Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Optimal OS version for Mid-2010 MB

M

Milchschokolade

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Nov 30, 2014
17
0
Hello,
I've recently obtained a Mid-2010 polycarbonate macbook (A1342 MC516*/A; aka MacBook 7,1). It has been upgraded to 8 gigs of RAM. What is the best OS version to run on this machine?

I am aware that it is capable of running Yosemite, but is that truly the best way to go for a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo machine?

I would be perfectly fine with an older OS if it meant better overall performance - less lag for example, or more stability. I do not mind paying for an upgrade/downgrade DVDs either. Clean install, fine by me. And yes, I am aware that the newest ones are free, while the older ones I have to order and pay for. The $20 or whatever it will take is not an issue.

I simply want the fastest and most stable system for this particular model. I can live without iCloud, don't need anything else that comes on any particular version. As long as I can install MS Word, Dropbox, Evernote, Endnote x7 and access the Internet (with all necessary plugins for browsing today) I'm fine.

Thanks for taking the time to read! :)
 
Hello,

IMO the best OS would be Mavericks 10.9.5.

I have installed Mav on a dozen of Macbooks 6,1 and 7,1, with 4 GB of RAM minimum, it works perfectly.
But I must say that all these Mac have a SSD (Crucial MX100 256 GB), not and HD.
 
Milchschokolade said:
Hello,
I've recently obtained a Mid-2010 polycarbonate macbook (A1342 MC516*/A; aka MacBook 7,1). It has been upgraded to 8 gigs of RAM. What is the best OS version to run on this machine?

I am aware that it is capable of running Yosemite, but is that truly the best way to go for a 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo machine?

I would be perfectly fine with an older OS if it meant better overall performance - less lag for example, or more stability. I do not mind paying for an upgrade/downgrade DVDs either. Clean install, fine by me. And yes, I am aware that the newest ones are free, while the older ones I have to order and pay for. The $20 or whatever it will take is not an issue.

I simply want the fastest and most stable system for this particular model. I can live without iCloud, don't need anything else that comes on any particular version. As long as I can install MS Word, Dropbox, Evernote, Endnote x7 and access the Internet (with all necessary plugins for browsing today) I'm fine.

Thanks for taking the time to read! :)
Click to expand...

With a SSD, as Bruno09 said, the best version is Mavericks 10.9.x.

Without a SSD, the best option is Snow Leopard, perhaps modded to 64bit (I did it on my Late-09 when I had it and benchmarks improved a little bit).

I have Yosemite on my Late-09 MB (8GB+EVO SSD) and I think it is a bit slower. It does a lot of alpha blending/blur effects which take more graphics resources.
 
Thanks for the feedback. Yes this machine has a stock HD, and an upgrade to SSD is not planned.

So Snow Leo, huh? That's what I was thinking about as well. Brdeveloper, could you elaborate on the 64bit mod? What is the benefit? Is it stable? Is it hard to do?

Do I have to mod it because I have 8gigs of ram in there?

Sorry for newb questions.
 
Milchschokolade said:
Thanks for the feedback. Yes this machine has a stock HD, and an upgrade to SSD is not planned.
Click to expand...

Maybe you could try Mountain Lion, which seems to be the last HDD-friendly OSX. However, you must pay for a license. 120GB SSDs are pretty affordable these days and you could upgrade to Mavericks for free.

So Snow Leo, huh? That's what I was thinking about as well.
Click to expand...
I'm a bit purist. Maybe someone will recommend Lion to you. Actually I was feeling my Late-09 MB a bit slow even on Snow Leopard and with 8GB.

Brdeveloper, could you elaborate on the 64bit mod? What is the benefit? Is it stable? Is it hard to do?
Click to expand...

It is stable. Actually Apple only allowed booting the 64bit kernel on Macbook Pro laptops, even considering that the Late-09 and Mid-10 white MBs shared the same specs with Mid-09 and Mid-10 MBPs, respectively.

I found the topic that helped me to boot with the 64bit kernel:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1184959/

There is a long discussion around what a 64bit bandwidth gives in terms of performance over 32bit. A 5-10% bump seems to be consensus. It also helps when an application needs dealing with more than 4GB of RAM at once. In 32bit mode, OSX does PAE, i.e., a kind of two-step addressing which partially solves the 4GB limit -- the system will use all the available memory, but each application is still limited to 4GB.

Do I have to mod it because I have 8gigs of ram in there?

Sorry for newb questions.
Click to expand...

No. The system will enable PAE if it boots with the 32bit kernel. PAE solves the 4GB limit with the penalty of a bit slower fetch data rate (because of the 2-step trick). Actually your Mid-2010 Macbook support up to 16GB both with a 32bit or 64bit kernel. I think the 64bit kernel is the only option since Mountain Lion, so you don't need applying any patch.
 
Last edited:
two people have recommended mavericks. can you even get mavericks these days?
 
You can contact Apple Support and they will provide you with a code with which you can download 10.9.
 
gooser said:
two people have recommended mavericks. can you even get mavericks these days?
Click to expand...

Hi gooser, is it that you think Mavericks will be fastest and most stable on this machine? Faster and more stable than earlier OS versions?

I'm just making sure, because again, speed and stability are my primary objectives. While Mavericks looks nice, I really don't need anything that it has to offer (that an earlier OS does not have).
 
Milchschokolade said:
Hi gooser, is it that you think Mavericks will be fastest and most stable on this machine? Faster and more stable than earlier OS versions?

I'm just making sure, because again, speed and stability are my primary objectives. While Mavericks looks nice, I really don't need anything that it has to offer (that an earlier OS does not have).
Click to expand...

no. i was just questioning if it was still available.
 
10.6 and 10.9 and both nice quick operating systems for that model. I'd suggest using 10.9 as it is still updated and supports newer applications and technology.
 
Intell said:
10.6 and 10.9 and both nice quick operating systems for that model. I'd suggest using 10.9 as it is still updated and supports newer applications and technology.
Click to expand...

Would you say that 10.6 and 10.9 are particularly stable, as opposed to say the Lions (10.8 and 10.7)?

My web research on this issue led me to believe that 10.6 is the most trusted. And the Lions are quite disliked. 10.9 also gets good feedback, but not as consistently as 10.6. And Yosemite is obviously too new to compare (less articles), although some guys on the official Apple support forums recommended that I stick Yosemite on it... I doubt that's such a good idea.
 
I'd stay away from 10.7. 10.8 is so similar to 10.9, it's just best to go with 10.9. 10.6 is nice, but it is old and no longer updated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back