It is definitely confusing. I have a M4 Pro and get 47.6 at 1080p Ultra, while Ars reports 37.6 fps.I was actually talking about the CPU-version (Notebookcheck sometimes measures CPU efficiency with CB R24) but thanks for the GPU info!
Edit: 46% for CB R24 GPU is impressive, but I do wonder, as has been brought up as a possibility several times in reviews, if the 60-70% we're seeing in Blender GPU, also a 3D renderer, is due to Apple leveraging the GPU neural accelerators there? I'm pretty sure in Blender Nvidia has OptiX code to do denoising using their tensor cores and I think Apple has worked hard to ensure parity, so maybe it was using the Neural Engine for that purpose and that code is now using the GPU? Because I'm seeing the same 60-70% increase on Blender 4.2 released in the summer so this isn't something new they just added and Metal 4 doesn't seem like it's really ready yet anyway. Blender was already Apple's best GPU renderer, so I'm thinking maybe it was already using the NE somehow and now the GPU matrix accelerators have just improved on that?
For what it's worth arstechnica claims to have tested the Mac version of CP 2077 and gotten basically the exact same numbers:
MacBook Pro review: Apple’s most awkward laptop is the first to show off Apple M5
Apple M5 trades blows with Pro and Max chips from older generations.arstechnica.com
Scores are a little lower for the M4 but those were Airs, so that part is explainable.
But overall it doesn't make sense. I thought the port of CP2077 (especially once the settings bug was fixed) was much more performant than its emulated sibling?
Edit: yeah the native version should be 10-20% faster (and not sure if they had manually fixed the setting bug)
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.
M5 gaming
- Thread starter M4pro
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Andrew Tsai is currently testing the M5. I watched a few minutes saw Cyberpunk get a 90%+ increases on a couple of benchmark runs. Remarkable.
Are you saying the M5 is 90% faster then the M4? That seems rather hard to believe. What resolution and settings is he using? Is he comparing upscaling on the M5 against non-upscaling for the M4?
I can’t give you specific data at the moment. I only got to watch a few minutes. He is currently streaming so if you’re interested you can tune in to his YouTube channel and rewind to see the tests. If not, he will publish a shorter video soon I would imagine. He makes part of his living testing games on macOS so he knows how to do it. Worth noting that Arstechnica got a 100% increase at 1080p Ultra.
I wonder if the testers are also testing the older models at the same time or are using the results from when the game came out and they ran the tests the first time. For such large jumps I wonder if the older bug of SSR being one step higher is in play for all the non-RT results (remember the RT results ignores the setting).
EDIT: I know MrMacRight reruns the tests on all the hardware he has (and borrows for hardware he doesn't).
That seems a bit disingenuous, its 100% faster when comparing a Macbook pro with active cooling against a fanless macbook air.
edit: I'm not against the m5, but lets compare apples to apples
Disingenuous? Aren’t you the person who tried to say the M4 Pro had unacceptable performance while you are running only pc games via crossover?
Its base M4 vs base M5. While the Air throttles earlier than the pro, the CP2077 benchmark takes about a minute to run, too short to have much throttling. In any case, if you watch Andrew’s stream you’ll see a 92% increase.
Yes I am, simply because I'm looking to game on my mac and as such Crossover is virtually a requirement when it comes to wanting to play AAA games on my mac.
A base M4 that quickly throttles vs. a M5 that has active cooling - apples and oranges
Here's what the verge has for cyberpunk benchmarks, not that silly "its 100% faster" nonsense. It serves no one when disinformation about the M5 is being bantered about like that.
I'm not sure we're seeing a number of reviews use 1920x1200, but what ever, as long as there's consistent testing, and context.
I'm not sure we're seeing a number of reviews use 1920x1200, but what ever, as long as there's consistent testing, and context.
I’m sorry you are just cherry picking results that please you. Talking about disinformation while dismissing actual credible testers is ridiculous. The verge is not a better tester than Andrew Tsai or Ars.
He does bring up a salient point. If different reviewers are getting wildly different results it makes generalized comparisons more difficult. I mean even Apple isn't claiming 100% gaming performance uplift (for the systems they tested) so that should cause pause when we see it.
Disagree. He’s not making that point. He’s saying the reviews which show a better score than he is comfortable with are “disinformation”, while the lower scores are real. This is very silly. Neither test is representative. We need lots of tests to know what’s happening. That doesn’t mean that Andrew Tsai or Ars are “disinformation”.
Yes. All the reason to wait before making any statements about “disinformation”.
No question and in all honesty if OptimusGrime said, there's a 100% increase of the M5 MBP vs. the M4 MBA, that would be fine, because it qualified the result, instead of just stating Ars is reporting 100% increase.
How am I cherry picking when I'm displaying results of a M4 MBP, and a M5 MBP? Seems like the best way to run a comparison.
I wonder when macOS gaming reviews will be as polished as what we see on the PC side. It is why we (okay maybe just me) was excited when Digital Foundry started doing performance reviews for Mac hardware (now helped because Apple is sending them review units).
You’re adding assumptions based on things I didn’t say. No where did I say the general improvement is 100%. Just that certain tests showed that increase. You on the other hand dismissed these tests as “disinformation”.
Ahem
Either way, I'm tired of beating a dead horse. I'm done with this argument.
This doesn’t mean what you think it means. Ars Technica did get 100%. Andrew Tsai did get 92%. None of that means all tests will show that. This is quite simple if you read the actual words and don’t add your own thoughts into the mix.
CP2027 Ultra Preset - High Texture Quality
Resolution - 1080p
Metal FX Upscaling - Quality
FPS: 39
From Andrew Tsai
Resolution - 1080p
Metal FX Upscaling - Quality
FPS: 39
From Andrew Tsai
DS 2 is a PS5 exclusive with no PC release date announced either. Why are you asking about a Mac version now?
You mean the M4 isn't bandwidth starved therefore additional bandwidth of the M5 doesn't help? Hmmm ... maybe? However, seems unlikely as Steel Nomad especially is pretty bandwidth sensitive on pretty much every GPU I've seen and other tests like Blender which are bandwidth sensitive, especially Junkshop, showed excellent uplift (and Junkshop showed the best).
Very strange. Could they have tested the wrong version? or maybe theirs without the settings bug fix? I don't see how they could mistake the native Mac and XOver version - yours is without upscaling?
A lot of reviewers default test with upscaling off. 1200p, I'm assuming, is rounded for native resolution of the display 1800x1169.
Good thinking. I’ll turn that setting back to psycho and test again.
Not disinformation, but additional context: Andrew's results were from a 13" M4 Air with 8 cores. So there's whatever cooling difference + 2 cores.