What have you done with an early Intel recently?

[ToniCH]

So, the Mac Pro 2009 (4.1->5.1) I mentioned previously. I did buy it. Specs: X5660x2, 16GB RAM, 240SSD, HD4870, 10.13.x. Very clean machine.

I upgraded the RAM to 64GB 1333 ECC -sticks I had in my box of old memory. Went smoothly. Also updated the 10.13 with all Apple had to offer.

I'll continue this in the Mac Pro -section where its maybe more at home.

 

[B S Magnet]

So, the Mac Pro 2009 (4.1->5.1) I mentioned previously. I did buy it. Specs: X5660x2, 16GB RAM, 240SSD, HD4870, 10.13.x. Very clean machine.

I upgraded the RAM to 64GB 1333 ECC -sticks I had in my box of old memory. Went smoothly. Also updated the 10.13 with all Apple had to offer.

I'll continue this in the Mac Pro -section where its maybe more at home.

The classic Mac Pro is a rare series which has a home either here on Early Intel Macs or over there.

It’s up to you!

 

[eyoungren]

The classic Mac Pro is a rare series which has a home either here on Early Intel Macs or over there.

It’s up to you!

I'll stay here with my own 2009 MacPro.

 

[B S Magnet]

I'll stay here with my own 2009 MacPro.

I rather like the company here, if I may be so bold to say.

 

[ToniCH]

Yeah, I like the people here too (same guys in G5 section) but I posted twice here about the Mac Pro, which I consider early Intel, hoping for some comments, advice etc. but nobody (but VivienM, thank you for that) was interested and/or had time to comment. All you guys passed me by without commenting. And its alright, you don't have to get involved with every case you see here in the forum.

So, I thought Mac Pro -section might get me some more interested people with Pro-specific know how, which I personally don't have yet, and it did in short time. There I got some problems resolved in no time. So, me transferring my MP thing to another section was purely because I needed help. Hope you didn't get offended by that.

Some of these machines can really fit in many sections, its really difficult sometimes to figure out which section is the best one in each case.

 

[B S Magnet]

Yeah, I like the people here too (same guys in G5 section) but I posted twice here about the Mac Pro, which I consider early Intel, hoping for some comments, advice etc. but nobody (but VivienM, thank you for that) was interested and/or had time to comment. All you guys passed me by without commenting. And its alright, you don't have to get involved with every case you see here in the forum.

So, I thought Mac Pro -section might get me some more interested people with Pro-specific know how, which I personally don't have yet, and it did in short time. There I got some problems resolved in no time. So, me transferring my MP thing to another section was purely because I needed help. Hope you didn't get offended by that.

Some of these machines can really fit in many sections, its really difficult sometimes to figure out which section is the best one in each case.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but as I don’t have a Mac Pro at this time, anything better than general info isn’t really something I can deliver.

But in that sense — that there are multiple forums designed around different metrics (product line x and temporal line y) — I do think the mods should consider, as with all the other Mac lines, reserving the Mac Pro forum for, specifically, the post-classic, post-2012 models (the 6,1; 7,1; and 8,1) and allow and/or move all Xeon-based Xserves and classic Mac Pros over to here, where a lot of experience across different models, within that window of product development time, resides.

 

[TheShortTimer]

Some of these machines can really fit in many sections, its really difficult sometimes to figure out which section is the best one in each case.

I've received help in the Mac Pro forum - and some of it came from a Early Intel/PPC regular.

One major positive of the Early Intel forum is that most of us won't tell people who ask for help/advice that their machines are useless and that the solution is to buy a newer/new Mac.

 

[B S Magnet]

I've received help in the Mac Pro forum - and some of it came from a Early Intel/PPC regular.

One major positive of the Early Intel forum is that most of us won't tell people who ask for help/advice that their machines are useless and that the solution is to buy a newer/new Mac.

“‘Oh, your no longer supported Mac? Bcuz Apple doesn’t support it, we don’t help with advice other than buying advice. Buy a recently used model, a refurb, or pony up to the Apple Store in your town and buy new, as Cupertino intended you to lolmao…’ Posted by @luv2NuMacs2018 Messages: 10,413 Reaction score: 983”

 

[VivienM]

Some of these machines can really fit in many sections, its really difficult sometimes to figure out which section is the best one in each case.

Here is a thought - maybe it should be broken out by software...

Snow Leopard is definitely early Intel. I would be hesitant to call High Sierra running on the same hardware "early Intel"... or really, anything vintage, when it is still actively supported (at least for a few more months) by Chrome and Firefox and the current versions of a reasonable amount of other third-party software. But Snow Leopard, honestly, that feels almost as vintage as a PPC machine, complete with the struggles to find a usable web browser.

 

[theMarble]

Snow Leopard is definitely early Intel. I would be hesitant to call High Sierra running on the same hardware "early Intel"... or really, anything vintage, when it is still actively supported (at least for a few more months) by Chrome and Firefox and the current versions of a reasonable amount of other third-party software. But Snow Leopard, honestly, that feels almost as vintage as a PPC machine, complete with the struggles to find a usable web browser.

Lion through Mavericks are in a "grey area". They have modern browsers (Chromium Legacy and SeaLion), but are still well within the Early Intel era, especially considering that some 2006 Macs can run up to Mavericks with NPF. On the other hand though, Mavericks can be run on a Mid 2014 MBP, which I don't think anyone considers Early Intel.

 

[B S Magnet]

Here is a thought - maybe it should be broken out by software...

There are already forums dedicated to each major version of macOS and OS X. The ones which get much activity are the latest three supported by Apple. Older iterations, additionally, don’t really discuss things like the dosdude1 patches or OCLP.

Moreover, with each major version walled away from each other, there isn’t really enduring community cultivation coalescing around those major versions. At this point, that puts up at around twenty or so OS-oriented forums and counting.

Snow Leopard is definitely early Intel. I would be hesitant to call High Sierra running on the same hardware "early Intel"... or really, anything vintage, when it is still actively supported (at least for a few more months) by Chrome and Firefox

“Early Intel” doesn’t mean “decrepit and unsupported by software made by third-party application makers”. And that I can use an early 2008 MBP runningn OCLP-patched Big Sur or Monterey doesn’t make that MBP a “late Intel Mac”.

and the current versions of a reasonable amount of other third-party software. But Snow Leopard, honestly, that feels almost as vintage as a PPC machine, complete with the struggles to find a usable web browser.

Snow Leopard is, because of dylibs and frameworks brought in with Lion, running into an issue of being keyholed between PowerPC-designed OS X browsers and later OS X browsers. It is why there are legacy Chromium and Mozilla-based browsers available for Lion which are not for Snow Leopard.

But the root of how forums are laid out is not hard to distinguish: a forum is little without the coalescing of members who become regulars to a fairly stable forum whose pre-designed shelf life isn’t, well, one or three years.

 

[B S Magnet]

Lion through Mavericks are in a "grey area". They have modern browsers (Chromium Legacy and SeaLion), but are still well within the Early Intel era, especially considering that some 2006 Macs can run up to Mavericks with NPF.

A majority of systems I have defined elsewhere as squarely in the “early Intel” camp are systems for which Lion through Mavericks were designed to be run officially (and predominantly). That includes Macs going all the way back to 2006 June 2007. Heck, even El Capitan runs on 2006 and 2007 Macs, as intended by Apple.

This is why I try to limit or avoid entirely an emphasis on OSes and focus more on the design, components, and features (or lack thereto) bundled with the hardware, when trying to assess whether a model qualifies as “early” or “late” Intel. At this time, I haven’t found a reliable way to distinguish a third camp called “middle Intel” on either end of what would be those bounds.

 

[theMarble]

This is why I try to limit or avoid entirely an emphasis on OSes and focus more on the design, components, and features (or lack thereto) bundled with the hardware, when trying to assess whether a model qualifies as “early” or “late” Intel. At this time, I haven’t found a reliable way to distinguish a third camp called “middle Intel” on either end of what would be those bounds.

These days, I personally consider anything Sandy Bridge or older to be Early Intel, as Ivy Bridge/2012 machines have Metal-capable GPUs, meaning that they can run patched macOS releases with tolerable graphics performance, plus that is when the Retina MBP came around and the thin iMac's.

Mid Intel is generally (in my opinion) anything that is too old to natively run the latest macOS releases, but is still new enough to be a capable, performant main Mac. I would consider this to be Ivy Bridge-Kaby Lake, through I don't like the Butterfly-era machines to be in the same category as the lovely 2012-2015 Retina's .

Late Intel is simply anything that can run the latest macOS releases (Sonoma) without any patchers, so Coffee Lake/2018 and newer.

At some point though, all Intel Macs are going to end up in the same "old Macs" category.

 

[B S Magnet]

These days, I personally consider anything Sandy Bridge or older to be Early Intel, as Ivy Bridge/2012 machines have Metal-capable GPUs, meaning that they can run patched macOS releases with tolerable graphics performance, plus that is when the Retina MBP came around and the thin iMac's.

Mid Intel is generally (in my opinion) anything that is too old to natively run the latest macOS releases, but is still new enough to be a capable, performant main Mac. I would consider this to be Ivy Bridge-Kaby Lake, through I don't like the Butterfly-era machines to be in the same category as the lovely 2012-2015 Retina's .

The main issue with a “mid” distinction along those lines is it is a moving window.

Late Intel is simply anything that can run the latest macOS releases (Sonoma) without any patchers, so Coffee Lake/2018 and newer.

At some point though, all Intel Macs are going to end up in the same "old Macs" category.

Yes, and we still have a discrete PowerPC Macs forum (namely, for New World PowerPC models) and a discrete “Early Intel Macs” forum, as well.

The former covers almost eight years of models, from iMac G3 Rev A., to A1138/A1139/A1117s. The years I noted in the above-linked post also hits around that eight years (2006 to early 2013) — as does the window for the late Intel Macs (late 2013 to 2021) — which introduce a whole battery of Apple-led features to mark them as fundamentally different from other Intel-based computers of their comparable day (such as, for instance, use of that T2 chip).

 

[TheShortTimer]

At some point though, all Intel Macs are going to end up in the same "old Macs" category.

All Macs, Silicon models included - are inevitably destined for the "old Macs category".

 

[B S Magnet]

All Macs, Silicon models included - are inevitably destined for the "old Macs category".

“Your M2 Ultra is obsolete. How do you like dem Apples?”

 

[GMShadow]

These days, I personally consider anything Sandy Bridge or older to be Early Intel, as Ivy Bridge/2012 machines have Metal-capable GPUs, meaning that they can run patched macOS releases with tolerable graphics performance, plus that is when the Retina MBP came around and the thin iMac's.

Mid Intel is generally (in my opinion) anything that is too old to natively run the latest macOS releases, but is still new enough to be a capable, performant main Mac. I would consider this to be Ivy Bridge-Kaby Lake, through I don't like the Butterfly-era machines to be in the same category as the lovely 2012-2015 Retina's .

Late Intel is simply anything that can run the latest macOS releases (Sonoma) without any patchers, so Coffee Lake/2018 and newer.

At some point though, all Intel Macs are going to end up in the same "old Macs" category.

On the contrary, the butterfly Macs are very mid, as the kids would say these days. 😄


It'll finally work out once they're all obsolete. My guess is the split will be "easily upgradeable" and "not easily upgradable", with the iMacs kinda falling in weird middle grounds.

 

[theMarble]

On the contrary, the butterfly Macs are very mid, as the kids would say these days. 😄

In my books, the butterfly Macs are near if not the lowest you can go, but that discussion would be going off-topic here.

 

[ToniCH]

One major positive of the Early Intel forum is that most of us won't tell people who ask for help/advice that their machines are useless and that the solution is to buy a newer/new Mac.

Yes, that is true. Some do not understand at all that others like to use old machines because they like them, they do all that is needed and do it well, are fast enough, have a hobby with vintage machines or any other of dozen reasons imaginable. Its not always about money but that can be a perfectly valid reason too.

I personally are one of those who like old gear (computers, cars, stereos etc.). My use is such that I have absolutely no benefit from 3x faster new machine - I cannot write or browse any faster as I do with older machines. And I think performance/quality vs. price is best in 2009-2014 machines currently. And those I use with my work and most other uses too. I do have much older machines too but those are purely for hobby use and tinkering. I don't think I have any newer computers than 2014 unless Raspberry Pis are considered computers?

Another thing is money. I refuse to submit to planned obsolescence and ever bloating OS and software. So, I jumped out of the rat race of "I must buy a newer machine every 3 years to be able to use a word processor or web browser" in 2009 when I bought my last new machines. Now machines with i7 processors or equivalent, enough ram, quick drives are plenty fast for everything I do. That combined with fast enough internet-connection and I am happy.

Snow Leopard is definitely early Intel. I would be hesitant to call High Sierra running on the same hardware "early Intel"... or really, anything vintage, when it is still actively supported (at least for a few more months) by Chrome and Firefox and the current versions of a reasonable amount of other third-party software. But Snow Leopard, honestly, that feels almost as vintage as a PPC machine, complete with the struggles to find a usable web browser.

I personally cannot see "Early Intel" saying anything about OS or any other software. IMHO its purely a hardware thing.

I see it this way: Apple introduced Intel Macs in 2006, now its 2023 (=17 years). In my opinion Macs made up to about 2012 are early. But around at that time things started to change and newer macs are different from the older ones. For example repairability was reduced with glue everywhere, hardware upgrade possibilities were made worse etc.

Ps. PPC-machines became officially obsolete 7 years after its discontinuation, ie. 2013. One could argue that Intel Macs made before this date were early. But I don't want to argue.

 

[ToniCH]

Today I got bored and took my Apple Radeon HD 4870 apart for service. The fan was super noisy and irritating. Loads of small screws to get all that apart.

First I thought it was the fan touching the casing but it was infact dry bearing. These fans do not have the lube-hole in the back, one has to pop it apart. I then applied some grease and put it back together. I reapplied thermal paste and cleaned the board while I was in there. Old paste was rock hard after 14 years.

The operation was success and now it no more makes any extra noises at all. 👍🏻 😎

 

[Tratkazir_the_1st]

I see thermal pads for VRAM. Are they same or new now?

 

[ToniCH]

I left them be, they were still soft and probably work ok. My objective was to get the fan fixed. Everything else was something I did as the need appeared.

When I started I didn't know I have to separate the cooling block assembly from the card. I thought I could get the red top casing out and then remove the fan. But the cooling element and the fan are between the top casing and that red plate with the pads, which needs to be removed too. Basically the cooling system is a separate assembly from the GPU card itself, bolted on top of it. And then there is a black bracket thing behind the card additionally and the card is sandwitched between the bracket and the cooling unit.

The paste on the processor was so bad I didn't want to put it back together without renewing it. This GPU will be my "backup" GPU when my new one arrives so it will probably mostly sit in a box for the next 14 years.

 

[chaosbunny]

Donated 10 bucks to the OCLP team.

 

[DCBassman]

My wife and I do house/dog/cat sitting, sometimes for many weeks. My original thought in getting an old iMac was to use it, running Linux, instead of a tiny Windows notebook. This idea was scuppered by acquiring a 27". No way I'm carting that around...
But a 21.5 might be feasible for long stays. So I may offload the Mac Pro and grab a 2011 iMac 21.5 for this purpose. I know, it's hardly what you'd call portable, and me being me would *still* have the little Windows notebook along as backup...
You can never have too much backup.

 

[Michael.S]

I recently acquired another early 2008 17“ MBP with that beautiful 1900x1200 resolution and a GeForce with 512MB + max specced out RAM bays with 6GB
Only the 2.6 GHz C2Duo is missing and having that standard 2.5GHz instead.
But I guess I can live with it

My first one died early this year and I was planning on replacing the GPU but this new was less than the GPU replacement +better Screen and more RAM.

Anyway,
I installed chromium on it as it still has ElCapitan on it.
I plan to upgrade.
Shall I go for HighSierra or Mojave instead?

Catalina is out of question for me.