If they were worth 0 like Gudi says, I'd pick up an intel iMac Pro or 5K iMac in an instant if I could find one cheap!
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.
I am confused...
- Thread starter JW Pepper
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have a 2015 5k Mac. Its a really good machine, but obviously in 2023, its rather long in the tooth. I'm planning on reformatting the drive, and donating it.
No, I said the Intel inside processor in those old iMacs is worth zero. Everybody has an old CPU and nobody wants one. It's the 5K display and all-in-one form factor, which gives old iMacs their remaining value.
What would you pay me for the cardbox full of the innards of a 2015 iMac without display and enclosure? Not that much, I suppose. And that's what will happen to the resale value of old Mac Studios. Future Apple Silicon Macs will outperform them in multi-core benchmarks and they don't even come with a nice display attached.
Last edited:
Intel and AMD still make really fast CPUs, and for some workflows (and games!) there is no alternative to x86 PC. Intel, especially, made some great CPUs this generation.
With that said - both of my PCs sound like air conditioning when they are idle, while my MacBook Pro is baaaaarely audible when at maximum load. Also, I can’t keep my Legion laptop on my lap because of the heat. I’m not exaggerating.
The reason Intel, AMD and Nvidia are so fast is partly due to great designs, but also, due to high power consumption. We really should start expecting quiet and cool devices, with the exception of those intended for really taxing workflows.
You're making broad strokes with regarding PCs. I have an 11th gen desktop, and its whisper quiet. The fans barely spin up or make any sounds. Playing games, the fans are not noticable. Are there PCs that are loud? Of course, particularly gaming laptops but that doesn't mean PCs in general are loud.
Now I built the desktop with quietness in mind. It air cooled, using a NH-D15 for the CPU, with 140mm fans pulling in air from the bottom and exhausting it to the top. My temps are easily in the 70c range while pushing the machine. YMMV with regard to desktops, but if build it yourself, then you're in control and can design it anyway that best fits your needs.
Last edited:
That's probably not fast enough for what I want, but it might be tempting.
I almost bet that the last Mac's I keep will be Intel Macs...
Its quite pokey at this point, but I hated to give it up, so there it sat. I'm ready to clear space up and declutter so its going to find a new home soonThat's probably not fast enough for what I want, but it might be tempting.
I almost bet that the last Mac's I keep will be Intel Macs...
Good point.
I'd probably pay you nothing for that, but a working one, I'd pay for. Intel Mac's are far more useful to me and even some of the iMac Pro's with 18 core xeon's are faster mult-core processing than the M1. I have a Mac Studio Max, but it's really nothing special performance-wise, and not as useful as my Intel Mac Mini for the work I do.
Performance isn't the main quality I look for -- how much of what I can do with it, is. Though performance is important within that criteria!
Yep, nothing says heat is not a problem like one of the most insane coolers on the market.
Wife is still using a 2015 w/ i5 and 32 GB RAM. She won't let it go - I've offered to get her a new setup but she is attached to the thing. It's not insanely slow IMO - few times I've done things like set up new wifi or get Time Machine running it's been okay. I think the RAM is helping - miss the days when we could add our own RAM.
That's way too much for an i7 of that age, I want something with that display though, but I might as well buy a Studio display for cheaper. 8gb of RAM is way too little for that price!
Especially when you can get an iMac Pro from OWC, Apple Refurb, for $2199.
Used & Refurbished 27-inch Apple iMac Pro (2017) from OWC
Save money on a used 2017 27-inch iMac Pro professionally refurbished and inspected by Apple Certified Technicians. View our unbeatable prices online.
eshop.macsales.com
Or this for $2580
Used & Refurbished 27-inch Apple iMac (2020) from OWC
Save money on a used 2020 27-inch iMac professionally refurbished and inspected by Apple Certified Technicians. View our unbeatable prices online.
eshop.macsales.com
That logic makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. That's like saying "My parents stopped giving me gifts on Christmas, which must mean that Santa Claus got held up".
In single-core scores, yes. In multi-core scores, no. In fact, I don't think anyone would make the claim that an iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, 2020) with an i9 and beefed up graphics would be schooled by an iMac (24-inch, M1, 2021) unilaterally. Is the M1 more thermally efficient than the i9? You betcha. But the i9 is still beefier and stronger. And, mind you, I'm only talking about the base M1, not the M1 Max (which absolutely destroys that i9).
Again, you clearly don't understand the used Mac market works.
What a hyperbolic statement to make! If an Intel iMac was anywhere near hot enough to heat my house, I'd stop paying the heating bill!
You DO realize that Intel's things go into the CPUs that power pretty much every service that you use, right? Consumer electronics devices are far from everything. There are also scores upon scores of Intel processors purchased and deployed in computers all across the world every year. Just because they do not produce ARM processors for phones and tablets doesn't mean that they're a dying company. Just that you only see the consumer tech world and nothing else. Open your eyes.
Personal computing is far from all computing. You do have cloud computing which is arguably more dominant. Also, every app you use that requires the Internet to function. Powered by a SERVER. Most servers? Still powered by Intel. And the consumer CPUs you'd have found in something like a 2-port 13-inch MacBook Pro sold prior to November 2020? A third the cost of each of those Intel chips. But please do tell me about how personal computing is only about battery-powered devices these days.
Because Intel suffered from serious mismanagement from 2015 to 2021 and their manufacturing business suffered as a result. Plain and simple.
That logic doesn't follow at all. Try again!
Intel didn't fall from grace in 2007. Intel was on top of the world until about 2014. That's when things started to seriously unravel.
BRO! HE LITERALLY QUOTED YOU SAYING THAT!
(A) That's inaccurate. (B) That's not how the resale value is determined by anyone other than you. (C) The world doesn't even come close to revolving around you and your opinions.
No, but sell each of those parts individually and you'll make a fair amount of money. Browse the used Mac parts market sometime and you might learn a thing or two.
No, they'll devalue the same as other Macs do with or without a screen. The only difference is that the shipping cost won't be as insane. Again, a built-in display doesn't change or affect the resale value. I know you believe it does, but you are wrong. Plain and simple.
Which are designed specifically for overclocking! Overclocking is when you take a CPU and force more power through it so that it can run faster. As as side effect it runs hotter, hence the beefier fan. The things you miss about computing when you blindly hate on PCs and Windows...
Haha! 😂😆 You must be new to Apple, if Santa Clause being held up is inconceivable to you. My most beloved thread in the forum is called The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming and it started on December 2013. Those poor fellas received only three Christmas gifts in ten years and the first one killed the quad-core option. Waiting for an update is an inherent part of the Mac user experience. That's why the Buyer's Guide exists. iPhone users know there's something new for Christmas every year, but us Mac peasants.
I think I said "rivaled" not "schooled" and you conveniently ignore my argument, that it's the cheapest AS iMac which rivals in performance with the most expensive Intel iMac from the year before. And yes, single-core performance is an important part of computer performance.
It's me, Hi, I'm the problem, it's me.
So your house has terrible insulation. How does that change the fact that Intel draws four times the energy?
You want a second opinion on used Mac prices? Here you go:
Note, how Luke never forgets to mention the display you get for that money.
Last edited:
Most of your reply reads like you're intoxicated on drugs I wish I had. What you say makes no sense and is inaccurate and ignorant when it does. You have a good rest of your whatever, I think I've exhausted the entertainment value had by debating with you. Cheers.
So you surrender! Well, you never made a single argument for why the display isn’t important to the value of a used Mac. You just claimed to know it better. 🤷
What is very strange is that this was not always the case.
I specifically recall using one of THE earliest LCDs, an 11” ViewSonic, connected over VGA to a PowerBook 3400 and dual display occurred automatically with no need for software or fiddling about. Just connect and boom just worked. Of course this is with system os 7.
So when did font become so screwed up in macOS? Don’t recall 3rd party monitors having such issues from Puma to Panther.
When did Windows decide that low-ppi displays were good enough?
We've already given you the answer. Microsoft was too ambitious with their support for high-DPI displays (rather than focusing on 2x like the Apple retina displays, Microsoft was pushing for any scaling factor). Third-party developers didn't update their software, or at least didn't early enough. (Doesn't help that you probably needed or at least could heavily benefit from Vista/7... at a time when third-party Windows software had to support XP) So people are scared of scaling on Windows. Corporate IT buyers do not have time to spend on testing this - the low-DPI display is more than good enough for the intended use, so they'll just keep buying more low-DPI displays. And no one other than some corporate IT and gamers buy high-priced/high-quality peripherals for Windows machines - a lot of consumer retailers like worst buy don't even stock them.
Microsoft's Surface tablets have had high-DPI displays for years and years now... as have other high-end Windows laptops.
And Apple's focus on 2x, while a genius shortcut that drove high-DPI adoption on laptops and iOS devices, is exactly the problem with external monitors. 2x means a "4K" monitor should be about 21-24", just like on the iMacs. A bigger monitor should be 5-6K resolution and... well, what DisplayPort standard do you need to do more than 4K resolution? How many >4K monitors are on the market? So you get people trying to use, say, a 27" or a 32" 4K monitor and you are now outside Apple's magical 2x zone and... that's where I think you get into trouble. I don't think macOS will do 150-175% scaling on one of those monitors particularly nicely.
My guess: when Apple adopted the 2x scaling model for retina high-DPI things. There are a couple of great blog posts by some dude out there who did a lot of investigating and thinking on this issue - the basic problem is that there are very few external monitors that are the right size/resolution for retina-style 2x scaling. And there are a LOT of 4K monitors, particularly at 27-32", that really need something other than 2x scaling which macOS is not great at.
Same time Apple did - long ago. Remember in the past low-ppi displays were all we had. All OSes supported them. When hi res displays showd up, Apple, in their typical style, dropped support for low-res displays and Microsoft did not. So, now Windows support all displays well, while macOS supports just a fraction of available monitors which hhas these consequences:
- Apple customers have to pay higher prices for the monitors (or live with horrible PQ)
- Apple customers have very limited choice of monitors form factors. This hurts especially badly those who would like to have wide monitors.