Apple, ATI, NVIDIA Actively Working on Improving Mac Gaming Performance

[MagnusVonMagnum]

What? Apple's video card drivers need updated? Say it isn't so!

I think the problem is that Apple will only want to update the drivers for machines made in the past 6 months.

 

[Bafflefish]

When I purchased my Rage 128 (Which was released for the first time for powermacs), PC's got Radeon (Next Generation).

The Rage 128 for Mac was released in 1999 if I recall. Radeon (PC-side) made its debut in 2000 (April if I recall). The first Radeon for Mac? Released in 2000 (July/August).

When I purchased my Radeon9800, again, PC's had the next generation already.

Ah, when *you* purchased it =/= when it was released. Radeon 9700 Pro. Launched: August 2002
* Radeon 9700 Pro Mac Edition: Launched January 2003

* Radeon 9800 Pro (PC), Launched: March 2003
* Radeon 9800 Pro (Mac), Launched: July 2003

It would be roughly a year between the launch of the 9800 Pro for PC, and its successor generation, giving the release of the Mac version parity with the PC version for several months...

When I purchased X850XT, PC's had the 1800 series.

Once again, when *you* purchased.

* Radeon X850XT (PC), Launched: December 2004
* Radeon X850XT (Mac), Launched: January, 2005

* Radeon 1800 series (PC), Launched: October, 2005

Once again, that's a considerable amount of time of parity between the two...

So no. I think you are remembering incorrectly.

No, fairly certain you are...

And not having SLI/Crossfire hinders the possibility of having GTX295 like dualcore cards on macs.

Not true. Users on Mac Rumors even got the GTX 295 Co-op edition to work via driver hacks: https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8199020#post8199020.

Since their drivers use the SLI technology even if they are not SLI in practice.

Ok, here's the thing: it would be fairly simple for nVidia and Apple to implement driver support for a card such as the GTX 295. The 295 (and prior dual-GPU nVidia cards) have SLI implemented as part of the PCIe switch that connects the two GPUs. There would be no need to support a chipset-level SLI solution, because that comes with far more complexities (supporting SLI via different GPU models, supporting the SLI chipsets themselves, etc.).

The GX2s and the 295 are SLI at their most basic level. Even Linux has support for the 295. It's really just a matter of Apple not caring enough about gaming (which, admittedly, gaming is a very small % of the market), and thus partners like nVidia and AMD not caring to push it much either.

So when the time comes when a mac can run a dualcore card, then a mac will be able to run SLI as well.

SLI can be implemented either via a single card solution, in which case it's very basic and requires nothing more than essentially supporting a dual GPU solution for a singular model, or it can be far more complex, involving a chipset-level solution integrated into the motherboard, a la the nForce chipsets, etc.

The chipset-level solution involves considerably more complexity, and I don't see Apple going towards that any time soon.

Supporting SLI for singular graphics cards however is not a big deal, and Apple should already be supporting it...

 

[mdriftmeyer]

I recall Apple working with ID Software to try to make Doom 3 run better on a Mac, as it performed much slower than the Window's side. They failed. I think the biggest problem is OS X itself. It's good for everything BUT 3D and gaming.

You know nothing about operating system designs if you think OS X is the problem.

The problem was the OpenGL stack and getting nVidia and ATi back then to use I/O Kit was the problem.

They now use both.

LLVM and Clang w/ clean OpenGL 3.3/4.0 stacks, OpenCL 1.0/1.1 system-wide and used by the gaming industry will see huge pushes forward for OS X.

 

[Bafflefish]

Yep and after that the StrangeDogs folks (remember them?) kept flashing faster and more powerful cards. When Apple sold the Radeon X850XT as a BTO-only option someone with one dumped the ROM to a file and they found that some but not all PC X850XT cards would "just work" in said PowerMacs.

As is normal for the industry, it was at a time too when the cards weren't that expensive PC-side, so yeah, it was a great little "hack" to get a nice card to work.

And I remember towards the end of the whole "Flashing PC Cards to work in PPC Macs" era I managed to snag a nVidia 7800GS which was even faster than the X850XT and well more powerful than the GeForce 6800GS. That card still is great and I still use it.

Nice. I had been using a 9800 PRO in my gaming PC, and when the time came to replace it, I simply flashed it with the Mac bios. Still works today as well.

You could not buy a 7800GS for a Mac since by the time it was released (one of the last beefy AGP 8x cards) Apple already scooted over to PCI express cards for the last generation of PPC macs and that seemed to scuttle that development effort especially when moving over to Intel.

Yeah, I think PCI Express made its way over in... 2005? For some of the models at least.

I miss those days in a way, I know the strangedogs domain expired and someone else got a hold of it and started a cottage industry selling flashed cards which went against the spirit of free exchange of knowledge and there was a schism in that group.

Yeah, I think the late 90s/early 2000s was possibly one of the most fun to be some type of an "enthusiast" on either platform. I've been using OS X since it was in beta, and it's been a fairly fun experience going along, but yeah, it was definitely a fun period to try and "cheat the system" in order to have the best possible hardware for our PowerMacs without having to pay the outrageous prices Apple often charged.

I don't know if in the era of Intel Macs people were flashing better PCI express cards but in a way the PPC era folks had this kind of "can do, we'll MAKE IT WORK" attitude that I still admire.

Anyway, enough reminiscing.

I think it still occurs to a small extent, but these days I think it's more about driver hacks and trying to get cards to simply function if possible.

But the 4850 in iMac is actually quite a powerful card if you use bootcamp. Even the 9600GT in my MBP is a great GPU under bootcamp. Ofc you cannot play the most cutting edge titles in highest quality, but again, that's not what macs are for.

The 4850 in the iMac 27" series is a mobility Radeon 4850, and not the actual desktop version. It's ok, and gets the job done, but even in Bootcamp, trying to play any of the recently released FPS' at high settings will bring that card to its knees. It's a pity too, since the IPS panel is so nice.

 

[Flash SWT]

First off, thank you rbarris. I appreciate your dialog with us and your participation on the forums here. it is great to have an official voice in the conversation. Also thank you to Valve for helping push Apple forward, hopefully they will start taking this issue more seriously.

On the 10.5 issue, it has already been addressed by rbarris in previous threads:

Work is being done, but it will only help 10.6.x.

We haven't yet designated any games as "10.6 only". Just be aware that there aren't going to be any graphic driver updates for 10.5, and driver updates are where we're going to obtain a significant share of performance improvements over time.

This basically means that Apple is the only company we can blame for a lack of performance updates for 10.5 users. Personally I don't have too big of a problem with that. 10.6 is almost a year old and will run on all Intel Macs which are also required to run all the new games.

However I can relate to the previous poster who has kept his primary Mac Pro on 10.5. I earn my living as a photographer and am in the same situation. In my case it is one specific bug that Apple has failed to fix (even in 10.6.4) that is keeping me tied to Leopard. As much as I'm tempted to upgrade for gaming performance improvements at this point, work has to take a priority. I'm surprised some of y'all have a hard time understanding that.

.

 

[SpamBoy]

This is awesome news! My hope is that developers/users can finally update graphics drivers independently of the OS drivers, which will make things evolve much more quickly.

Also:

Steam is said to be working with Apple, ATI and NVIDIA on these optimizations...

For the record, Steam is the name of the online service, Valve is the name of the company.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

However I can relate to the previous poster who has kept his primary Mac Pro on 10.5. I earn my living as a photographer and am in the same situation. In my case it is one specific bug that Apple has failed to fix (even in 10.6.4) that is keeping me tied to Leopard. As much as I'm tempted to upgrade for gaming performance improvements at this point, work has to take a priority. I'm surprised some of y'all have a hard time understanding that.

I understand it perfectly. My MidiMan interface has a quirk whereby it gets massive delays under Snow Leopard UNLESS you unplug/plug it back in AFTER Logic 9.1 (or anything else like Garage Band) is running. Do I blame M-Audio for a screwed up driver or Apple for fudging up the old one so it no longer works? Either way it doesn't matter in a functional aspect as it simply does not work properly under Snow Leopard and that's a shame given Logic 9.1 is a Professional Application and you would think that Apple would work harder with associated hardware developers to ensure that it keeps working with their software.

As for the gaming issue, it wouldn't be a problem either if Apple didn't completely 100% (save security patches) *DITCH* support for versions of operating systems the same day the next version comes out. Don't tell me it's not so because it is. *ANY* bug fixes that came after Snow Leopard was released were not included in any software updates for Leopard. Since drivers are updated only through Apple (unlike with Windows where you can get manufacturer driver updates for XP two OS revisions later), it is effectively a dead operating system (save security patches and Safari/iTunes updates for a while longer). Apple likes to paint Snow Leopard as a tweak upgrade, but if they don't support regular Leopard, it's not a tweak. It's the new OS standard. They just didn't want to call it that since they dumped 40% of all their existing users in the process (i.e. PPC).

Now if Microsoft controlled graphics drivers like Apple does and they had done that to XP when Vista came out, I shudder to think what would have happened to Microsoft as a company in terms of share prices. This is a company that was FORCED to sell XP for a LOT longer than it EVER wanted to because consumers DEMANDED it. But Apple users just take whatever Apple dishes out. Oh, it's only $29 and I have Intel so who cares? Yee-haw! Personally, that's not the point to me. It's the philsophy that sucks. Look at the iPhone and see how much faster they are ditching support for older hardware and it has nothing to do with architecture and everything to do with trying to force users to buy newer hardware. It's the "Ye Old Milk the Cows" routine instead of focusing on new customers; I cannot help but notice their computer prices have been STEADILY RISING since the switch to Intel when more even prices and faster updates for things like the Mac Pro were touted as the new norm. Yeah right. You can wash a pig, but you can't stop it from jumping back in the mud and Apple is definitely a pig.

I would expect the trend to continue with fewer and more pricey choices for real computer hardware while iPhones get new gimmicks like multi-color options for iPhone 4.1. Support the [insert cause here] with the new RED iPhone! Get your designer color choices here and laser engraving for only $100 more! Don't expect ANY removable batteries for ANYTHING since Apple can use it to make you upgrade or get a nice hefty $100 fee for something that takes 10 seconds to do on anyone else's hardware. But they're "green" friendly. Yes, throw that iPad away and get a new one with a new battery!

Wait until they customize the device ONLY for you (like buy-online "Steam" type games are already doing) so you cannot sell "used" hardware. It'll be licensed for a one-time user only and will be non-transferable (well maybe for a hefty title change "fee" they will let you sell it like some Steam games). Imagine that. You won't "own" the hardware. You will be "renting/leasing" it with a full EULA agreement attached. Yes, I think Apple will LOVE that idea. Maybe I can patent it before their lawyers run to the office. Oops! Too late!

 

[lgoodlove]

We can only hope

We can only hope that this happens. It has been needed for a long time. As a high school grad and a college student in the fall, I helped A LOT of people make computer (almost all laptop) purchases. One of the main reasons people don't want a mac besides the cost, and the fear of new things, is that they don't game well. If your going to pay $1000-$2800 for a laptop why shouldn't it be able to do the same things a $1200 windows laptop can? I understand 's obsession with light and efficient laptops but there is no excuse for lack of software support.

O and hopefully this will pull all graphics performance up, such as; video editing, photo editing, design and do I dare say it... Flash. (I prefer HTML5)

 

[Setmose]

Radeon 5870 Mac Edition

Soon, please!

 

[MorphingDragon]

Soon, please!

Eyefinity 6 edition would be awesome in a Mac Pro.

---

Hey Valve, here's an Idea.

Stop making ports that suck royal rear.

 

[layte]

.......................................................

Again, when I purchased my GTX285 in October, it was the fastest GPU for PC's as well (single core).

8 years ago, the fastest GPU available for a Mac was at least one generation behind, the releases never even overlapped for couple of weeks. It was always at least one generation behind.

So YES things have changed.

The ATI 58x0 series were launched in September 2009, so you actually had the third fastest GPU available.

 

[MorphingDragon]

The ATI 58x0 series were launched in September 2009, so you actually had the third fastest GPU available.

5870 > GTX480 > 5890 > Sapphire 5890 Toxic Edition

No, the 3rd fastest card in the world is the GTX480.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Question

So my question would be:

If you had to buy a Mac, SOON (within the next month presuming nothing changes in the lineup) what is your "best bang for the buck" video card option for the current lineup?

 

[Flash SWT]

So my question would be:

If you had to buy a Mac, SOON (within the next month presuming nothing changes in the lineup) what is your "best bang for the buck" video card option for the current lineup?

I think you still need to make this decision based on what your primary use of the computer will be (assuming you aren't buying it solely to game). I believe for most of us gaming is just a hobby, something to do to relax from work, etc.

If you're a student you should buy the Mac that will most help you with your studies (do you need a laptop for use in class?) If you are a film maker you might need a Mac Pro, etc.

.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Ah...

I think you still need to make this decision based on what your primary use of the computer will be (assuming you aren't buying it solely to game). I believe for most of us gaming is just a hobby, something to do to relax from work, etc.

If you're a student you should buy the Mac that will most help you with your studies (do you need a laptop for use in class?) If you are a film maker you might need a Mac Pro, etc.

.

I'm mainly a musician and composer who also does video work. My current system is a PowerMac G5 2.5 dual with an nVidia 7800GS in it. I've got 2.4 TB of disc too internally and another 1.7 TB external.

A Mac pro would seem obvious but they're so much more expensive than
what I paid for the G5 (I got it as a display model from a local store and they tossed in Applecare which was a good thing as it leaked a while back).

I am considering a 27" iMac with the Core i7 but I heard someone on this system had an issue with it 10 days after delivery and he was using it heavily for music - he said it worked fantastic but the machine totally died and I'm one of those users who never shuts his cpu off so I may have to go with a refurb Mac Pro or something.

 

[pigoz]

CSS is lagging like **** on my Mac and it runs fine with higher video settings on my 6 years old PC.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

I'm mainly a musician and composer who also does video work. My current system is a PowerMac G5 2.5 dual with an nVidia 7800GS in it. I've got 2.4 TB of disc too internally and another 1.7 TB external.

A Mac pro would seem obvious but they're so much more expensive than
what I paid for the G5 (I got it as a display model from a local store and they tossed in Applecare which was a good thing as it leaked a while back).

I am considering a 27" iMac with the Core i7 but I heard someone on this system had an issue with it 10 days after delivery and he was using it heavily for music - he said it worked fantastic but the machine totally died and I'm one of those users who never shuts his cpu off so I may have to go with a refurb Mac Pro or something.

The obvious choice for me is to build a Hackintosh the next go around. I can put together a high-end GPU powered Quad-Core with dual 2TB drives and 16GB of memory for around $1200. It would run circles around the stock Mac Pro in almost all areas. Apple's prices are fast becoming completely out-of-line once again and it's sad because this time you can directly compare Apples-to-Apples with PC hardware since it's virtually identical. Pretty cases do not equate to 2-3x the price. Even if I inflated the price of OSX to $400 (2/3 the price of the new Mini), it STILL doesn't compare.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Yes....

The obvious choice for me is to build a Hackintosh the next go around. I can put together a high-end GPU powered Quad-Core with dual 2TB drives and 16GB of memory for around $1200. It would run circles around the stock Mac Pro in almost all areas. Apple's prices are fast becoming completely out-of-line once again and it's sad because this time you can directly compare Apples-to-Apples with PC hardware since it's virtually identical. Pretty cases do not equate to 2-3x the price. Even if I inflated the price of OSX to $400 (2/3 the price of the new Mini), it STILL doesn't compare.

I've thought about that too. The problem is: you need just the right combination of motherboard and hardware for it all to work correctly. The guesswork on that is what annoys me - at least with a Mac it mostly works out the door. I work in I.T. for my day gig and I go to the mac to get away from all of the garbage you deal with on the Windows side. It's certainly something to think about though.

 

[krzyglue]

I don't need Anandtech to tell me what I can experience myself, nor did I mention anything about playing portal on an i7 iMac.
And as for Windowz and M$ and steam/TF2, well I have and still getting enough crashes as it is by now, but the performance is close, very close. I suggest we give Valve and the rest of the industry time to digest this and soon we will know.

Seriously, you know that Portal and Team Fortress 2 run on the same engine?

Also, myself being an avid Anandtech reader, I suggest you rethink your rather baseless opinion that they are somehow irrelevant. That site is very respected in the hardware-enthusiast community. No one said TF2 on OSX is utter crap (it isn't, I've played a fair amount myself), but people are simply pointing out that there is room for improvement.

Oh, and I've found no stability differences between the OSX version and the Windows one. Neither has crashed on me so far, and again, I've run them for hours on end.