• Updated 2023-07-12: Hello, Guest! Welcome back, and be sure to check out this follow-up post about our outage a week or so ago.

Mac Pro... not sure if want.

CC_333

Well-known member
What an attitude -- at $5000, it's a professional tool meant to do a job that pays.
I realize that. I, am a private individual with no job, just want it to last as long as it can because I probably can't afford another one anytime soon. That being said, I do see your point. I don't expect it to last forever, I just wish it did (admittedly, that statement wasn't very well worded).
That having been said, I have no doubt that the Mac Pro's hardware will last a very long time -- and if your needs would objectively have been met sufficiently by a plastic MacBook, then I have no doubt that (even if it doesn't always run current software) the Mac Pro will be fast enough to do what you want for the forseeable future.
My point, exactly.
but you'll almost certainly not be able to make an unsupported future operating system work by putting in a newer GPU.
No, probably not. But other things, such as the CPUs and RAM, could make a difference.
Expandability is definitely nice. Outside of hard disks, how much of it have you used?
So far, I have upgraded the hard disks from a single 320 GB stock drive to two 1 TB drives, a 500 GB drive and a 30 GB SSD. The RAM has remained a constant 4 GB so far, but I intend to upgrade it to at least 8 GB in the near future. And as for the PCI express slots, I'd love to get a USB 3 card (or two) in there, but I haven't seen any that will work on a Mac.
Will that machine run Tiger?
Yes, it will. I have a working copy of it installed so that I can format Zip disks in a format a classic Mac will understand (and despite being on an Intel machine, it lets me install Mac OS 9 drivers on said Zip disks. I haven't been able to do this with 10.6, 10.7 or 10.8 (maybe 10.5 could do it, but I haven't tried). I've also noticed that, even though it isn't the most modern OS in the world, it can run somewhat faster than subsequent versions could, even on the same hardware (in this case, a 2008, 8-core Mac Pro with 4 GB RAM). Fortunately, for the foreseeable future, I don't have any needs that can't be met by 10.4 (except maybe Flash video > :( ).
I am well aware of all the things you said in your post, and perhaps I didn't word mine very well, but basically I am in agreement with you.

c

 

krye

Well-known member
Any free Mac is a good Mac.

Plus, the day after they give it away will be the day you think of the perfect use for it.

 

Cory5412

Daring Pioneer of the Future
Staff member
I, am a private individual with no job
Did you have a job in 2009 when you bought it? Spending as much on a workstation computer when you're unemployed seems irresponsible to me, but I can't claim to know everything about what's going on.

Yes, it will.
I'd meant the OP's "MacBook Server" -- OP mentioned decommissioning it and dual booting their Mac Pro into 10.4, but to me, hosting files to 68k/ppc Macs seems like one of the most monumentally huge wastes of a Mac Pro's time and electricity consumption, unless you're time-traveling to the '90s, have one of these and a few huge disks, and are replacing a whole pile of AWS95/AWGS9150/ANS500s with the Mac Pro.

Fortunately, for the foreseeable future, I don't have any needs that can't be met by 10.4
I would probably sooner not own a computer than use 10.4 on one of my main computers. Objectively, it's fine (minus the lack of security patches since 2010 or so), but it lacks modern web browsers now (I mean, unless you really really love running a core utility like that in Rosetta) and flash is a big deal to a lot of people.

One of the reasons I often reply to people who talk about wanting G5s and Mac Pros/XServes to last forever is that despite their high cost, they're often not really designed to last a long time in a home environment, they're designed for (and are generally good at) having a normal life-cycle in a professional/datacenter environment, and then being replaced after 3-5 years. It's more of a public service announcement. (That and it's always interesting to see what people's justification was for buying so much computer.)

The problem with big computers in homes is that they become a great place to sink more and more money. (I'll be the first to tell you that my own big computer is a money pit and I would almost certainly be saving a lot of money and not losing much functionality by using something much smaller.) Often, you can sink a whole lot of money into an old big computer without ever gaining functionality. (This is more true on the Mac side of things, unfortunately, just because Apple doesn't optimize for people who are willing to spend a grand putting marginally faster processors and a boatload of ram into their old Mac Pro, rather than spending a grand on a new MacBook/air, mini, or iMac.)

It depends a lot on what you're going to do with a big machine -- Even though I could probably toss a video and sound card into it and run it as a Windows 7/8 desktop, I'm running my own big machine as a virtualization server, which means the capacity is actually used. (I'm waiting to have some expendable cash to bring it from 16 to 32 gigs of ram.) There are two issues I'm going to run into with it though:

The first is that my particular machine has eight disk bays, and I found a good deal on 2TB disks so it's crammed full of them and now I have 12TB of on-line disk capacity that needs good backups, especially since I bought and am using disks that aren't really for "enterprise" use, and may develop UREs and bad sectors quickly. A reasonably developed backup system for 12TB of disk capacity is going to cost a bomb, even if I go straight to disks (and have enough disks to hold 2-3 weeks of full backups) or eliminate the disk tier and go straight to the cheapest tape loader I can find.

The second is that eventually I'm going to either run up against the capacity of my machine, or some marginal upgrade is going to cost more than a new machine. (There are already ivy bridge corporate desktops that would probably outperform my current configuration.) It's hard to let go of several thousands of dollars of computing equipment and either make the same magnitude of investment, or acknowledge that slightly more frequent upgrades of smaller systems is easier -- both in terms of budgeting and in terms of acknowledging when it's time to be done with a system.

(Again, I know there are a lot of different circumstances, especially when Dell will sell you a machine that holds four disks and four or five PCI/PCIe slots for $399, but even on the PC side of things... those slots go unused most of the time.)

But it sounds like you knew what you were getting into and that you understand how Apple tends to do new software. And who knows, now that all vestiges of 32-bit are gone from Mountain Lion's HCL, and the oldest IGPs are gone, the system requirements may stay stable for some time.

Plus, the day after they give it away will be the day you think of the perfect use for it.
Story of my life.

 

directive0

Well-known member
I'm no masochist, 10.4 will not be the primary OS, I'm only going to boot into it in special circumstances that require its use. Otherwise she'll be running 10.7, Windows 8 and Ubuntu.

The aim here is a triple boot system, eventually.

 

CC_333

Well-known member
I'm no masochist, 10.4 will not be the primary OS, I'm only going to boot into it in special circumstances that require its use.
Same here, pretty much. It's running 10.8 right now, in fact.
I, am a private individual with no job
Did you have a job in 2009 when you bought it? Spending as much on a workstation computer when you're unemployed seems irresponsible to me, but I can't claim to know everything about what's going on.
No, I've never really had a job (I'm too young to get a job which would easily pay for this machine, honestly). Actually, we (my mother and I) had saved up enough money to afford it, and I got it for my birthday to replace a frustratingly unstable PC I had built. We don't have a lot of money in general but we had managed to save enough at the time to make it possible.
The plan originally, actually, was to do audio recording/editing with it, although I've never really had the time (I've been very busy with school and stuff). If I ever choose to pursue it in the future, all the pieces are here now to make it easily possible (assuming it doesn't become totally obsolete first (and it probably will)).

I'm willing to live with an obsolescent computer for a few years, although security would probably be a problem (in that case, I'd probably adapt to using some form of Linux). Unfortunately, I have to admit that the 2008 Mac Pro is already bordering on obsolescent (it is the minimum requirement for 10.8, for example; I cannot rely on Apple to support it in the next release or two of OS X, although that is probably likely, at least for 10.9), so its days as a modern computer are probably numbered.

Anyway, I hope I am successfully filling any gaps in your understanding of my thoughts :) I'm not perfect, but I'm trying to muddle through.

c

 

directive0

Well-known member
Just a quick shot. She's working well. Thanks to the council of CC_333 I will be doing some light restoration to it.

I've christened her "Galactica".

IMG_3133.JPG

IMG_3135.JPG

 

Gorgonops

Moderator
Staff member
I'm willing to live with an obsolescent computer for a few years, although security would probably be a problem (in that case, I'd probably adapt to using some form of Linux). Unfortunately, I have to admit that the 2008 Mac Pro is already bordering on obsolescent (it is the minimum requirement for 10.8, for example; I cannot rely on Apple to support it in the next release or two of OS X, although that is probably likely, at least for 10.9), so its days as a modern computer are probably numbered.
Even a 2006 Mac Pro is still a reasonably competent Linux computer, and will be for a while. The annoying 32 bit EFI limitation matters not under Linux, as long as you don't have some philosophical problem with using the BIOS emulation stub to boot x86-64 instead of EFI, and I find that personally at least four 2.0 ghz Core Duo 2-equivalent cores is still a couple notches above the "fast enough" cutoff for a daily driver. On the flip side, of course, I haven't been using mine much after being shocked and amazed that according to the Kill-A-Watt the system draws about 200 watts while completely idle. (This is with the monitor in power save mode, system load average flat barely above zero.) That's... a lot. It certainly was enough to talk me out of having the system double as the home server, anyway.

I have on hand the RAM chips needed to max the thing out at 32GB, so I've been thinking of keeping the thing around for use as a bare-metal VMware box, but I have as of yet failed to actually come up with a good reason for *having* a giant VMware box at home.

 

olePigeon

Well-known member
The whole 32-bit versus 64-bit EFI thing is just stupid. Apple should have stuck with Open Firmware.

 

IPalindromeI

Well-known member
EFI isn't bad if it's implemented right. In most PCs, it sure as heck ain't, especially now with most PCs being unable to boot Linux due to insane bugs, and merely changing settings like BIOS/UEFI toggle or secure boot, unable to boot Windows. wat

Even in Itanium and the restricted (compared to other x86 boxen) Intel Macs, EFI is NOT ready for prime time for the beige box mainstream. It's in a massive teething period, and together with a new OS like Windows 8, it will leave a sour taste in the users. OpenFirmware is more mature, but completely alien to x86. It's the same scenario as the SGI Visual Workstations with ARCS. BIOS is creaky, but it works and it's been proven for years, and that's important.

 

olePigeon

Well-known member
That's why Apple should have stuck with Open Firmware. It can boot any OS, operates independent of the architecture, and doesn't care if you're 32-bit, 64-bit, Intel, PowerPC, ARM, or a ham sandwich. You can run 32-bit and 64-bit drivers simultaneously. None of this 32-bit only or 64-bit only crap. It's an excellent firmware, and in my opinion, superior to EFI.

EFI was developed to pander to Microsoft.

 

redrouteone

Well-known member
About six months ago I found a first gen MacPro for $180. I have 32GB of RAM in mine. I lucked out and got the ram in trade for some work.

I don't use it much for 2 reasons. One it pulls a lot of power. According to my PDU it pulls about 220 Watts at idle.

The other thing is that the CPUs don't have EPT support. So it causes problems with running nested hypervisors, which pretty much rules it out for my lab use.

I'm not sure I'm going to keep it. I don't find it very useful.

 

Cory5412

Daring Pioneer of the Future
Staff member
Apple should have stuck with Open Firmware.
So that the machines could only run Windows, and open source systems that put in the extra effort for OF on ia32? Apple would still have figured out how to make the original Mac Pro obsolete after however many software versions, and would probably still have implemented it wrong anyway.

At least as it stands, you can choose between Mac OS X, Windows, Solaris, Linux, BSD, bare-metal hypervisors, etc.

merely changing settings like BIOS/UEFI toggle or secure boot, unable to boot Windows. wat
Citation needed. Microsoft specifically requires that OEMs allow secure boot to be turned off in UEFI, and never have I heard anywhere else that doing so will render Windows unable to boot.

In most PCs, it sure as heck ain't, especially now with most PCs being unable to boot Linux due to insane bugs
Which insane bugs? In EFI, or in Linux? Or is it more of a driver issue with the newest generation of chipsets? I'd thought the Linux people were getting better at keeping up with Intel's new chipsets.

 

coius

Well-known member
I had a gigabyte board I spent almost $350 on (really nice, it supported Tri SLI/CrossFire X setups) whicht he UEFI was so crappy Windows wouldn't boot when it was enabled. It bluescreened just booting off the DVD. Also, Linux would KP. The board wasn't defective, the UEFI bios was that crappy. Too bad, it was one of the highest performing boards. It could do 64GB RAM, had 5 PCI-E 16-lane Slots (3 @ 16-lane/2.0, 2 @ 8-lane) + 2 1-lane PCI-E.

SATA 6.0Gbps, and had 12 SATA ports + 4 eSATA, all the ports were USB 3.0 and the board has the 990FX chipset. I ended up giving it to a friend with my dual Radeon HD 5770 because I needed GPT support, and the board sucked so bad I couldn't do GPT since it would crash on boot.

It was a common issue. the EFI implimentation just sucked. I don't think Windows 8 would run either on it. It seems to be the buggiest board Gigabyte made. I am back running with a (from the 3rd RMA) ASRock Extreme3 board, that (knock on wood) is still going after 7 months now.

I ended up upgrading the system with an FX-8120, and with the water cooling system i received today, I proceeded to overclock to 4.4Ghz easily. It beats out a Core i7 3.4Ghz 2600 (I think it's 3.4, I will have to check). The ASRock with the new cooler/etc.. his 4.12pts on Cinebench for CPU, OpenGL is 69.31 with the Radeon HD 6850. It's better than nothing, but the gigabyte board did better than that. Also provided better voltages. (Geekbench was almost 14k points btw, 64-bit, beat some 6-core Xeons)

The one downside about EFI is some applications make you pay extra to support something that is now expected to ship on PCs (Acronis, I am looking at you. don't sell software then proceed to tell people they have to pay $50 to upgrade to a plus pack for GPT support)

Either way, yes, I have seen EFI be suckily implimented. Apple's first-gen EFI systems were that way. Especially the Mac Pro. That should've been EFI64 minimum. The EFI specs existed at the time. Apple should've used it.

That said, the Mac Pro of that vintage is nothing to scoff at. If you don't like it, sell it yourself. eBay still fetches a pretty penny for them. After that, go buy yourself a nice laptop that you would like (how about a 2010 17" MacBook Pro?)

Don't balk at free. Aka looking a gift horse in the mouth. Otherwise, give to a family member that probably runs on a Pentium 4 or P ///.

The Mac Pro would be good for Linux or Windows 7 support. I can imagine that that Mac Pro would beat my FX-8120 even overclocked. And it probably has extra power on the side.

 

directive0

Well-known member
ON THE TOPIC OF THERMAL PASTE / PADS:

I am going to do some basic maintenance to Galactica tonight. One of the things I want to address is the constant spooling up and down of my GPU fan. If I scroll down a webpage quickly I hear it start to spin up "WhiiiiirrrRRRRRRRR" and then very quickly spool back down. A background level of fan noise is acceptable, but this up and down, up and down, up and down spooling is driving me crazy. My Mac Pro mentor CC_333 has informed me that this sometimes is an indication that reapplication of thermal paste on the GPU is required.

Fine, I have no problem with that, I have reapplied thermal paste before. HOWEVER I was given a Thermal Pad by a friend who said it was preferable to applying thermal paste and have never tried one.

Do you geniuses have any advice on that score?

 

CC_333

Well-known member
I guess I'll post this in the open for all to see...

I have had little experience with thermal pads, other than removing old and/or contaminated one which can no longer serve their function.

Specifically pertaining to the Mac Pro GPU, I used thermal paste. It seems to be working just fine. You could try a pad; I don't see why it wouldn't work as well.

Just a parting tip when disassembling the heatsink: be careful! It's kind of tricky because of the way it's attached to the PCB (although that could've been due to my lack of experience).

Good luck!! :) :)

c

 

Cory5412

Daring Pioneer of the Future
Staff member
The new ThinkCentre has some bad UEFI
So, one ThinkCentre M92p has bad UEFI, maybe -- did the owner of it call Lenovo? If my brand new machine refused to boot any OS except by disabling an advertised feature of the machine, I would call the vendor and ask what was up.

Apple's first-gen EFI systems were that way.
Apple has been implementing things wrong for just-about-ever. It's one of their favorite things to do.

 

directive0

Well-known member
Ended up getting 10.4 running! (thanks to help from CC_333!)

Tried to remedy the graphics card spooling, but alas it continues. Its alright, I can deal with it.

I have it triple booting Windows, X.7, X.4. Things are great. I have a spare video card from my windows desktop. Is it possible to use it on the windows side, or even the mac side?

 

Hotdog Zanzibar

Well-known member
Well done!

I'm still rocking my 1st-gen (2006) Mac Pro. It's a dual 2GHz system running OS 10.6.8 on a 150gb 10,000rpm Velociraptor HD. I've upped the RAM to 6gb and can go much higher if needed. My home business is graphic design, and it runs the latest Adobe CS6 software VERY well. I have Windows 7 Ultimate installed via BootCamp on a 200gb 7200rpm drive and a 1Tb WD Caviar drive installed for documents, movies, jobs, etc.

I replaced the stock GeForce 7300 with a GeForce 8800 GT. When that died last year, I replaced it with a Radeon HD 5770, which according to Apple shouldn't run in this system, but it does flawlessly.

My friends and I have LAN parties a few times per year where we play the latest multiplayer games, and my Mac Pro still performs like a brand new 2013 system.

I see no need in the near future to upgrade from this machine, even if future Adobe titles no longer support 10.6. I can run CS6 for years if I have to, since I am the one creating content for others. As far as I can tell, Lion and Mountain Lion are fairly poor releases of the Mac OS, and 10.6 suits me just fine.

 
Top