Contribute
Register

List of Macs that can run macOS 13 Ventura

Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
1,296
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z390 Designare
CPU
i9 9900k
Graphics
RX480
Mac
  1. MacBook Pro
Classic Mac
  1. Performa
  2. Power Mac
  3. PowerBook
  4. Quadra
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
Mine is less than 3TB usable space with all 4 slots filled... Unfortunately QNAP doesn't have a SHR2 equivalent.

At least I will get an idea of the usability. If it works well, I will probably get 4 x 6TB seagates for 18TB of usable space at some point. These are the most resilient drives at the moment, according to Backblaze.

Unfortunately, this will mean I also need the same amount of HD space for a backup of the NAS.

Fairly expensive, all in all.
 

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
18,546
Motherboard
Asus Z370-G Gaming (Wi-Fi AC)
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.0GHz
Graphics
RX 6600 XT
Mac
  1. MacBook
  2. Mac Pro
Classic Mac
  1. iBook
  2. Power Mac
  3. PowerBook
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
Mine is less than 3TB usable space with all 4 slots filled... Unfortunately QNAP doesn't have a SHR2 equivalent.

At least I will get an idea of the usability. If it works well, I will probably get 4 x 6TB seagates for 18TB of usable space at some point. These are the most resilient drives at the moment, according to Backblaze.

Unfortunately, this will mean I also need the same amount of HD space for a backup of the NAS.

Fairly expensive, all in all.

You have more storage at home than google!!!

Yes, I'm a data hoarder. Lol. I decided long ago that storage was cheap enough that I can pretty much avoid "delete".

I use SHR2 for two disk redundancy so that my data is safe even if 2 out of 8 drives die at the same time. I know that's not "backup" but it's good enough for me.


I just read a couple of reviews and the Seagate 6TB's are noisy. As I am sitting in the same room which is also my recording studio, this is not going to work.

I have my NAS about 8 feet away from where I sit and I've never heard it. If noise is a major concern, you can always situate your NAS in another room, assuming your studio is fully wired with Ethernet.
 
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
886
Motherboard
Gigabyte C246-WU4
CPU
E-2278G
Graphics
WX7100
Mac
  1. MacBook Pro
  2. Mac mini
I already have the occasional 50% NAS CPU load when using a 2.5GbE connection, and I think a NAS testing site concluded that 500-600 MB/s was the max throughput for this model(TS453BT3)
I am using HD's with 2 x 250 GB SSD's as fast cache/tier. Using EXT4 filesystem.
500 megaBYTES/second (it's important to pay attention to the difference between bits and bytes, Mb and MB, when discussing these…) is more than enough to saturate 2.5 GbE, and still benefit from an upgrade to 10 GbE.

Hmm... That's weird... The CPU in your NAS should be more powerful than the one in mine and I get very good performance... Here's what I get from an 8x3.5 HDD array with two of them being used for redundancy and no caches.
4-wide RAID5 can read/write sequentially with the throughput of 3 drives (but the IOPS of one drive).
8-wide RAID6 (SHR2) has the throughput of 6 drives.

Also, CPU and RAM usage always remains very low...
A ZFS user would say that if your NAS has free RAM you're wasting resources… ;)

Mine is less than 3TB usable space with all 4 slots filled... Unfortunately QNAP doesn't have a SHR2 equivalent.

At least I will get an idea of the usability. If it works well, I will probably get 4 x 6TB seagates for 18TB of usable space at some point. These are the most resilient drives at the moment, according to Backblaze.

Unfortunately, this will mean I also need the same amount of HD space for a backup of the NAS.
Excellent point! A parity array is not, in itself, a backup.
I suppose you're aware that RAID5 is less safe than it should be because drive capacity is growing faster than their ability to ensure data integrity.

Fairly expensive, all in all.
Yes, though running multiple HDD-based NAS is still less expensive per TB than buying extra SSD capacity at Apple's price…

I have my NAS about 8 feet away from where I sit and I've never heard it. If noise is a major concern, you can always situate your NAS in another room, assuming your studio is fully wired with Ethernet.
Spinning drives make noise. More drives means more noise—and also more cooling. :(
10 GbE on copper runs hot and is picky with cables, especially for (not-so) long distances. Optical cables are much better but I suspect that the studio is neither wired with fibre nor wired with Cat. 7 copper.
 

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
18,546
Motherboard
Asus Z370-G Gaming (Wi-Fi AC)
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.0GHz
Graphics
RX 6600 XT
Mac
  1. MacBook
  2. Mac Pro
Classic Mac
  1. iBook
  2. Power Mac
  3. PowerBook
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
500 megaBYTES/second (it's important to pay attention to the difference between bits and bytes, Mb and MB, when discussing these…) is more than enough to saturate 2.5 GbE, and still benefit from an upgrade to 10 GbE.


4-wide RAID5 can read/write sequentially with the throughput of 3 drives (but the IOPS of one drive).
8-wide RAID6 (SHR2) has the throughput of 6 drives.


A ZFS user would say that if your NAS has free RAM you're wasting resources… ;)


Excellent point! A parity array is not, in itself, a backup.
I suppose you're aware that RAID5 is less safe than it should be because drive capacity is growing faster than their ability to ensure data integrity.


Yes, though running multiple HDD-based NAS is still less expensive per TB than buying extra SSD capacity at Apple's price…


Spinning drives make noise. More drives means more noise—and also more cooling. :(
10 GbE on copper runs hot and is picky with cables, especially for (not-so) long distances. Optical cables are much better but I suspect that the studio is neither wired with fibre nor wired with Cat. 7 copper.

I'm no fan of ZFS. IMO, it's way too resource hungry for just a file system. Over the years, I've tried to get all my equipment to consume less power and run cooler. Having to go to a Xeon and 128GB of RAM just to run a NAS is counterproductive to my goals. My current NAS runs on a C2550 with a 14W TDP.

True! More drives in the array can help performance.

I started using SFP+ years ago on my MacPro5,1 and switched to 10GBase-T when Apple added native support for AQC107. In neither instance have I never come across issues with heat. Although, I should note that I do take care to monitor my equipment and try to keep them relatively cool. Also, I do use CAT6 cables for 10GBase-T.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
1,296
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z390 Designare
CPU
i9 9900k
Graphics
RX480
Mac
  1. MacBook Pro
Classic Mac
  1. Performa
  2. Power Mac
  3. PowerBook
  4. Quadra
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
500 megaBYTES/second (it's important to pay attention to the difference between bits and bytes, Mb and MB, when discussing these…) is more than enough to saturate 2.5 GbE, and still benefit from an upgrade to 10 GbE.
That's why I am getting a second hand 10GbE card. Also, the 2.5 GbE adapter I have now eats up CPU cycles because there's no proper driver for MacOS.
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
Messages
1,296
Motherboard
Gigabyte Z390 Designare
CPU
i9 9900k
Graphics
RX480
Mac
  1. MacBook Pro
Classic Mac
  1. Performa
  2. Power Mac
  3. PowerBook
  4. Quadra
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
Spinning drives make noise. More drives means more noise—and also more cooling. :(
10 GbE on copper runs hot and is picky with cables, especially for (not-so) long distances. Optical cables are much better but I suspect that the studio is neither wired with fibre nor wired with Cat. 7 copper.

I will use cat 6a cable. My first private QNAP with 2 bays was on a cupboard in the living room. The Seagates that were in there made a really irritating noise when spinning up.
I carefully chose quiet drives for my next QNAP, which is sitting 7 feet from my desk on a piece of an acoustic panel.
Otherwise you could hear a low rumble in the room below(I have uninsulated wooden floors that easily resonate, unfortunately)
 

pastrychef

Moderator
Joined
May 29, 2013
Messages
18,546
Motherboard
Asus Z370-G Gaming (Wi-Fi AC)
CPU
i9-9900K OC'd @ 5.0GHz
Graphics
RX 6600 XT
Mac
  1. MacBook
  2. Mac Pro
Classic Mac
  1. iBook
  2. Power Mac
  3. PowerBook
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
It looks like Apple dropped support for Skylake this year...

If Apple drops Kaby Lake next year, Coffee Lake in 2024, and Comet Lake in 2025, is it safe to assume that all Intel Mac support will be dropped by 2026?

If this plays out to be true, three more macOS versions are left with two years of security updates.

This would also mean that the MacPro7,1 which was released in 2019 would've had 6 years of full support.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
886
Motherboard
Gigabyte C246-WU4
CPU
E-2278G
Graphics
WX7100
Mac
  1. MacBook Pro
  2. Mac mini
The overall timing seems reasonable, but I'm unsure whether Apple will march by dropping one generation each year. Apple still sells Coffee Lake, in the Mac mini, so it would make sense to support this generation until the end.

Skylake is actually still supported… as Skylake-X/W in the iMacPro; it would also make sense to support this "Pro" model until the end. What was dropped is the HD 530 iGPU, while HD 630 got Metal3 support. With some luck for us, all CPUs with (U)HD 630 will be supported until the end.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2015
Messages
1,074
Motherboard
Z370 AORUS Gaming 3
CPU
i5-9600K
Graphics
RX 580
Mac
  1. MacBook
  2. MacBook Pro
Mobile Phone
  1. iOS
It looks like Apple dropped support for Skylake this year...

If Apple drops Kaby Lake next year, Coffee Lake in 2024, and Comet Lake in 2025, is it safe to assume that all Intel Mac support will be dropped by 2026?

If this plays out to be true, three more macOS versions are left with two years of security updates.

This would also mean that the MacPro7,1 which was released in 2019 would've had 6 years of full support.
The Dortania team said macOS Ventura brings many challenges.

 
Top