Expanding a single processor G5 to a dual processor

Hi , I have an early 1.6 single processor G5. Is it possible to add another processor to this computer? Thanks for any help.
Also, Will I have any trouble running panther on this machine? I am now using 10.3.9
Message was edited by: five string
Message was edited by: five string

Depends on the MLB. Some of the First generation SP G5's have a MLB with the circuitry and connector for a second processor. However if this is the case it can ONLY take a second 1.6 GHz as the board will be set up as not to take anything faster than 1.6.
A dual compatible MLB should also have 8 DIMM slots, as far as I know the 4 DIMM MLB does not exist with dial CPU connectors.

Similar Messages

What's the deal with dual processors???

The whole dual processor thing has been bugging me for some time now. If I have a dual 500mhz processor, is it the same as a 1.0ghz processor, worse than one, better than one?! Are there other factors at play? In my limited scope, if you had a dual 500, 533, whatever, it would be the same as a single 1.0ghz - and yet these dual processors are priced much cheaper. I really am at a loss as to how computers do their processing, and how to compare single processor G4's and dual processor G4's when making a purchase.
Insight would be greatly appreciated!

And you shouldn't forget, the future is multiprocessors. There is a limit to miniturization, and the solution seems to be multiplication. So operating systems and applications are increasingly going to be multiprocessor-aware. Maybe a perfect example is the upcoming MacOS release, Snowleopard. Apparently, there will be almost no cosmetic changes. The changes will essentially be 'under-the-hood'. And you can bet, that some of those changes will be increased efficiency with respect to multiple processors.
So what's the deal with airplane peanu...err, dual processors?
The advantage, theoretically is, having more workers to do the work. Your 1ghz processor is like a worker who can lift 100kg, and your 500mhz are like workers who can lift 50kg each.
So where's the advantage? If you have a farm with 40 kg hay bales in the field that you need to pick up, your better off with two workers than one right? Or 8 workers in the case of a 8-core MacPro. So an multiprocessor-aware operating system, doles out the work much more efficiently, spreading the tasks around, or spreading a single task around in pieces (if the app is so written).
You've heard of render farms? The multiple computers used to render the frames of animated movies? Its the same principle. Having computer 1 render the first 1000 frames and computer 2 the next, the project gets done within a lifetime. If they had had only one computer, ToyStory would still not be finished.
Its the future. Just wait till the end of this year for example. Nehalem chips will be sporting even more processors.
Try these;
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1619399&tstart=0
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070605-intel-updates-compilers-for-multic ore-era.html
Nehalem; http://techreport.com/discussions.x/12130

Dual Processor Support

Hi there, I am wondering is there a list of general mac applications out there that take advantage of the extra G4 processors in DP systems. I am looking into upgrading my G4 and for the life of me can't decide whether I should stick to economical single processor or better performing Dual Processor.
To start off on what I use my mac for besides e-mail idisk and internet. There have been many times when I have to convert or extract sound or video using Quicktime. That there is one application that I can think of (though I could be wrong) that uses the extra Processor in DP systems.

Even if none of the applications can use more than one processor, a dual processor will speed things up because there is always more than one process running in OSX.

Migrating from single processor to dual processor Callmanager

Hi Networkers,
had anyone install a Callmanager 4.1 dual processor version of CM4.1-K9-X345D= before in a single CPU in a dual processor capable server before.
Can it work in the first place?
Had anyone successfully migrate it to a dual-processor later on?

I dont think there is any difference in Callmanager software for a dual processor versus single processor server. For 7845 (dual processor) the hardware detection disks may be different from the one for single processor (7825, 7835)
Migrating from one to another is as easy as taking a BARS backup from one server, build the other server to the same version and restore it. (Make sure server name and ip are the same for both servers)
Please remember to rate posts!

Can a Power Mac G5 2.7 dual processor be run as a single processor?

This is in relation to my last question that I may have mis-worded,
Can I run a dual core, dual processor, as a dual core, single processor, and if so, how do I do this?
This is the info on;
About this Mac:
Power Mac           G5
Machine Model     7,3
CPU type             Power Mac G5 - 3.1
Number of CPU's 2
CPU Speed          2.7
Any Help,
Thank you.

Yes. (but yours is a dual processor, single core each processor)
It may be run as a single processor by disabling one processor.
While booted normally, in Utilities, open Terminal and enter the following:
$ sudo nvram boot-args="cpus=1"
To re-enable the 2nd cpu
$ sudo nvram boot-args=""

Single or Dual Processors for Tuxedo and/or weblogic 8.1?

We run Tools 8.44 and 8.20 and double checking to see if either Weblogic (8.1) or Tuxedo (8.1) would utilize a dual processor environment? We run these on Windows 2003 Server.
Appreciate inisght.

Yep its all in the cache, and the L3 makes all the difference.
I remember when I was shopping for my upgrade, Gigadesign had two different models of CPU's, the (brand new at the time) single and dual 7447's which went up to a dual 1.8 and the older pre-Freescale models (cant remember the model number maybe it was indeed the 7455B??) that maxed out with a dual 1.4..
I remember reading benchmarks (and quite a bit at XLR8yourmac.com) about the older dual 1.4's being on about the same level as the dual 1.6 and 1.7 7447 cpus.. This was all down to the 1.4 having L3 cache on each cpu. The 7447 had double the L2 like the 7448 but no L3.. I didnt really care much since they were relatively the same benchmark, but I went with the dual 1.7 7447 anyways just because the numbers were higher..
And funny enough, the CPU never ran stable at 1.7, my Mac would crash and kernel panic left and right. I couldnt get any response back from their tech support (I think it was one guy that ran the whole thing) about adjusting the voltage on it, so it spent its entire lifetime in my G4 as a dual 1.67. Not too big of a difference but I couldve saved some money just flat out buying a 1.6 instead of the 1.7, and wouldve saved even more had I just listened and bought the dual 1.4 with L3...
John with a G4 - no problem at all hehe! Dont get me wrong I loved my G4 and it served me well for just about 10 years before it 'died' on me.. But after getting the late-2005 dual core G5 man oh man I wish I wouldve done it waaaaaaaaaay sooner!

Replace powermac mdd single 1ghz processor with dual processor

I want to know if i can if put a dual 1.25 or 1.42 ghz processor in my single processor machine. will it work because what i understand is that i have the slower bus speed of 133 and the dual processor machines have 167. will that matter?

Aftermarket processor upgrades would have to be specific to the Mirrored Drive Doors model. The CPUs for earlier models will not work. So you would have to follow the recommendations of each manufacturer. Maybe someone who has added one can chime in with a recommendation. Otherwise, try:
http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/g4reviews.html

Dual Processors compared to Single

I remember reading somewhere on this forum that a single processor G4 will produce
approximately 60% of the processing power of a dual processor G4 of the same speed.
Is this correct?
I am currently running a G4 DA (with processor upgrade) AT 1.46 GHz. I am considering
buying a dual 1.42 GHz G4. So, if my rather shaky math is correct, I can expect the dual
1.42 to operate as if it were (very roughly) a 2 GHz single.
Is this a reasonable estimate? I am trying to decide whether the dual 1.42 will be a good
next step on my climb up the Apple tree. My current G4 setup has performed flawlessly
for over a year now but is beginning to show signs of its age when it comes to processing
HD video and converting video formats.
In my figuring, I didn't take into account the increase in bus speed from 1.33 MHz to 1.66
MHz from the single DA to the dual 1.42. So I would expect that my estimate of 2 GHz
is on the conservative side.
Would appreciate the advice of anyone more knowledgeable about these things than I am.

Thanks all for your replies.
So the general consensus seems to be that I will not gain much by upgrading to
a dual 1.42 from a single running at 1.46 even considering the slight increase
in bus speed - 1.33 to 1.67 MHz - and the improved multi-tasking ability.
I was hoping to find a cheaper solution than upgrading to a G5, especially since
with a G5 I'll lose the ability to boot to OS9 or even use OS9 apps in Classic mode.
One of my most-used apps is the old Photoshop 3, which I've stuck with because
the use of its tools has become second nature to me. I also flip into OS9's QT 6
Pro which has a few features lacking in later versions.
Could one of you steer me to a site that shows comparative speed tests on say,
Photoshop processing between various G4 models? I've come across such tests,
but can't remember where. That would help me make a decision between the
dual G4 and the more expensive G5.
I'd much appreciate your input on this.

Can FW800 133 MHz board from single 1 GHz machine take a dual processor?

I've read in more than one place that the logic board from the 1 GHz FW800 machine can't be used with ANY dual processor. Can anybody tell me with a reasonable degree of certainty whether this is true or not?
Please don't bother answering based on general principles. I already believe -- tell me if I'm wrong -- that every other MDD FW400 or FW800 board CAN take a dual processor and, except for this question, EVERY processor will work EITHER with EVERY 133 MHz board OR with EVERY 167 MHz board.

From my experience the processor card should be compatible, but don't hang me if I'm wrong.
This page showes how to set different multipliers = bus ratios.
So, according to the default multipliers for the MDDs, you get:
6.5x 133 MHz bus = 864.5 MHz CPU (867 MHz)
6.0x 166 MHz bus = 996 MHz CPU (1.0 GHz)
7.5x 166 MHz bus = 1,245 MHz CPU (1.25 GHz)
Thus, if you put a Dual 1.0 GHz onto a 133 MHz board, you'd get not 1.0 GHz but 800 MHz instead (798 MHz to be exact). The same goes for the 1.25 GHz where you'd get 1.0 GHz (997.5 MHz), and for the 1.42 GHz where it'd be 1,1 GHz (1130 MHz, multiplier 8.5x).
6.0x 133 MHz bus = 798.0 MHz CPU (1.0 GHz → 800 MHz)
7.5x 133 MHz bus = 997.5 MHz CPU (1.25 GHz → 1.0 GHz)
8.5x 133 MHz bus = 1,130 MHz CPU (1.42 GHz → 1.1 GHz)
So, if you alter the bus speed of the board (see here, link is from the xlr8yourmac page linked above) you will be able to use the Dual processors for the 166 MHz bus on your 133 MHz board, then overclocked to 166 MHz, at their designed speeds. If you don't what to change the boards system bus speed the processors will just be underclocked, thus run slower – with all the advantages like less power consumption and less heat emission together with a prolonged lifetime.
To fit the 133 MHz system bus you would have to change the multipliers on the processor daughter card to run at the processors native speeds.
Just one example:
1,000 MHz / 133 MHz = 7.5x
So, if you'd want to run a Dual 1.0 GHz processor on a 133 MHz system board you'd have to alter the multiplier from 6.0x (for the original 166 MHz system bus) to 7.5x (for your 133 MHz system bus) – the resistors to change the multiplier reside on the processor daughter board.
That said, keep in mind that this procedure is *NOT tested or confimed*, but it seems logical, doesn't it?
I had a OWC Mercury Extreme 1.4 GHz processor upgrade placed in a Gigabit Ethernet replaced into a Quicksilver (2001 version). As you can see here, it had set the multiplier to 14x to have it run at 1.4 GHz on the Gigabith Ethernet (100 MHz system bus) and I had to set the jumpers to a multiplier of 10.5x for the Quicksilver (133 MHz system bus).
Thus, if I had put the OWC Mercury Extreme running at 1.4 GHz in the 133 MHz bus Quicksilver unmodified back into the 100 MHz bus Gigabit Ethernet, it would run at 1050 MHz (roughly 1.0 GHz).
That's it. There wouldn't be more to it than that, but the latter source (for changing the motherboards system bus speed) states that Apple put in some protection on the processor daughter card to prevent increase in system bus speed if no dual processor is present. Since this doesn't apply to you as you stick to your 133 MHz system bus it shouldn't bother you.
*But don't blame me* if it should turn out to be completely wrong!
Cheers,
Andreas.

CHUD on a dual processor MDD running Leopard (10.5.8)

I finally got around to installing CHUD today and am wondering if some of you folks who have used it for a while might have some easy answers to a few questions.
I first tried version 3.5.2. It installed, but I couldn't adjust any of the settings. I then read on japamac's site that some MDD's could use 4.4.4. I installed that version and it does work (In fact, I'm posting this with one processor tied behind my back). However, there does not seem to be an option for nap mode.
Also, after I toggle between single an dual processor mode a few times, performance in dual mode seems to take a big hit. A restart solves the problem, but I'm wondering if this is normal.
Is there any way to get nap mode to work in a dual cpu MDD running 10.5.8?
Is there any way to get it to stay in single CPU mode when it wakes from sleep?
I read through the discussions at xlr8yourmac before posting this. It appears that some people have been able to get nap mode to work under Leopard, but they are not always careful to mention exactly which version of Leopard and CHUD they are using.

Hi-
When installing CHUD, it is also necessary to run CHUD remover to deinstall previous installations.
If not deinstalled, odd stuff happens.
3.5.2 is the one for dual processors.
Other versions have mixed dual processor support.
This is one of the claims that 4.4.4 works, but I have lingering doubts
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=5974655&#5974655
I may need to edit my blog page.....
It takes a script for automatic Nap enabling in a dual processor machine with 3.5.2.
See this thread:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=9030378&#9030378

Dual processor not showing up in Activity Monitor

I have a dual processor G5 PowerPC at work and when I look at the CPU Activity Monitor it shows me the activity on both processors. My Mac Pro at home is also a dual processor but when I look at the activity monitor it only shows one processor thread. Is this normal or is there something wrong with my Mac Pro? Anyone else notice this as well?

Hi KSStudio. A few questions to clarify.
1. Is this a dual or single cpu machine?
2. How many cores per machine?
Check it out...
Assuming you have a dual cpu (8 core) 2009 mac pro, when you use activity monitor choose > Window > CPU Usage. You should see a floating window with 16 panes. (8 panes if you have a single processor/4 core model) Under normal loads using 10.5 you should see some activity in all 16 panes. Under normal loads using 10.6 you should see activity in odd numbered panes. You will see activity in even numbered panes when the load is high. This is normal and due to Snow Leopard's improved utilization of processor technology.
Hope this helps.
--Jesse

"Inconsistent cursor cache. Out of range cursor" error on dual processor multi thread

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

"SQL-02103: Inconsistent cursor cache." error on a dual processor multi threaded apps

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

"SQL-02103 Inconsistent cursor cache." error on dual processor multi threaded system

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

"SQL-02103: Inconsistent cursor cache." error on dual processor multi thread apps

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

I have a C++ with Pro*C++ COM object running on a Win2000 OS on
a dual processor Middleware. The program is being called by a
service in a multi threaded way. An oracle error like ORA-2103
and SQL-02103 will be generated after running the program. We've
tried putting mutex on every SQL statement in Pro*C and it works
but the systems became very very slow. We concluded that the
error might be cause by a collision of threads accessing the
same Table or different tables having foreign constraints. This
is so because the error keeps coming from a statement accessing
Table A and following errors comes from a Table B having a
foreign key on Table A.
Our only solution now is to put Mutex on Statements accessing
same tables or tables with foreign constraints but this will
make our system run very very slow. I dont know if the problem
is in our Oracle Database because we already upgraded our system
from 8.1.6 to 8.1.7. The wierd thing on this is that the system
is running smoothly without oracle errors on a SINGLE PROCESSOR
Middleware. Hope you can give me any insights on this problem.

Expanding a single processor G5 to a dual processor

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for