Have M1 Macs Wrecked the Used Intel Mac Market?

Updated on : December 3, 2021 by Taylor Moore



Have M1 Macs Wrecked the Used Intel Mac Market?

Not really. In fact, sales are pretty good even for the newer models. M1 is not really an alternative to the x86 version, it will eventually be, but it is not yet available. Obviously people who don't need the x86 capabilities will and should get the M1, but there is still a huge market (it may even be bigger) for the x86, so the used versions will still be available for a decent price.

Eventually, x86 might disappear for Mac, especially with Apple's lack of support in the future, but M1 is too new to have a real impact yet.

Hopefully the Mx will help drive down the price of used Intel Macs, but you wouldn't hold your breath for long waiting for a substantial price drop.

The problem is, there is a huge market for used Intel Macs. As they get rarer, anyone using an Intel-only workflow (eg, software that only works on Intel systems, or is concerned about “1st Gen” hardware, etc., etc.) be willing to pay more, not less.

So I think the used market is going to shake up, but it will depend more on where you buy it.

No and I never will. Apple just gave me $ 150 for a 2014 8th Gen Intel Mac Mini i5 that I paid $ 600 for in 2015. You can imagine how much it will sell for. There will be demand for both.

If you are running Parallels for Mac and you already have Windows 10 as a VM, you cannot bring it in. You have to get the ARM version of Windows.

Horrible mac pro trash machines still cost a fortune second hand should tell you something.

They may go down a bit, but not really. There is a simple reason.

Most people buy a Mac, they don't care if it's M1 or Intel. Both machines are excellent, have excellent software, and offer very good value for money.

No. Intel's market is still valuable for non-64-bit items for late OSX, Big Sur (MacOS 11), and for Intel virtualization with VMware, Parallels, etc. At some point in the future, there may be enough oversupply that this depresses the market. We'll see.

No, butterfly keyboards destroyed the used Intel Mac market.

But I guess maybe you are not familiar with that saga, you just heard about M1.

Given the struggle to upgrade, there should be a glut of Intel Macs. Usually you'd have to wait to get a used Intel 2020, but they should be on the market by now.

I had the worst experience with the new MacBook Pro M1 chipset. I have faced more than 6 problems in 6 months. My MacBook Pro was delivered by Apple on December 1 and I couldn't use it until January 14 because I was not in my hometown and my device was in my hometown, so after January 14 I had a chance to use my device and only with the first week I started to have problems, I can see a coating on the screen when I open my camera, so I contacted Apple support to solve the problems, but after that, I still faced this. connect

Keep reading

I had the worst experience with the new MacBook Pro M1 chipset. I have faced more than 6 problems in 6 months. My MacBook Pro was delivered by Apple on December 1 and I couldn't use it until January 14 because I was not in my hometown and my device was in my hometown, so after January 14 I had a chance to use my device and only with it the first week I started to face problems, I can see the coating on the screen when I open my camera, so I contacted Apple support to solve the problems, but after that, I still faced this. connect it with my WiFi and with my iPhone X hotspot. Again I contacted Apple support and they again solved my problem but it still happens sometime. And after this, I noticed that when I turn off my MacBook and when I close the lid again, it starts to boot up and the Apple boot sound is heard when I open, the lid screen turns on and goes black. And I have noticed that this MacBook is slower than my Windows laptop with Intel i5 9 Generation. I didn't expect these things with Apple.

When it comes to applications running on ARM (Apple Silicon) architecture, yes, they are much better than Intel i7.

The M1 could get into a tie with the intel i7 when running Rosetta-based applications, which is an intel-to-arm architecture converter to maintain compatibility at the cost of a bit of performance. But they are faster than many PCs anyway!

Now if you see the benchmarks claimed by Intel

Looking here doesn't look very good, does it? But here's the twist. Intel had to do bias tests with the MacBook to keep selling its chipsets for around $ 400 every year -_-

See li battery

Keep reading

When it comes to applications running on ARM (Apple Silicon) architecture, yes, they are much better than Intel i7.

The M1 could get into a tie with the intel i7 when running Rosetta-based applications, which is an intel-to-arm architecture converter to maintain compatibility at the cost of a bit of performance. But they are faster than many PCs anyway!

Now if you see the benchmarks claimed by Intel

Looking here doesn't look very good, does it? But here's the twist. Intel had to do bias tests with the MacBook to keep selling its chipsets for around $ 400 every year -_-

View the battery life test

Now dodge those anniversary photos and Intel observations. Personally, I own both machines (MacBook and swift 5) and my MacBook M1 gives me over 16 hours of the same tasks but with an unrealistic brightness of around 50 percent. The swift also gives 13 hours, but that's not the point. My overall satisfaction from using the M1 is more than what I get from the Swift 5. M1 IS FASTER! You may not see it on the paper provided by Intel, but in its use you will find a significant difference.

Here are my observations of what I do on both of my laptops.

M1 chips are faster in

  1. Video editing and rendering (found a difference of more than 30 seconds and higher)
  2. Android Studio builds (although they run on Rosetta).
  3. Image processing

and almost every other aspect that a heavy user can imagine.

While the i7 has only one advantage, that's game Lol!

Well, regardless, just enjoy your life with "what you have" or even better "what you can get";)

In fact, it is the opposite.

Let's say Intel sells an i7 for $ 250 (considering R&D + BoM), they would still have at least around $ 50 in profit. After all, Intel sells chips to other companies who then put them in their laptops (or to people who use them in builds). They do not make the laptop themselves.

Apple was one of those Intel customers. They used the chip, which was essentially $ 200 but with a profit of $ 50. However, Apple also made a profit on its entire laptop.

They are doing the same thing now, but since they can make the SoC themselves, they are:

  1. Keeping the $ 50 with them (assuming M1 at
Keep reading

In fact, it is the opposite.

Let's say Intel sells an i7 for $ 250 (considering R&D + BoM), they would still have at least around $ 50 in profit. After all, Intel sells chips to other companies who then put them in their laptops (or to people who use them in builds). They do not make the laptop themselves.

Apple was one of those Intel customers. They used the chip, which was essentially $ 200 but with a profit of $ 50. However, Apple also made a profit on its entire laptop.

They are doing the same thing now, but since they can make the SoC themselves, they are:

  1. Keeping the $ 50 with them (assuming M1 also costs a base $ 200 when considering R&D and BoM)
  2. Use that $ 50 to make bigger investments in TSMC for chips and deliver bigger year-on-year performance gains than Intel has ever done with Macs.
  3. Giving more value to the user in terms of battery life and performance (we can all agree that while the M1 may not beat the i7 and i9 in all current situations, the Macs that ship with the M1 today used to have quad-core i3 and i5, with bad thermals and average battery life at best)

So even if they aren't getting much in terms of profit, they are increasing the value proposition of entry-level Macs.

Question: What will happen to Intel if Apple starts making its own Mac chips?

Answer: For Intel, nothing. Apple is a drop in the bucket for them. Good for advertising but not the bottom line.

But for Apple's software developers, it's another kick in very sensitive body parts - the wallet!

Every time Apple changed the way applications had to be developers, they pissed off the developers.

In some cases, some developers gave up and never ported their software to the next generation of Apple computers.

Both Microsoft and Apple have facilitated the transfer of software from generation to generation, it is still

Keep reading

Question: What will happen to Intel if Apple starts making its own Mac chips?

Answer: For Intel, nothing. Apple is a drop in the bucket for them. Good for advertising but not the bottom line.

But for Apple's software developers, it's another kick in very sensitive body parts - the wallet!

Every time Apple changed the way applications had to be developers, they pissed off the developers.

In some cases, some developers gave up and never ported their software to the next generation of Apple computers.

Both Microsoft and Apple have facilitated the transfer of software from generation to generation, it remains a problem and generates costs for developers. Another version of the software must be built and tested. It is a cost even if no line of code is changed!

For example, one of the few games I play is "StarCraft."

I first played it on Macintosh 7100/80, PowerPC under OS 7. I had to be ported to OS X to run on my G4 Cube. It had to behave AGAIN to run on a 32-bit Intel processor. And finally it was ported back to be Intel x86–64 bit.

For a long time I had to wait for the Intel version. So I ran it on a G4 or G4 Cube laptop!

# 1. It will piss off the developers.

# 2. Some of the software will not carry over to the new CPUs and will be lost.

Other Guides:


GET SPECIAL OFFER FROM OUR PARTNER.