Replacement of the 2.26GHz Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors in 8 Core MacPro

eVGA has an X58 that supports some, and perhaps most, Xeon cpu.
http://www.evga.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=29
The Classified board is better designed for Xeon.
There should be others, but single socket so far.
Core i7 is Nehalem and pin compatible.

The W35xx series is what Apple uses in 4-core (single cpu) model.
The dual cpu uses 55xx and these cost - a lot, not just Apple BTO.

I think you'll find the 2.26 - or even the quad, is more than you might realize.

A. What do you intend to do and use it for? probably most important.
B. If/when you outgrow, sell yours.
C. Perhaps you would be in the market for 2008's 8-core $2399.

Most of the threads, and the question of 2.26 vs other models, comes up a lot since the 2009 was announced - take a look at what others have said; and look at benchmarks on Barefeats and in particular at various apps.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7243896&postcount=230

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/115605

http://www.barefeats.com/nehal03.html (there are 10 "Neha10x" in series)

thinking about buying the 8 Core 2.26Ghz mac Pro. don't have the cash for 2.66 or 2.93 just yet.... my 2 questions are, when and where will I be able to get the faster processors on their own in the future and once replaced, would I be able to use my old processors in a PC ??? cause I don't think anyone would want to buy them for a mac....

Hi,
From what I have seen the 2009 Mac Pro 2.26 GHZ has a lower system bus speed than the eight core 2.66 and the 2.93. As a result, I would not expect the 2.26 to upgrade properly to 2.66 or 2.93. If you really need the higher speed you should probably wait until the price drops or buy the Mac Pro in the Apple refurbs. http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/specialdeals/mac

You could also consider the 4-core 2.93 and save money.

The 2008 models provide great performance and are considerable less $$$. You can see the 2008 Mac Pro 2.8 compared against the 2009 Mac Pro 2.26 here:

http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/amug/reviews/articles/intel/macpro-2009/

Is it possible to remove one of the two 2.26-Xeon-Cpus
to add e.g. a 2.96-Xeon?

CPU1= 2.26 CPU2= 2.96 😉 very interesting combi

I don't think you could... the clock speed on the bus also drives the chips... so the 2.96 would be driven at 2.26...

Hi, please can you explain me why the 2.26 has slower system bus than 2.66 and 2.93? They use the same memory modules, they have the same mother board isn´t? So what is the speed difference? I really didn´t know that.
Thanks!

Yes you can, I called up a local Apple authorized repair shop (crywolf) to verify and they confirmed that you can. They just added that you will need to make sure you put the correct amount to CPU thermal paste when installing.

To answer your second question, I saw on newegg the a little while ago that there were 3.2GHz (Xeon W5580) processors, but now that I look again, they are gone.

As long as the socket and series are the same, you should have no problem.

I thought "W" were "W35xx" and used in Apple single socket while there are a couple x55xx series only for dual socket.

And yes, Newegg had W3520/40's (and gone quickly).

Yes you can, I called up a local Apple authorized repair shop (crywolf) to verify and they confirmed that you can. They just added that you will need to make sure you put the correct amount to CPU thermal paste when installing.

Hi,
When I was testing the different Mac Pro models, the 8-core 2.26 displayed a 5.9 GHz System bus frequency while the Mac Pro 2.66 and 2.93 versions displayed a much higher bus frequency. I would ask your repair shop if they are talking about the 2009 Mac Pro. If they say yes, I would ask them if they have completed the upgrade.

I would be concerned that the lower bus frequency of the Mac Pro 2.26 might impact a CPU upgrade.

Good Luck!

Interesting...I did tell them specifically that I wanted to get the current early 2009 2.26GHz model and upgrade to the 2.93/3.2 procs later. The people wanting to do this are in for a little bit of a wait for the faster processors to come down in price so I doubt crywolf has actually done this upgrade. Out of curiosity, what were the differences in bus frequency since they are using QPI (QuickPath Interconnect) now? Unfortunately I don't have a Mac Pro in front of me, yet...

Hi,
The Mac Pro 2.26 GHz has a System bus frequency of 5.87GHz you can see it here:
http://www.engadget.com/photos/apple-mac-pro-early-2009-benchmarks/1438363/

The Mac Pro 2.66 and 2.93GHz models have a System bus frequency of 6.40GHz you can see it here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrae/3382437704/

Have a great day!

From what I have seen, and you can't really test running OS X, but whatever your cpu is clocked to, say you put in a 2.66GHz and clock it up to 4GHz which is easy enough, the Quick Path will change.

I'm not sure what Engadet is talking about and whether they can even make changes.

People can clock these Nehalem chips, and especially the server versions, to much higher than what they run at in Mac Pro. Not endorsing or saying it is or is not safe or anything, just that you can - and learn a lot in the process; but, it is new territory and I still don't understand all the rules and what to watch (other than temps of course).

CPU-ID, Everest Ultimate, CPU-Z are some I've been using along with EVGA's E-LEET Utility, which support and know Nehalem, but some readings you can only get accurate voltage reading and such from the BIOS setup screen. Where you can disable H-T and make other changes.

My thought is "system bus" may not be accurate anymore. One feature of Nehalem was to do away with the whole fsb. There is a 133MHz on-cpu memory controller, and that can be adjusted also.

mbean wrote:

Yes you can, I called up a local Apple authorized repair shop (crywolf) to verify and they confirmed that you can. They just added that you will need to make sure you put the correct amount to CPU thermal paste when installing.

Hi,
When I was testing the different Mac Pro models, the 8-core 2.26 displayed a 5.9 GHz System bus frequency while the Mac Pro 2.66 and 2.93 versions displayed a much higher bus frequency. I would ask your repair shop if they are talking about the 2009 Mac Pro. If they say yes, I would ask them if they have completed the upgrade.

I would be concerned that the lower bus frequency of the Mac Pro 2.26 might impact a CPU upgrade.

Good Luck!

What you are refering to is the QPI (Quick Path Interface) that connects the processors to the IOH (Input Output Hub - PCI-E, SATA, rest of the system) and in the case of a multi processor system, other processors. This is on the chip and while it can be changed in software, the Mac Pro uses the default of the processor. Thus a processor with a higher QPI speed will work fine in a Mac Pro that originally had 2.26GHz Xeons in.

What you are refering to is the QPI (Quick Path Interface) that connects the processors to the IOH (Input Output Hub - PCI-E, SATA, rest of the system) and in the case of a multi processor system, other processors. This is on the chip and while it can be changed in software, the Mac Pro uses the default of the processor. Thus a processor with a higher QPI speed will work fine in a Mac Pro that originally had 2.26GHz Xeons in.

Hi,
That sounds great. Please post the Geek Bench performance results after you install those new CPU's! Now if they were only affordable 😟

Mr. Mbean please do complete research before you post and state something.
And if you are not right about it, just admit it. Good luck and have a nice day!

Mr. Mbean please do complete research before you post and state something. And if you are not right about it, just admit it. Good luck and have a nice day!

Hi,
If you read the posts you will find that my comments were directed at the fact that the 2.26GHz has a different system bus speed than both the 2.66 and the 2.93GHz 8-core 2009 Mac Pro models. I also provided links that verify this.

I am not positive that an 8-core 2.93GHz upgrade of the 2.26GHz will provide the same performance as a stock 2.93 GHz from Apple. As no one has completed this upgrade I cannot assume the performance will be the same.

I still believe there may be an issue otherwise why wouldn't the 2.26, 2.66 and 2.93 all have the same system bus speed? I would rather users understand that there are stock differences before blindly believing that an upgrade will automatically work.