Mavericks on mid 2010 macbook pro?

sam.walker22

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 20, 2010
45
3
Wondering if anyone has installed mavericks on a 15 inch mid 2010 macbook pro (or similar?)

Hows the performance? I'm interested in the power efficient properties of mavericks, however if it's just going to slow me down a little bit (like lion did to snow leopard) then i'll probably just stick with mountain lion which is running fine for me at the moment.
 

denisvj

macrumors regular
Sep 9, 2006
164
15
I have it installed on my MB Pro 2010 .

So far runs fine but haven't tested for a long period , I have been busy but going to play with it on weekend .
 

ToniqR

macrumors member
Jul 26, 2011
75
0
Bath, UK
Hi, I too would be really interested in hearing how it will perform on a 2010 MBP. As nice as it is to buy a shiny new retina, I want to keep mine for as long as possible :)
 

davemc67

macrumors newbie
Apr 13, 2010
24
1
I am and to be fair it's pretty quick. Scrolling on Safari is much better than in Mountain Lion. Only issue I've had so far is that Maps will not load.
I found the same maps wouldn't load, turns out the fault lies with the dynamic graphics switching

If you use gfx card status tool and set the graphics to either integrated or discreet graphics Maps loads, as soon as you switch it to dynamic graphics Maps fails to load.

Hope this helps
 

Wuiffi

macrumors 6502a
Oct 6, 2011
686
78
Since 10.8.3 nearly every program (like twitter, little snitch etc) force the dedicated graphic chip in the 2010 mbp model (making it run hot and loud). Any improvements seen with mavericks?
 

buffaloseven

macrumors newbie
Jun 16, 2013
2
0
Since 10.8.3 nearly every program (like twitter, little snitch etc) force the dedicated graphic chip in the 2010 mbp model (making it run hot and loud). Any improvements seen with mavericks?
The latest update to 10.8 fixed that problem for most software on my 15" 2010 MBP.
 

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,425
287
Since 10.8.3 nearly every program (like twitter, little snitch etc) force the dedicated graphic chip in the 2010 mbp model (making it run hot and loud). Any improvements seen with mavericks?
I'm on 15" 2010 MBP. On Mavericks even Adium, Hardware Monitor, and HardwareGrowler are forcing discrete graphics...
 
17" Mid 2010 MBP with NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M 512MB graphics and integrated Intel graphics. Mavericks runs great on it considering its a beta release. Slight improvement in battery life but nothing drastic. Maps loads with no problems and no need to switch modes in GFX Status. Aside from bombermine.com I'm not much of a gamer so I can't comment on that.
 

bolen

macrumors 6502
Jul 22, 2008
351
0
Sweden
Hardware installation support wise Mavericks currently supports all configurations currently supported by Mountain Lion.

Performance wise my current impression (running a 2011 MBP) is that Mavericks is noticeably more responsive and smooth compared to Mountain Lion. I'm really looking forward to the final Mavericks version!
 

ptesone

macrumors newbie
Oct 27, 2009
26
4
running it on a Mid 2011 MPB (and iMac also Mid 2011) than runs Mavericks real well *BUT* I ran into a bug when doing quick preview on say, a folder full of pics/videos- when selecting all and viewing each file (using up and down arrow)
it starts to hang on the video files and bog the system down. . .

and on my iMac (not MBP) my iMovie faces and skin all look purple. . .

those are the only two issues I've seen w/Mavericks Developer Release #3 OS X 10.9 (13A510d) so far

The MacBook Pro battery lasts just as long as it did as Snow Leopard/Lion/ML
real happy w/the performance- can't wait for final release! :D
 

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,425
287
Had Mavericks on my 15" mid MBP for almost a month... Battery life no change, since most of my apps requires discrete graphics. There are certain simple apps like Adium still triggers discrete graphics, making energy savers sort of nothing to brag about.

Yesterday I had a major problem with one of my third party app that required me to clean install SL, and oh boy I missed the snappiness of SL. Lion, Mountain Lion, and even Mavericks do not have the system responsiveness traits of SL, not even close. I really wonder what Apple did wrong in this department.

Day One, a journaling app that I used most, launched almost instantaneously after a click on the Dock with the icon bounced just once. This is on SL. Whereas on Mavericks, sad to say it takes a 3 to 4 bounces before the interface appears. And now it has this weird bug that loses connection to DropBox whenever Day One wanted to access my journal file, and then hangs.

Bear in mind that my MBP has an SSD plonked in, SL flies, but Mavericks really behaves like SL on HDD instead.
 

antoniogra7

macrumors member
Jun 12, 2012
73
13
Had Mavericks on my 15" mid MBP for almost a month... Battery life no change, since most of my apps requires discrete graphics. There are certain simple apps like Adium still triggers discrete graphics, making energy savers sort of nothing to brag about.

Yesterday I had a major problem with one of my third party app that required me to clean install SL, and oh boy I missed the snappiness of SL. Lion, Mountain Lion, and even Mavericks do not have the system responsiveness traits of SL, not even close. I really wonder what Apple did wrong in this department.

Day One, a journaling app that I used most, launched almost instantaneously after a click on the Dock with the icon bounced just once. This is on SL. Whereas on Mavericks, sad to say it takes a 3 to 4 bounces before the interface appears. And now it has this weird bug that loses connection to DropBox whenever Day One wanted to access my journal file, and then hangs.

Bear in mind that my MBP has an SSD plonked in, SL flies, but Mavericks really behaves like SL on HDD instead.
It's Mavericks also a clean install? Based on what you said, mine is faster and it's a 13" MBP with HDD.
 

Eithanius

macrumors 65816
Nov 19, 2005
1,425
287
It's Mavericks also a clean install? Based on what you said, mine is faster and it's a 13" MBP with HDD.
Upgrade directly from Snow Leopard. Otherwise some of my apps won't install properly. Also tried clean install of Mavericks previously, seems to be more flaky with it. Mavericks with SL foundation seems more stable.
 

Kodiak2012

macrumors newbie
Sep 10, 2011
1
0
Mavericks Compatibility List

This is directly from Apple's website:

Mac models compatible with OS X Mavericks

- iMac (Mid 2007 or newer)
- MacBook (Late 2008 Aluminum, or Early 2009 or newer)
- MacBook Pro (Mid/Late 2007 or newer)
- MacBook Air (Late 2008 or newer)
- Mac mini (Early 2009 or newer)
- Mac Pro (Early 2008 or newer)
- Xserve (Early 2009)