4 ms·
I still have exclusively Intel-based Macs, and they continue to work fine. Except upgrading to the latest Ventura or Sonoma, or whatever N-1 currently is, intr
by metadat 2y ago
I still have exclusively Intel-based Macs, and they continue to work fine. Except upgrading to the latest Ventura or Sonoma, or whatever N-1 currently is, introduced new sources of slowness due to laziness on part of Apple engineering.
For example, the lock screen is animated and takes a little while to become responsive after opening the lid. This is 100% due to stupid and lazy, not because the hardware is incapable of displaying a simple animation movie.
- 486sx33 2y agoI’ve got an i9 10th gen Mac with 128GB of RAM and a 1TD SSD and I’ve got an m2 pro MacBook with 32GB of RAM The m2 absolutely destroys the performance of the i9
- arp242 2y agoUndoubtedly, but what the previous poster said was "they continue to work fine". Not "they are of equal performance".
- umbra07 2y agoRight, but that's not the point. A 10th-gen i9 is still a very capable processor (ignoring the thermal issues).
- icedchai 2y agoThe i9's were quite awful. I had one for a work laptop. The fans ran constantly and it still felt like a hot plate. And ran slow due to a combination of throttling and corporate security software that added tons of overhead.
- talldayo 2y agoThe i9 destroys the performance of itself. It's very well-known that Apple undervolted their i9 models and even still couldn't engineer proper cooling for them. You can still get a sizable increase in performance running the same chip in a properly-cooled laptop instead of a Macbook. Everyone knows the i9 Mac is not some impressive Intel benchmark but instead the lowest point the Macbook has been at in a decade.