honestly, it just feels good; as if, for example, ventura et al worked to surf the web, while sonoma flies thru it. hope that continues to be the case...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sonoma is crazy fast...
- Thread starter macpro2000
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Seems strange doesn't it? I mean the last time we had performance improvements like this Apple made a point about it in their keynotes, here it's just a nice surprise.
Apple clearly wanted to devote the bulk of the keynote to Vision Pro, which by default left less time for everything else. This is one reason I find the Platform State of the Union to often be more informative than the keynote.
I'm fortunate enough to have MacBook Pro 16" (Intel) with 64GB RAM that I no longer use for work to install beta software on. I've not seriously tested Sonoma thus far, but in the casual use of the machine I've felt like it was surprisingly useable.
Generally, beta versions of the next OS run slow and exhibit buggy behavior, but Sonoma feels at least as sprightly as Ventura. It's hard for me to say just how much because no matter what, it runs significantly slower than Ventura on my Mac Studio, and that's what I'm used to using all day every day. Still, I'm optimistic about the final release of Sonoma.
Generally, beta versions of the next OS run slow and exhibit buggy behavior, but Sonoma feels at least as sprightly as Ventura. It's hard for me to say just how much because no matter what, it runs significantly slower than Ventura on my Mac Studio, and that's what I'm used to using all day every day. Still, I'm optimistic about the final release of Sonoma.
I haven't tried Sonoma yet, but everything seems pretty much instant already in Ventura on my M2 MBA. Things will be even more instant?
M2 MBA
I tried Sonoma day 1 and two day ago I rollback to Ventura and Last night I install Sonoma again.
for me Sonoma is more instantable smooth animation , instant app and great performance
but some app have bug VScode edge freezing somtime and memmory leak for me I can ignore If all sytem smooth
Sonoma does appear to be a more responsive OS overall. While there are some apps which still need an update or two for the new OS to maximize performance, it's also one of the most stable first Betas I've ever used.
I installed the betas on all my other devices. I would with the Mac too, but rely on Crossover for one of my apps. Whom already publicly stated they won't release any Sonoma related updates yet (Crossover usually breaks every year with new macOS updates). There is a way to get Crossover to work with some files from the Game Porting Toolkit, I'm sort of eager to try, but if it doesn't work, I'm not sure what I'd do. My application might even run directly from the GPT too - not sure if this is just for games or not?
I know how to rollback iOS updates, is macOS as easy as restoring a Time Machine backup? I probably won't update to Sonoma right now, but just curious.
I'm of the same mind. Unlike what appears to be most everyone here at MR, I have had no major issues with Ventura. It runs beautifully on my Mac Studio. Of course there are minor glitches and/or annoyances, but that is to be expected with an OS.
That being said, it is likely to run about the same or possibly slightly faster under Sonoma when Apple makes the final release available (the betas will always run slower than the final release, no matter what Mac you have).
i was running fine in ventura (still am, on my mini). sonoma (on my M2 air) is definitely faster. my hope is it stays that way...
I understand that macOS was made compatible for Apple Silicon, but could the performance improvements relate to it finally being free of Intel-era code?
Given that Apple still supports some Intel-based Macs with Sonoma, it is not free of x86 code.
Yeah, but I was unsure if the version that ships with ASi Macs differs any more now to Big Sur and Ventura.
You are comparing apples to oranges. v6.1 has ~5% Higher single core and ~10% higher multicore scores than 6.0. They should not be compared.
what? so geekbench is faster, not the results running the same mac on the 2 different OSes? not getting your point... 🤔
You're comparing Geekbench 6.0 scores against Geekbench 6.1 (see bottom of the screenshots).
i know, i updated geekbench from 6.0 t0 6.1. and that means that...?
EDIT: seriously, am trying to follow this: does that mean that Geekbench is now... more accurate? more inventive with its reports? how does updating the app change the information it is providing? 🤔
ah, got it. that's... nuts, makes me question the accuracy of the app in general. thanks for the information 👍
Why? Just from the nature of what the app does, it makes complete sense only to compare results from the same versions. Heck, they even have the scores divided into different sub sections on the web site to make it clear.
if an app that measures core values reads them differently with different versions... how is that usable information? why should a point update give me different results? the tools should get better, but the results should be consistent.
because they update the benchmarking mechanism to include new instructions, cpu features, architectural changes, and fix bugs.
Its always been the same with all benchmarking tools, going back decades, on all platforms.
It's not reading core values that changed, it is the benchmarking process itself along with the resulting scores.