Single G5 Xserve Upgradeable to Dual?

Hey guys, I know it's a legacy product, but I thought I'd ask.
Can a single 2.0Ghz G5 XServe be upgraded to a dual 2.0?
I see chips with heat sinks on ebay and there is just a small cap covering the second port on the XServe's logic board. Can I pick up a second CPU and pop it in?

If you can't afford to break the hardware (and in all seriousness), then you shouldn't be asking.
And if you can afford to try it and can afford to break the hardware, well, you shouldn't be asking. Just go try it.
If it works (or if it breaks), let us know.

Similar Messages

Single Link DVI-I to Dual Link DVI-D?!!

I have a (G1)Power Mac G5 with a ATI Radeon 9800 Pro with a Single Link DVI-I connecter, and my LG 19'' LCD has a Dual Link DVI-D connecter. What DVI cable do I need? I heard the newer Dual Link DVI-D cable will work with the older Single Link DVI-I. if it does, how does this work? DVI-I and DVI-D has differant pin slots. Please help!

The display is probably single-link DVD unless it is more than 1920 X 1200. The DVI plug may have all the pins, but the dual-link pins are probably not connected to any wires. The Graphics board uses DVI-I which include digital and analog. It can be used with DVI-D cables which don't use the analog signals.

Inserting multiple rows using a single Insert statement without using dual

Hi all,
i am trying to insert multiple rows using a single insert statement like the below one.
The below one works fine..
But is there any other change that can be done in the below one without using dual...
insert all
into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (1,1)
into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (2,2)
into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (3,3)
select 1 from dual;

NiranjanSe wrote:
Hi all,
i am trying to insert multiple rows using a single insert statement like the below one.
The below one works fine..
But is there any other change that can be done in the below one without using dual...
insert all
into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (1,1)
into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (2,2)
into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (3,3)
select 1 from dual;
SQL> create table ps_hd_samp (num1 number,num2 number);
Table created.
SQL> insert all
2 into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (1,1)
3 into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (2,2)
4 into ps_hd_samp (num1,num2) values (3,3)
5 select count(*)
6 from ps_hd_samp;
3 rows created.
SQL> select * from ps_hd_samp;
      NUM1       NUM2
         1          1
         2          2
         3          3

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.

A single Amd Fx 51 or Dual Opteron 248's????????????

I have asked you many questions over the past few years and I have another question for you. I have the option to run dual opteron 248's instead of my Amd fx 51. Would I see a performance gain?Or would it be a waste?

FX-51 = 2.2 GHz
Opteron 248 = 2.2 Ghz
So clock-for-clock, both CPU's will perform roughly the same, and both have 1Mb cache.
So for things like gaming, there won't be much difference, HOWEVER if you are using multi-threaded applications (eg. encoding, rendering), then you DEFINITELY want to go the Dual Opteron route.
My 2 cents!

Single 23-inch ACD or Dual 20-inch ACD's?

I will be purchasing a Mac Pro to increase my CAD and Photo editing capabilities....Should I go for a larger 23-inch or go for two little guys? My theory with the two 20-inch ACD's was that I can edit and view on the main screen and have the CAD render on the other screen. One bigger 23-inch would be nicer for normal work and CAD with the extra real estate and quality. Any Ideas?

This is an iMac forum, if you considering a Mac Pro please post on the Mac Pro forum! Personally if I were considering a Mac Pro I'd only consider the 27" Apple Display! Look at Apple's online store or visit your local Apple Store and see one in the flesh and you will see why it's recommended.

How can i make my single sim nokia c601 into dual ...

please give me i want to convert it into dualsim phone

You can't. Although there are a few unofficial stuffs that work out to some extent. Still, won't recommend anything. It isn't good for the phone. Nor is it allowed to discuss such stuffs here.

RAM once and for all (singl-/dual-rank)

Seriously, everyone says different things (seemingly)
What's best to do...replace my existing 8GB RAM with as many dual-rank 4GB modules as possible/affordable, or keep the existing and buy (the more expensive) single-rank 4GB chips?
dual rank chips are about half the price of single.
is there some reason not to just go the cheaper option?

Ratbaggy wrote:
yeah cool, and thanks. interesting though...why would Apple use RAM that performs worse.
While technically faster, just like populating three identical DIMMs to enable triple channel didn't show any measurable performance difference, I would imagine if you really benchmarked single vs. double ranked DIMMs you would be hard pressed to find a measurable difference.
It comes to cost. Smaller capacity DIMMs are easier to manufacture in single ranked/fewer chip per module configurations. Higher density chips are more expensive, so that's why you see 4 and 8 GB DIMMs mainly as dual ranked DIMMs
It's not an evil conspiracy but simple economics. It's just too bad Apple isn't more up front about the whole rank issue, it would solve a lot of confusion. The only reason I even knew about it is I just had to read up on it for some server purchases.

Xserve G4 Dual 1.3GHz PCI Options?

I just picked up a Dual 1.3GHz G4 Xserve. I was wondering what my PCI options are. I was looking for what exact video cards work. So far I have only came up with the ATI8500 I believe. Is there any SATA cards that work to add external storage? Any info is helpful. I will be running 10.4 server on it with 4 180GB drives.

I had a similar problem when I received my xServe. My xServe is a slightly older xServe (1 GB, Dual), but the video cards should work the same in both servers.
I looked at the ATI 8500, but it was too expensive.
Look on eBay for an ATI 7000
I purchased one at a reasonable price. It works great, although not very powerful. It supports most basic resolutions which is fine for a server. This hardware was never designed for great video and the bus is no way near the performance you would get on a G5 desktop.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=8815758623&ru=http://search.e bay.com:80/8815758623_W0QQfromZR40QQfviZ1
MacBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.5)
I also looked into SATA to try and get away from ATA. Stay with the ATA as the cards are really expensive (MetaRAID cards) and the performance on the ATA cards is good and marginally slower than a SATA. They already have (hotswap thanks to Apple), but it is kind of flakey.
If you want external, go firewire 400. You have two ports on the xServe and firewire is much easier (and faster) with OSX than USB. You can get some pretty big firewire drives from Maxtor now, some with built in RAID 0 or RAID 1.
Otherwise, buy up a bunch of older drive holders and add the standard ATA drives when needed.
MacBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.7)

Single or dual 4500e for redundancy

I apologize if this has been asked before, but I haven't been able to find a solid answer when searching.
We're deploying a new datacenter and will have 20 racks of servers, mostly 1u. Given our bandwidth needs which are reasonably modest we're planning on using dual 2960s switches at the top of the racks and aggregating on a single or dual 4500e using 10gig links. The 4500e(s) will also have a bunch of 1gb devices such as firewalls, routers, and load balancers connected to them. Pretty typical network core. Given the need for 40 10gb links to racks and then another 20-or-so 1gb, the 4500e chassis seems to fit the bill.
My question is, do we go with a single 4507e with full redundancy (dual 10gb cards, one link to each from each rack, dual 1gb card, and dual supervisors) or a pair of either 4506e switches each with their own cards. With a virtual chassis the 4506e is appealing, but I'm not up to speed on any limitations that might impose. With IISU and the like does having two physical chassis vs everything in a single actually buy us anything if they're going to be in the same physical proximity anyway? A big reason to go with the single chassis is space - 11 rack units vs 20.
If we do go with a single chasis, other than Cisco's HA docs on the 4500e, is there any documentation or case studies that I could use to sell the idea to management? A number of people, especiailly those in favor of a ton of cheap netgear switches, argue that a single chassis is a single point of failure and we should never do it.
Thanks!

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
As you've described, the problem with any single chassis, the chassis itself can become a single point of failure even when loaded with redundant components. Independent chassis (e.g. VSS, StackWise) provide chassis redundancy although it does raise a question on software redundancy, i.e. multiple chassis are running some form of tightly coupled chassis OS vs. standalone chassis. Standalone chassis should be, in theory, the most redundant but they too create issues such as load sharing and asymmetrical path issues (e.g. unicast flooding). If you understand and trust a multi-chassis OS, I personally think it's often the "better" redundancy option.
I don't know if VSS on the 4500s support it, but 6500 VSS supports quad supervisiors, so if you lose a single sup on those you don't lose one of your VSS chassis pair.
Regarding your later post on using a 4500-X VSS pair, yes that might be an idea core for high density 10g. For twenty 10g ports each, you would need either the 16 port with the optional 8 port module or the 32 port model.
Depending on your remote rack setups, you might also consider 3750-Xs, stacked, in lieu of multiple (individual cabinet) ToR 2960S pairs. StackWisePlus is a much better stacking technology then FlexStack. Yes, the 3750-Xs are more expensive, but you might need less if you can bring multiple racks to the same 3750-X stack. (Depending on how many downstream stacks you actually need, you might also reduce your need for 10g ports on the core.) Depending on your feature needs, you might even be able to use the LAN Base models which in the later IOSs also support StackPower.
10g is nice, but it's also expensive. When working with switches within 100m, don't overlook the possibilities of gig copper Etherchannels. For example compare total cost of 8xgig (copper) build-in ports vs. single 10g (fiber) especially if special module is required.

1 Dual-Band Antenna vs. 2 Single-Band Antennas

Hey guys-
I was wondering if I was going to implement a 2504 with a 1550 series AP, would it be better to go with 2 Single-Band Antennas or 1 Dual-Band Antenna (which would mean I'd have to change the AP from an EU to an E).
What is the difference? I am thinking it has something to do with MIMO, correct?
This will basically be used to provided wireless connectivity outdoors to a single user. I am unsure what the NIC specs will be for the client, but I am saying its safe to say 2.4. Although the fact that I do not know, is what is making me purchase support for both bands.

Well it depends on what you are wanting to do. With the EU, you have 6 eternal antennas one for each radio. Now if you have a long backhaul and the omni's will not be adequate for that, then you use the EU with external patch antenna. So that is really the difference, the EU allows you to have a separate antenna type for each band.
Cisco Aironet 1552E/1552EU External Antenna Access Points
The Cisco Aironet 1552E/1552EU Outdoor Access Points are the standard models, dual-radio system with external antenna ports that are compliant with IEEE 802.11b/g/n standards (2.4 GHz) and 802.11a/n (5-GHz). The 1552E has three external antenna connections for dual-band omni or directional antennas. The 1552EU has six external antenna connections, three for 2.4 GHz and three for 5 GHz antennas, that support omni or directional antennas. They have Ethernet and fiber Small Form-Factor Pluggable (SFP) backhaul options, along with the option of a battery backup. These models also have a PoE-out port that can power a video surveillance camera or other devices. Highly flexible models, the Cisco Aironet 1552E/1552EU are well equipped for municipal and campus deployments, video surveillance applications, mining environments, and data offload.
Thanks,
Scott
Help out other by using the rating system and marking answered questions as "Answered"

Intel xserve + OS10.5

I'm about to set up a small office network based around an xserve but with the advent of Intelised Mac and the prospect of OS 10.5, I'm now in a quandary as to whether to wait. We will soon start replacing the older office iMacs with new Intelised ones and my concern is that I'm setting myself up for problems if I buy a current G5 xserve.
Does anyone know whether buying a current xserve will lead me up a blind alley in terms of hardware and software compatibility, system performance and cost.
Ta

Unlike the desktop and portable markets, where dual booting or running apps in virtualization are attractive, I can't believe that anyone will be doing the same with servers unless they are just playing around. Apple XServes are strong for AFP file services or SAN (XSAN) deployments, and Open Directory... but if you need a PDC, for example, you'll likely buy an Opteron or alternate Conroe platform w/o OS X as it will likely be faster at the same price or cheaper at the same performance level than Apple's hardware. Hardware performance of Apple gear, of course, has always been somewhat of a myth and effective marketing. However, not to say that the dependable hardware combined with the value of OS X isn't the more important issue.
A maxed out G5 XServe moves like a snail compared to the current maxed out Opteron systems, but they are CHEAP and they run OS X, which for some is a value, for others it is not. In the server market, Apple ends up being the budget solution, who would have thought?
To answer your question, I would buy now, because you are buying OS X, I presume. In the future, when the processing power jumps up 10 times, you can evaluate your system architecture and maybe then you can decide that you only need to buy 3 servers instead of 10... or something like that, but if the OS X server is going to meet your needs now, for the services you need to run now, you may not even get any appreciable value from a faster machine, especially if you have to wait for several months to a year. If your really scared about the hardware investment, buy a used G4 or G5 machine (like was mentioned), and install OS X server on it... maybe you only need the power of a G mini or something to tide you over for the Intel XServe? Or buy a G5 cluster unit... no one really needs the optical drive in most environments anyways.
The one thing no one has mentioned so far is that (at
least currently), we would not be switching from Mac
to Win without a restart. That's got to be a huge
PITA for a server on a routine basis.
I just got a single G4 xserve on ebay and max'ed the
ram (2GB) and 4x 180 GB drives for a mixed Mac and
PeeC network.
For what it's worth, there is still a lot of fight in
the old gal left for a small fraction of the cost of
the latest and greatest. 2 or 3 generations ago Macs
still offer a great value NOW.

Dual monitor setup without using the ADC?

Would it be possible to run a dual monitor setup using a DVI splitter cable from my (2009)Mac Pro?
I've seen some old forums referring to the 2006 models saying that this wouldn't work and instead you'd get the same image on both screens but the newer Mac Pros state they have "Dual-Link DVI ports".
Just wondering whether this means what I think it means and you can connect two monitors via a dual link cable and get essentially, two monitors running independently as opposed to the same thing on both??
Hope it's staightforward and me just being slow.

The GT120 features one Dual Link DVI-I port and one Mini DisplayPort .
The DVI-I is Dual Link capable, and also can be directly adapted to VGA.
Single-Link DVI is a serial interface that carries three data bits in each signaling interval, as well as control signals. In general, Single-Link supports displays up to 1920 wide. Dual Link DVI is the same except that it carries six data bits in each signaling interval, supporting displays over 1920 wide.
DVI screen drawing is very similar to VGA screen drawing, and the data sent are digital "scan lines" left-to-right row data, top-to-bottom with entire screen data sent about every 60 Hertz. Analog VGA signals are sent at the same time on a separate set of pins.
DisplayPort and its Mini variant are inherently a packet interface, but can be coerced to produce a "Dual Mode" signal that approximates Single-Link DVI. Getting Dual-Link DVI or VGA from DisplayPort interface requires a non-trivial converter than contains chips and requires power.
Executive Summary:
If you have one display that is wider than 1920 or VGA, attach to the DVI-I connector with an appropriate cable.
Running a Mini DisplayPort display from the Mini DisplayPort requires only a cable.
Single-Link DVI can be had from the Mini DisplayPort with a cheap adapter.
Dual-Link DVI or VGA requires an expensive Active Powered converter which can cost US$100.

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

3 hour video for single layer burn

I have a 3 hour 10 minute Final Cut Pro project that I would like to be able to fit on a single dvd-r, not having dual layer burning capabilities.
First of all I don't even know if this is possible without squeezing down the file so much that it's essentially not worth viewing.
I have read some of the DVD Studio Pro instruction manual to try and address this issue and it seems that the I should set the bit rate to as low as 2.8 to fit it all. I am using the h.264 encoder for the video and the mpeg-2 encoder for audio.
There are no presets in compressor for a video this long, so I'm at a loss as to how to create my own.
I would appreciate any advise on what the optimal settings for this should be, or if it's a lost cause and I should just cut it in the middle and make two dvds.
Thanks

Apply the longest preset, and that customize the preset to 3 or lower.
Use Dolby 2.
As you know that h.264 video won't import into DVD SP. Why encode to that format if you intend to encode it again?

Single G5 Xserve Upgradeable to Dual?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for