re-pasting the Northbridge with Arctic Silver instead of the factory crud and seeing a 6ºC reduction just from that.

Gravity Jim wrote:I've also seen reports of re-pasting the Northbridge with Arctic Silver instead of the factory crud and seeing a 6ºC reduction just from that.

Yeah I don't remember how I got about to looking at the paste on the PC my relatives gave me, but it had all dried up. These machines are 6 years old almost, so it's not a 'bad' idea. Fair warning though, it's supposedly a bit more tricky than dealing with the CPU heat sinks, and again, a HUGE portion of this is people seeing numbers and not knowing what a normal operating temperature for these chips is, and assuming the worst because they run hot.

It I think is mainly a case of knowing just enough to jump to conclusions without being an expert, IE getting in your own way.