*emphasis added
No they don't but apple has in the past compared apple silicon vs Nvidia, so I think in a gaming forum, talking about gaming performance, its a valid comparison. The OP opened this thread up with discussions of FPS, so when gaming, it doesn't make sense to compare a PC with an igpu, but rather against other laptops that actually can game.
Maybe this thread should be moved to the Apple Silicon forum and title changed to M5 GPU performance.
That's my point, compared to the M4, its a remarkable improvement, but I think for gaming its only fair to see how it lines up against other laptops that can game.
Does that impact “regular” RT also or is it a PT performance improvement?
How do you know this? What results are you basing this statement on? The only result we know of is a 44% increase (according to Apple). That seems very significant to me.
Base RT performance should improve without feature designed to improve IQ.
I'm basing it on their own comparisons stats that @Homy posted? They were comparing performance at 1280x800 with upscaling from balanced, so like a render resolution of 464p. As a gamer, cause that is where this thread is, that isn't great. We should not be excited over these "numbers" at such a low resolution.
You’re making the assumption that because they quoted those settings, only those settings will benefit. It seems more sensible to say the performance improvements are unknown at this point.
Because it takes time. Tahoe has barely been out a month.
It depends on the source of the improvements. If there are more cores, higher frequency or better utilization, then sure. If the improvements come from newer features within the hardware, then no.
This is an example of newer technology being slower than old technology if you meant to write that.
OR how about the OP or maybe @throAU, or @leman open a more generic, general M5/Pro/Max/Ultra GPU discussion in the Apple Silicon forum. With the OP starting the discussion in terms of gaming, FPS, and ray tracing a more generalized thread may make more sense. The M5's GPU has some significant improvements that fall outside of gaming and having a more general thread has benefits.
In PC land, we don't use such low resolutions for performance comparisons because it mostly becomes a CPU test. So if anything the performance gap at higher resolutions should be higher if the GPU performance has really improved.
Yeah it was on purpose, DLSS 4 transformer model is slower than the CNN model but looks better. From a marketing perspective Nvidia shows that you can make your upscale more aggressive to gain performance back and still have a good looking image/game. If Apple marketed their denoiser that way, CP2077 not being updated would be fine because we wouldn't be getting a like for like performance improvement.
Pc land is so vast that it simply isn’t true to say similar resolutions aren’t used. Again you’re basing your judgement on one score. This seems very unwise.
These things take time. Judging by some comments I’m not sure Metal 4 is even stable yet.
I'm not aware of any reviews using resolutions lower than 1080p for comparing PC GPU's without the test being for CPU performance comparisons, steam deck and its buddies notwithstanding. If you could point me to some that do that would be great.
From Steams' hardware survey Its clear that 1080p is still largely the favored resolutions and sub 1080p occupy tenths of a percent in many cases
Lol. Moving goal posts. You’re genuinely not aware of gaming reviews of integrated gpus of Lunar Lake, Strix Point that test at 720p at all? This was a while ago the last time I looked. I don’t have time to look for others.
Ok. Again this doesnt relate to the point in discussion. It was stated that no one tests at 720p. You’re showing me display resolution stats.
Thanks, for some reason I didn't take into account folks using iGPUs on the PC side for comparisons. I was wrong, clearly there are tests. I do find their CP2077 chart interesting as it does show what I was talking about with lower resolutions having smaller performance gaps than higher ones. So maybe Apple is sandbagging the performance increases.Lol. Moving goal posts. You’re genuinely not aware of gaming reviews of integrated gpus of Lunar Lake, Strix Point that test at 720p at all? This was a while ago the last time I looked. I don’t have time to look for others.
Intel takes down AMD in our integrated graphics battle royale — iGPUs are still nowhere near dedicated GPU levels but use much less power
Intel, perhaps for the first time ever, can legitimately claim to have the fastest Windows iGPU.www.tomshardware.com
Tested: Intel's Arrow Lake 140T iGPU mostly maintains an edge over AMD's older 880m
Performance compared in 16-inch MSI Prestige laptops
Ok. Again this doesnt relate to the point in discussion. It was stated that no one tests at 720p. You’re showing me display resolution stats.
As the older generation retires (looking at you Cook) and the younger gamer generations fill those seats I can see Apple putting a genuine focus on gaming like they haven’t before. I think we’re already starting to see that. We’re in a transition that is mostly being fueled by the need to keep up with AI generational leaps but People still want to game.
