Yosemite performance over Mavericks

[PsykX]

When did they pull Memory Compression?

It was never pulled, the point was it was introduced in Mavericks and no feature such as "optimization feature" was introduced in Yosemite.

Technically, Yosemite's performance should be <= Mavericks' performance. The latest GeekBench benchmarks seem to prove the opposite though, but then I'm wondering why Apple hasn't mentioned anything about it.

 

[Michael Goff]

It was never pulled, the point was it was introduced in Mavericks and no feature such as "optimization feature" was introduced in Yosemite.

Technically, Yosemite's performance should be <= Mavericks' performance. The latest GeekBench benchmarks seem to prove the opposite though, but then I'm wondering why Apple hasn't mentioned anything about it.

Newer and better drivers?
More efficient UI?
Refined memory compression?

 

[rneglia]

I have a 2013 macbook air with haswell and it's noticeably faster than mavericks. And my battery life is lightly better.

I have the same machine. I've noticed a slight dip in battery life on Yosemite. I'm going to attribute this to it being in beta until the GM arrives.

 

[PsykX]

Newer and better drivers?
More efficient UI?
Refined memory compression?

If you're right, Apple's doing a wrong marketing out of this OS. Performance would be the first thing I'd market, probably even before their new interface. That's what people want the most out of their machine. Fact is, so far they haven't marketed Yosemite's performance at all, so I'd be surprised they have worked so much in this domain.

 

[bbfc]

If you're right, Apple's doing a wrong marketing out of this OS. Performance would be the first thing I'd market, probably even before their new interface. That's what people want the most out of their machine. Fact is, so far they haven't marketed Yosemite's performance at all, so I'd be surprised they have worked so much in this domain.

Mavericks was all about performance. Yosemite is all about the new UI and Continuty/Handoff. The underlying changes they made in Mavericks are still there.

----------

While it is true that it's beta software and still has a bunch of debug code and parts of code that isn't optimized yet, I don't see any technical reason why Yosemite's performance over Mavericks would be better.

Mavericks did bring a few features like Time Coalescing and Memory Compression that brought us more performance. Yosemite doesn't feature anything like that. Thus, Yosemite's performance will be equal to or worse than Mavericks. The use of translucency everywhere makes me think the latter.

A few is an understatement! Yosemite still features all of those, they just aren't new anymore so they don't shout about them.

 

[Michael Goff]

If you're right, Apple's doing a wrong marketing out of this OS. Performance would be the first thing I'd market, probably even before their new interface. That's what people want the most out of their machine. Fact is, so far they haven't marketed Yosemite's performance at all, so I'd be surprised they have worked so much in this domain.

Except "performance" isn't as exciting to talk about two years in a row. They want to get NEW Mac users, so they're going to play up the "it works with your iPhone" angle to capitalize on the fact that there are more iPhone users than Mac users.

 

[n-evo]

It's the same for me on my 2013 27-inch iMac.

 

[PsykX]

Except "performance" isn't as exciting to talk about two years in a row. They want to get NEW Mac users, so they're going to play up the "it works with your iPhone" angle to capitalize on the fact that there are more iPhone users than Mac users.

So they're not going to talk about performance at all ? That makes no sense, Apple is always the first in line to talk about performance and to add graphics all over the place on their website.

Until Apple shows me the contrary at their next Keynote, or on upcoming pages on their website, performance hasn't been addressed per se in Yosemite.

A few is an understatement! Yosemite still features all of those, they just aren't new anymore so they don't shout about them.

Of course they don't have to mention these features anymore, they were born in Mavericks. I can't believe I'm being misunderstood that much, I never said they had to talk about past features, I said that Yosemite doesn't feature anything (new) as big as this.

 

[yellowbunny]

Late 2008 MBP, upgraded to 8GB and SSD.

Runs Ok but visually lags, Mavericks ran much smoother.

 

[Michael Goff]

So they're not going to talk about performance at all ? That makes no sense, Apple is always the first in line to talk about performance and to add graphics all over the place on their website.

Until Apple shows me the contrary at their next Keynote, or on upcoming pages on their website, performance hasn't been addressed per se in Yosemite.


Of course they don't have to mention these features anymore, they were born in Mavericks. I can't believe I'm being misunderstood that much, I never said they had to talk about past features, I said that Yosemite doesn't feature anything (new) as big as this.

I think they might talk a little about it, but it definitely won't be the focus. All they have to do is throw it up on the website while every commercial talks about how well it works with your iPhone and iPad and iWatch when that comes out. I can't say why performance is better, and resource use is lower, on my MBA ... but it is.

To me, that's more important than them trumpeting it.

 

[smartalic34]

My battery life is maybe only 60% of what it was under Mavericks... not sure if a clean install would help, but I'll wait til the GM to see if it improves.

 

[jimmason]

It's about the same for me on an I5 mac mini with 4Gb of ram late 2012

 

[bbfc]

So they're not going to talk about performance at all ? That makes no sense, Apple is always the first in line to talk about performance and to add graphics all over the place on their website.

Until Apple shows me the contrary at their next Keynote, or on upcoming pages on their website, performance hasn't been addressed per se in Yosemite.


Of course they don't have to mention these features anymore, they were born in Mavericks. I can't believe I'm being misunderstood that much, I never said they had to talk about past features, I said that Yosemite doesn't feature anything (new) as big as this.

I suppose what else is there to add? Mavericks added a ton of new features designed to extend battery life and improve memory management. They may tweak these. Lion and Mountain Lion did not add any features that improved performance, and were never marketed as such.

 

[jeanlain]

Late 2008 MBP, upgraded to 8GB and SSD.

Runs Ok but visually lags, Mavericks ran much smoother.

Same Mac, same experience. Mission control is much less fluid, as well as window resizing and scrolling, depending on the app.

 

[MacMan988]

I have Yosemite installed on a late 2011 MBP and it feels a lot faster than Mavericks was.

 

[iBug2]

So they're not going to talk about performance at all ? That makes no sense, Apple is always the first in line to talk about performance and to add graphics all over the place on their website.

If Yosemite performs better than Mavericks they wouldn't mention just that as long as it does not have a new tech with a cool name that boosts performance.

 

[bbfc]

I have Yosemite installed on a late 2011 MBP and it feels a lot faster than Mavericks was.

My MBP does feel slightly quicker, though you can tell Yosemite is still in development.

 

[scrmtrey]

1. You cannot compare (for real) developing OS and updated OS.
2. They still tweak UI (rendering and presentation).
3. Safari is faster than 10.9, i agree with that.
4. Fresh install, major performance difference, than just upgrade, at least for now. Later when Yosemite will be final version , it will make no noticeable difference.
5. I believe that 8GB instead of 4GB, will boost performance.

I tried early version of Yosemite on MBP15 EARLY 2011 and with discrete GPU was ok. So the final version will be rocket.

 

[ssls6]

i have rmbp late 2013 base model 2.5ghz,4gb ram, 128gb ssd is there any better performance in speed in yosemite over maverics or its just new make up of osx?

Benchmarks like Geekbench 64 say no. Graphical benchmarks like Heaven 4 say no. Some applications like Safari do render faster from what I can tell. So what you do will definitely impact your perception.

 

[AustinIllini]

I don't think the comparison between a beta release and Mavericks is valid.

It's not. We don't know for sure if performance testing is performed before or after the beta.

My guess is they ran preliminary performance numbers to make sure they didn't totally hose something up, but the full performance analysis has yet to occur.

 

[kappaknight]

If you're right, Apple's doing a wrong marketing out of this OS. Performance would be the first thing I'd market, probably even before their new interface. That's what people want the most out of their machine. Fact is, so far they haven't marketed Yosemite's performance at all, so I'd be surprised they have worked so much in this domain.

It's not. We don't know for sure if performance testing is performed before or after the beta.

My guess is they ran preliminary performance numbers to make sure they didn't totally hose something up, but the full performance analysis has yet to occur.

Yeah, if they're still tweaking the UI/UX, and fixing bugs, they haven't even touched performance yet. It's probably starting from a more solid base, so that's always good, but with things like Airdrop, phone calls, and Handoff, there will be new challenges to face, and new problems to code around for performance.

Also, you don't market something unless there's significant, noticeable improvement over the previous iteration. When they debut new hardware, it's always 1.6x faster, or 3x faster, etc. If Yosemite in its current form is only 1 or 2% faster, then that's not really something to brag about. Besides, for the moment, they want you to focus on other elements like UI, compatibility, expected behaviors, and bugs.

 

[robertosh]

On a mid 2010 macbook white unibody runs very well (8gb and samsung 840 evo ssd) but not as fast as with Mavericks. I notice it mostly in Safari, loading the webpages is more fast, but the app seems sluggish clicking on links, buttons, etc.

I will try on my iMac, faster but without SSD and less RAM.

 

[teeejay]

Running the machine in the signature.

Yosemite seems more smooth, at least for me. I love the design. Safari is ridiculously fast. Only issues with Safari is CMD+T, creating a new tab, that is quite laggy. And opening bookmarks has a short delay.

Launcher is much faster.

Mission Control icon is terrible

The only real issue is battery life. But that's due to the beta version, they'll fix it on official release, hopefully.

I think, that Yosemite is quite an improvement over Mavericks.

 

[nikicampos]

Don't know if this is a placebo effect but my 13' MBP mid 2010 is running pretty good, even in beta state, it feels somehow faster and smoother, hopefully it will only get better.

I really think this OS could be as good as Snow Leopard, which I loved.

 

[LeoNatan]

Are you sure you are on beta 4? I installed from my developer code two days ago but I had to run through 3 updates in the App Store before it was fully upgraded. So the initial download was beta 1 even though I downloaded it 48 hours ago. I was a bit concerned when I started using it because it was super crappy for beta 4 (Opening menus had a visible delay, mission control felt like it was 10 FPS, web pages wouldn't load in Safari...), but now that I am updated it feels quite normal.

This is on a 2012 13" rMBP as well.

Yes, I am sure. I've been running Yosemite since DP1. I'll install later and see if DP5 is better.