Tweet
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...op,2132-4.html
snip
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...op,2132-5.html
snip
snip
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...op,2132-6.html
ต้องแปลรึเปล่า ?
snip
The comparison between a Hackintosh running an illegal version of OS X on a conventional Intel based PC and an equivalently-priced Mac has always shown Apple to be more expensive, but comparisons across different hardware platforms tell us very little.
snip
On the same hardware, the legitimate copy of OS X ran considerably faster when using XBench or GeekBench.
Our Hacked Mac on a Mac was running about 18% slower for CPU tests, and 17% slower on GPU tests.
If it wasnt the fake SMBIOS that was causing the problem, our next thought was to look at the AppleIntelCPUPowerManagement.kext hack. This kernel extension is disabled on all Hackintosh installations including so-called vanilla installations by either by removing the file itself, or adding another file to disable this feature. Once we re-enabled the kext, things returned to normal speeds. Deleting the file completely resulted in slower speeds once again.
With such a performance hit when running a hacked Macintosh, the Apple Tax takes on new meaning. Other notebooks may have similar performance penalties due to power management idiosyncrasies--the difference was never noticed because no one tried creating a Hacked Mac on a Mac.
With such a performance hit when running a hacked Macintosh, the Apple Tax takes on new meaning. Other notebooks may have similar performance penalties due to power management idiosyncrasies--the difference was never noticed because no one tried creating a Hacked Mac on a Mac.
Comment