via the epic games store I assume, but an incredibly fast port.
No mention of who handled the port.
will be interested to see how it runs!
[automerge]1572468832[/automerge]
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Borderlands 3 now available on macOS
- Thread starter wubsylol
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
via the epic games store I assume, but an incredibly fast port.
No mention of who handled the port.
will be interested to see how it runs!
[automerge]1572468832[/automerge]
Excited to see it ported this soon! ?
The lack of any mention of a Mac version until now had me a little worried.
However those system requirements are insane. Radeon Pro 580 with 8 GB VRAM? Heck, the Windows version is supposed to run on a 2 GB GTX 680 or an even older Radeon 7970... So the macOS port requires like double the graphics power and 4x the VRAM!? ? That seems a little off to me...
Best case would be they're just playing it safe, given the performance issues the game still seems to have even on Windows, perhaps the minimum requirements on the Windows side were a bit low to begin with.
Worst case would be they screwed up the port, which I fear doesn't seem all that unlikely if Gearbox decided to do it in-house instead of utilizing the macOS expertise of Feral or Aspyr.
So yeah I too am very interested to see how it runs. Any way though I don't have much hope for my 680MX late 2012 iMac, maybe it's time for me to look into eGPU possibilities..
The lack of any mention of a Mac version until now had me a little worried.
However those system requirements are insane. Radeon Pro 580 with 8 GB VRAM? Heck, the Windows version is supposed to run on a 2 GB GTX 680 or an even older Radeon 7970... So the macOS port requires like double the graphics power and 4x the VRAM!? ? That seems a little off to me...
Best case would be they're just playing it safe, given the performance issues the game still seems to have even on Windows, perhaps the minimum requirements on the Windows side were a bit low to begin with.
Worst case would be they screwed up the port, which I fear doesn't seem all that unlikely if Gearbox decided to do it in-house instead of utilizing the macOS expertise of Feral or Aspyr.
So yeah I too am very interested to see how it runs. Any way though I don't have much hope for my 680MX late 2012 iMac, maybe it's time for me to look into eGPU possibilities..
Last edited:
Remember that unless you’re running a larger chassis Mac Pro, the GPU’s in iMacs and Macbooks are under clocked mobile chips hence the need for a more powerful chip and more memory...
No. The radon 580 that is in my iMac is only sightly less powerful than the RX 580. It's rated at 5.5 GFlops.
No. You're iMac's RADEON 580 is not running a the normal clock speed...
AMD Radeon Pro 580 (iMac) Review
AMD Radeon Pro 580 (iMac) Graphics Card review with benchmark scores. See how it compares with other popular models.
AMD Radeon RX 580 Review
AMD Radeon RX 580 Graphics Card review with benchmark scores. See how it compares with other popular models.
The PC one is clearly superior...
Last edited:
No. You're iMac's RADEON 580 is not running a the normal clock speed...
AMD Radeon Pro 580 (iMac) Review
AMD Radeon Pro 580 (iMac) Graphics Card review with benchmark scores. See how it compares with other popular models.benchmarks.ul.com
AMD Radeon RX 580 Review
AMD Radeon RX 580 Graphics Card review with benchmark scores. See how it compares with other popular models.benchmarks.ul.com
The PC one is clearly superior...
"The PC one" is a funny way to call the standard desktop graphics card. It's not like that card didn't work perfectly fine with macOS.. ?
"Desktop version" might be a more accurate way to put it.
It's all gonna be moot anyways:
Apple Silicon: The Complete Guide
Apple introduced the first Apple silicon Macs back in 2020, marking the start of its transition away from Intel's chips. Apple's custom chips...
www.macrumors.com
More powerful chip sure, but why would they need more memory?
My iMac's GTX 680MX performs similar to a desktop GTX 660Ti. It's the full Kepler chip just like the desktop 680 (and unlike the standard 680M), but clocked lower.
However I don't see why you seem to think that would explain the ridiculous difference in official system requirements. Even the "mobile" Radeon Pro 580 is roughly double the performance of a desktop GTX 680 (and double the memory). Sure it might be an inefficient port, but not twice as inefficient..
[automerge]1572989535[/automerge]
I doubt they'll go all-ARM on the Mac in the next 5 years. Certainly some models will be ARM sooner rather than later, but I don't see them do a clean Intel-ARM cut like they did back with the PPC-Intel transition. Though probably all Macs retaining Intel-CPUs will be kind of hybrid with an ARM coprocessor, like already today with the T2.It's all gonna be moot anyways:
Apple Silicon: The Complete Guide
Apple introduced the first Apple silicon Macs back in 2020, marking the start of its transition away from Intel's chips. Apple's custom chips...
Last edited:
The reviews seem to show it doesn't run nearly as well under MacOS so I'll probably pass on this port.
From what I've heard performance is extremely inconsistent. There's probably still a lot of issues to fix.
I think I'm just going to wait until it's on steam and hope things will be ironed out by then.
Can't really afford to spend much time on gaming right now anyway..