Just saw this delid tool which is specially made for 1366 Xeon
https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/lga-1366-delid-tool?variant=2388025671693
https://rockitcool.myshopify.com/products/lga-1366-delid-tool?variant=2388025671693
Well I was weighing the option of getting the X5680 instead but it was "only" 24$ I would save on it.I'm sure you've already made the purchase of the X5690, but if not, take a look at the X5680. It's roughly half the price of the X5690 (roughly, and you might find a rare good deal on a X5690), but is just a teeny bit slower. About 3-4% slower. You won't notice it, and you can save money.
Also get the X-series over the W-series (again, unless you find a rare ultra-low price on a W chip) because you never know if you might get a dual CPU tray or dual CPU MP in the future, and you can use your existing X-series and would only need to buy one more. The W series cannot be used in a dual config.
Have fun!
Would I notice much of a difference between my quad-core W3565 and the 6-core W3670?? Should I even bother?
In all likelihood, nope. Same single core performance. In most uses I saw essentially no difference between my 4x2.93 and the upgrade 6x3.33. Except video. Glad I did it since that is my main use on this system.Would I notice much of a difference between my quad-core W3565 and the 6-core W3670??
For what usage?
Gaming. I was wondering if it would tide me over until I can build a legit rig.
99% no difference, only very very few games can utilise more than 4 cores.
Nice scores! It's cool that the 8-core trashcans are getting equal multi-core scores as the 12-core 3.46ghz cheesegraters.Recently upgraded my refurbed quad-core 6,1 trash can to a 2667 v2. The swap went relatively well other than it having the tamper evident screws. I've ordered some replacements from a supplier in case I need to return the Mac Pro for service - hopefully they don't make a note of which systems had them?! CPU temps seem to have decreased around 5-10c too with the new thermal paste. The stock paste wasn't very well applied and there was a big spot in the middle with little to no paste. Replaced it with Gelid paste.
Anyway, the scores are 4055 for single core and 26060 for multi score which I thought was pretty decent! My 2018 MacBook Pro 15" six-core outperforms it by a fair margin in single core but still fairly decent. Results are here: http://browser.geekbench.com/user/100016
Yes for all.Am I correct that the Mac Pro 4,1 (2009) single cpu model does NOT need a Delided IHS CPU ?
Which makes upgrading the single 2009 Mac Pro version, a lot easier than the dual cpu 2009 MacPro.. ?
So single cpu 2009 would be same like upgrading the 2010-2012 Mac Pro versions.. ?
2009 single CPU Mac Pros backplanes and CPU trays are identical to the 2010/2012 ones in everything except the SMC firmware version.@tsialex
One more question btw.
Tighning the CPU heatsink screws on a single CPU 2009, is also the same method I presume as the 2010's ??
So exactly counting the screw cycle times is not necessary , which makes it also a lot easier. ?
As far as I have seen, with delided xeon's putting the cpu heatsink bank on is very painfull process.
but then only for the dual cpu 2009 version I presume.. ?
So just tighten those cpu screws like you can not go further until it stops, and breaking the socket is them nearly impossible.. ?
@tsialex
One more question btw.
Tighning the CPU heatsink screws on a single CPU 2009, is also the same method I presume as the 2010's ??
So exactly counting the screw cycle times is not necessary , which makes it also a lot easier. ?
As far as I have seen, with delided xeon's putting the cpu heatsink bank on is very painfull process.
but then only for the dual cpu 2009 version I presume.. ?
So just tighten those cpu screws like you can not go further until it stops, and breaking the socket is them nearly impossible.. ?
I'm totally confused about all this ********...
after upgrade macpro 2010 to 2X 5690 3.47GHZ have not seen much of an increase in speed
ram 16GB 1333->96GB 1600 (1333)
my "old" cpu 2.33 & RAYDON top of the line were giving better "benchmark" results than my nvidea GTX1070
Thats becasue you use a wrong benchmarks.
E.g. Cinebench OpenGL test
I started with cinebench and thats where i got the info
5870 1G + 12c 2.66 (57.49)
is beating a
1070 8G + 12c 3.46 (56.12)
Then i moved to other test tools
CUDA-Z /ocean wave and the results are not consistent