3D Rendering on Apple Silicon, CPU&GPU

[jujoje]

Houdini for AS now gold

Houdini for Apple Silicon now Gold | SideFX

SideFX is excited to announce the gold release of the Houdini Apple Silicon build to coincide with the H19.5.534 production build. The Houdini Apple Silicon build is built natively for macOS arm64 so Mac users can take full advantage of the power of Apple silicon M1 and M2 chips.

www.sidefx.com

 

[BootLoxes]

Houdini for AS now gold

Houdini for Apple Silicon now Gold | SideFX

SideFX is excited to announce the gold release of the Houdini Apple Silicon build to coincide with the H19.5.534 production build. The Houdini Apple Silicon build is built natively for macOS arm64 so Mac users can take full advantage of the power of Apple silicon M1 and M2 chips.

www.sidefx.com

Hopefully Marmoset Toolbag is next. My last non-AS software

 

[Boil]

Possible AMD MI200-series derived MPX-format accelerator for the forthcoming ASi Mac Pro...

Read from where the above link starts, and the same with the post linked in said above link, it's linkception...

 

[Xiao_Xi]

For those familiar with the Metal API like @leman, how difficult would it be for Apple to implement these features?

Eevee-next uses features that are not available in the Metal backend yet. These feature include support for Storage Buffer Shader Objects (SSBO) and indirect drawing/compute.

2023-03-10 Eevee/Viewport Workshop (Planning 2023)

Blender HQ is a place to held workshops in a face-to-face setting and fly in the necessary people. In March 2023 there was a module workshop about Eevee/Viewport planning for 2023. What made it really amazing was that Apple was able to fly in and participate in the workshops. It allowed faster...

devtalk.blender.org

 

[jmho]

I think most of the issue is that Eevee is designed around OpenGL and the way OpenGL works which is quite opinionated and a little bit weird since it has been around since the dawn of time.

So while Metal and Vulkan generally are more versatile, the difficulty in porting Eevee is trying to get these new modern APIs to perform tasks that were originally designed for OpenGL's far more rigid way of doing things.

So while using "SSBOs" (which are an OpenGL thing, which seems to just mean writeable buffers with some extra sauce), and doing indirect drawing, are not particularly difficult things to do in Metal, they might require a significant amount of internal plumbing inside the Metal backend because the basic concepts and building blocks don't match 1 to 1.

 

[leman]

For those familiar with the Metal API like @leman, how difficult would it be for Apple to implement these features?

2023-03-10 Eevee/Viewport Workshop (Planning 2023)

Blender HQ is a place to held workshops in a face-to-face setting and fly in the necessary people. In March 2023 there was a module workshop about Eevee/Viewport planning for 2023. What made it really amazing was that Apple was able to fly in and participate in the workshops. It allowed faster...

devtalk.blender.org

I think @jmho‘s answer is spot on. From myself I would add that it’s less about features and more about what they are used to build.

 

[Xiao_Xi]

Eevee is designed around OpenGL and the way OpenGL works which is quite opinionated and a little bit weird since it has been around since the dawn of time.

Is this a weakness unique to Blender's Eevee or will other real-time rendering engines also suffer from it?

 

[galad]

They already implemented those features, it's just that the patches are under review, and Blender developers spend time on trying do the right thing instead of merging the first working implementation: https://projects.blender.org/blender/blender/pulls/104870

 

[leman]

Is this a weakness unique to Blender's Eevee or will other real-time rendering engines also suffer from it?

I’d expect pretty much any OpenGL software to have inherent inefficiencies.

 

[sunny5]

This is the 3rd year of migrating from Intel to ARM and yet I have to admit that Apple GPU is still poorer than what people are talking about. Let's face it, most of Mac "specialized" software such as video, music, photo, illustration, and more aren't really GPU intensive software at all. For video, it actually take advantages from media chips and ProRes chips so it's hard to say it heavily uses GPU performance and even if so, that's only one example.

On the other hand, most of GPU intensive software are either Nvidia based or Not Mac friendly. Blender is a great example as Apple supports directly with their resources and developers for Metal and Apple Silicon version but even on the latest version, the performance is still bad. Based on Blender benchmark, M1 Ultra is barely better than RTX 3050 which is a joke to me. It's very common and normal seeing posts about Mac GPU's poor performance from many other PC forums while Mac users clearly ignoring the fact. Resident Evil 8 is another great example. M1 Max cant even come close to mobile RTX 3070TI. Maybe that's why Nvidia's market share for external GPU is 80~90%.

How come GPU intensive software aren't really supporting Apple Silicon Mac? That's because Apple GPU's performance isn't really great at all. Yes, there are only a few software and task that Apple GPU MIGHT be better but that's only a few examples. Currently, Nvidia is leading most of GPU intensive software and market for a long time and Apple isn't even near them. Yes, there are only a few GPU intensive software/app such as Maxon Cinema 4D, Resident Evil 8, Blender, and etc but that's only a few example and does not really represent the entire market. I mean who even use Mac for GPU intensive workflow? That's what Mac users are thinking which is not a good thinking, why not?

I still dont get that a lot of people seem dont care about GPU performance. Apple GPU is NOT great and I only see lack of 3D field software which actually take advantage of GPU. Even Apple is investing a lot for 3D and AI/Machine learning which is ironic compared to what Apple GPU can do. If GPU performance matter, people dont really use Mac at all. I mean, is there any GPU intensive software on Mac like game, graphic design, 3D render, AI/Machine learning, and more? If so, how many? I can say only a few.







I have to question them: Does Apple really wish to stay and focus in 2D fields where GPU power isn't really necessary OR useful? Mac is well known for having a poor GPU performance for a while and ironically, Mac specialized software aren't GPU intensive which makes me doubt about Apple GPU. You might say, I dont care, no it's not, you are wrong, blah blah... But once you start comparing with RTX 30,40 series to Apple GPU, what will you say? If Power by Watt matters, it doesn't work on desktop especially in terms of maximum performance.

Whether you care about GPU performance or not, it's would be nice if Apple GPU get more performance for 3D fields of graphic intensive software to compete against Nvidia as they are dominating all GPU market by 80~90%. Beside, it was Apple themselves who compared M1 Max and Ultra to Nvidia and yet, they never get closed to them in terms of performance.

The only solution I can think of for now is to unlock the power limit for High Power mode. Currently, a Low Power mode actually use only high efficiency cores to reduce the power uses but a High Power mode? It doesn't do anything instead of controlling the fan speed which doesn't even work mostly. The power limit for all Apple Silicon GPU is too much especially for desktops. Or is that a limit of Apple Silicon? idk.









I'm not sure what you are thinking especially since many of you think Apple GPU's performance isn't bad or is great compared to RTX series as they only care about specific software but for me, it is very disappointing. Do they really wish limit what they are good at which isn't even GPU intensive at all? Is this why a lot of Mac Pro users concern about the current situation? The GPU market is keep increasing but after 3 years of using Apple Silicon Mac, I'm quite pessimistic about Apple's GPU performance unless they can change the tide with M3 series with 3nm + Ray tracing or something related to GPU like media chip or ProRes Encorder/Decorder is a great example.

At this point, I have no idea whether they only wish to focus on 2D markets or adventure to 3D markets and AI/Machine learning. Is this just me feeling this way?

 

[Herbert123]

To be honest, Apple doesn't care about niche markets too much - of which 3D still is a part of according to Apple. it is a mistake in my opinion, and has pushed them out of the 3d market for a large part. Same with games, of course.

I had high hopes for Apple's new architecture, but it just can't keep up with a good Linux/Windows rig for 3d work. And I can't blame Apple, because that is not their goal. It's okay for the odd relatively mid-level 3D job (Motion graphics artists on Macs will probably be happy enough with the performance.), although beyond that I can't imagine a 3D artist foregoing the advantages of a Linux/Windows workstation for their work. Just the leagues of difference between GPU rendering speed and 3D display driver speed is reason enough to stay away, as well as the limit/expense in RAM.

Not saying it isn't workable for certain use cases: just not ideal. It is what it is.

Apple is doing very well in other areas, though. That said, I also think it is a mistake to underestimate this area and how important it may (will) become in the near future. It already is.

The way I see it, Apple will consistently settle for "good enough" here. Which makes sense from their point of view. Frustrating for 3d artists and professionals, though.

(PS I was really excited when the new architecture was introduced. I tested my 3d jobs on good Mac Studios at work. It was okay, but not great.)

 

[sunny5]

Yeah we really didn’t need another thread on this. But people do love those unfortunately.

I already checked and participated that thread but I found it not useful as I'm not getting information I wanted. If not, I wouldn't make another post like this. It's more about what Apple is doing toward GPU intensive software, not specific 3D software alone. Mac isn't really specialized as their main software aren't really GPU intensive instead of being slower than the competition.

Then how do we even define specialty? At least video is what Mac is good at and specialized but like I said, video software heavily take advantages from media chips and ProRes En/Decorder, not GPU's power itself and even then, that's the only one example.

 

[Bodhitree]

Well, I did hear that people in Apple had said they had “underestimated the importance of 3D rendering”, which makes perfect sense to me. Games are a very important field for future VR/AR platforms, and 3D is integral to that entire business.

But GPUs use up a lot of power and silicon, and therefore don’t fit so well into the performance-per-watt narrative that Apple has built around its chips. To build a low-power, high-performance GPU is arguably harder than doing it for a CPU, basically because of the need to do highly parallel operations at high speed.

NVidia has been making discrete GPUs for a long time, with the generous power limits that a wall-plugged desktop provides. To catch up to that with an architecture that comes from mobile phones, where power and silicon area too are at a premium, will be a tough ask.

 

[sunny5]

Well, I did hear that people in Apple had said they had “underestimated the importance of 3D rendering”, which makes perfect sense to me. Games are a very important field for future VR/AR platforms, and 3D is integral to that entire business.

But GPUs use up a lot of power and silicon, and therefore don’t fit so well into the performance-per-watt narrative that Apple has built around its chips. To build a low-power, high-performance GPU is arguably harder than doing it for a CPU, basically because of the need to do highly parallel operations at high speed.

NVidia has been making discrete GPUs for a long time, with the generous power limits that a wall-plugged desktop provides. To catch up to that with an architecture that comes from mobile phones, where power and silicon area too are at a premium, will be a tough ask.

I believe using a mobile architecture for desktop is already a problem which has been proven a lot with M1 Ultra. I dont care about laptops since MacBook Pro series never reached beyond 100W limitation in order to perform 100% of power even on a battery power. But a desktop is a whole different story.

Maybe they should add more GPU cores, make GPU specialized chips, or even increase the power consumption. But it's not just about hardware but also about software. Yes, Apple is showing many interests in 3D, AI/Machine learning, or something GPU intensive but currently, I doubt about it.

 

[iPadified]

I believe using a mobile architecture for desktop is already a problem which has been proven a lot with M1 Ultra. I dont care about laptops since MacBook Pro series never reached beyond 100W limitation in order to perform 100% of power even on a battery power. But a desktop is a whole different story.

Maybe they should add more GPU cores, make GPU specialized chips, or even increase the power consumption. But it's not just about hardware but also about software. Yes, Apple is showing many interests in 3D, AI/Machine learning, or something GPU intensive but currently, I doubt about it.

Likely because you did not get the support you wanted. 3D rendering IS about desktops. Close the thread.

 

[4389842]

I already checked and participated that thread but I found it not useful as I'm not getting information I wanted.

oh and so you create another thread to somehow magically gain insight into Apple‘s strategy?

 

[leman]

This is the 3rd year of migrating from Intel to ARM and yet I have to admit that Apple GPU is still poorer than what people are talking about. Let's face it, most of Mac "specialized" software such as video, music, photo, illustration, and more aren't really GPU intensive software at all. For video, it actually take advantages from media chips and ProRes chips so it's hard to say it heavily uses GPU performance and even if so, that's only one example.

Depends what you mean by "GPU intensive". It's' exactly those applications that showcase the most effective and extensive use of the GPU in the professional domain on Macs. Apple's architecture is uniquely suited for these kinds of tasks anyway.

On the other hand, most of GPU intensive software are either Nvidia based or Not Mac friendly. Blender is a great example as Apple supports directly with their resources and developers for Metal and Apple Silicon version but even on the latest version, the performance is still bad. Based on Blender benchmark, M1 Ultra is barely better than RTX 3050 which is a joke to me. It's very common and normal seeing posts about Mac GPU's poor performance from many other PC forums while Mac users clearly ignoring the fact. Resident Evil 8 is another great example. M1 Max cant even come close to mobile RTX 3070TI. Maybe that's why Nvidia's market share for external GPU is 80~90%.

M1 series was the first product iteration that apparently suffered from some limitations. In the meantime we have M2 Pro/Max which show much better performance in Blender. In fact, they perform on par or even slightly faster than equivalent (FLOPs-wise) Nvidia GPUs running CUDA. Of course, Nvidia still has a massive advantage because of hardware RT. But once Apple releases their version of hardware RT they should be able to compete with Nvidia favourably in these types of application, at least on mobile.

How come GPU intensive software aren't really supporting Apple Silicon Mac? That's because Apple GPU's performance isn't really great at all. Yes, there are only a few software and task that Apple GPU MIGHT be better but that's only a few examples. Currently, Nvidia is leading most of GPU intensive software and market for a long time and Apple isn't even near them. Yes, there are only a few GPU intensive software/app such as Maxon Cinema 4D, Resident Evil 8, Blender, and etc but that's only a few example and does not really represent the entire market. I mean who even use Mac for GPU intensive workflow? That's what Mac users are thinking which is not a good thinking, why not?

I still dont get that a lot of people seem dont care about GPU performance. Apple GPU is NOT great and I only see lack of 3D field software which actually take advantage of GPU. Even Apple is investing a lot for 3D and AI/Machine learning which is ironic compared to what Apple GPU can do. If GPU performance matter, people dont really use Mac at all. I mean, is there any GPU intensive software on Mac like game, graphic design, 3D render, AI/Machine learning, and more? If so, how many? I can say only a few.

It's too early to make these kinds of judgement. Nvidia has been building high-end desktop GPUs for decades. Apple has been in this game for only a few years. As second generation product, M2 series is phenomenal, at least when it comes to performance. M2 max is roughly 14TFLOPs at under 50 watts of power consumption.

Apple still has a lot of work in front of them, like scaling to desktop better, improving the software ecosystem and developer relations, and of course implementing advanced capabilities. But they are playing a long game.

 

[MauiPa]

I believe using a mobile architecture for desktop is already a problem which has been proven a lot with M1 Ultra. I dont care about laptops since MacBook Pro series never reached beyond 100W limitation in order to perform 100% of power even on a battery power. But a desktop is a whole different story.

Maybe they should add more GPU cores, make GPU specialized chips, or even increase the power consumption. But it's not just about hardware but also about software. Yes, Apple is showing many interests in 3D, AI/Machine learning, or something GPU intensive but currently, I doubt about it.

haha so funny. ARM is not mobile architecture, but it is used in Mobile. Apple silicon M1, M2, and soon M3 is great. I just read an overclocked Intel Xeon used 1900 wats. If that is your thing, you should get it

 

[sunny5]

haha so funny. ARM is not mobile architecture, but it is used in Mobile. Apple silicon M1, M2, and soon M3 is great. I just read an overclocked Intel Xeon used 1900 wats. If that is your thing, you should get it

M series are based on A series with same mobile CPU/GPU architecture. Do you really think CPU is the only mobile part? Read again.

 

[Krypton Deer]

1. Apple sells more laptops than desktops and M series chips are efficient. So it's great.
2. You focus on 3d modelling and gaming. And Mac is not the best at these. We all know.
3. "Will Apple care 3D markets in future?" Just use Nvidia for now. Apple does not have to make cargo trucks.

 

[Xiao_Xi]

Apple still has a lot of work in front of them, like scaling to desktop better, improving the software ecosystem and developer relations, and of course implementing advanced capabilities. But they are playing a long game

Are there any technical, commercial or marketing hurdles preventing Apple from achieving the performance of nVidia GPUs?

What could be Apple's next step? Hardware-based ray tracing? Hardware-based path tracing?

 

[stevemiller]

i've you're the target market for for 30xx and 40xx nvidia gpus for demanding 3d workloads and gaming, then i get being sad that there's nothing truly comparable yet on the mac side. but a few things to consider:

apple wasn't a big player in the space to begin with. my 2018 intel mbp had a 560x which was the fastest option at the time and was truly terrible. so much so that i had to get a vega64 (fastest desktop amd option at the time) egpu just to make it tolerable. and it was a hot, buggy mess. this was truly the era of despair.

-apple silicon out of the gate was a substantial improvement in the right direction in the laptop space. the 2021 m1 max outperforms the desktop class egpu from 3 years prior, and does so while being silent, cool and stable.

-the improvements are continuing. the m2 max is nearly double the m1 max in blender's cycles benchmark. still might not be where you want it to be yet, but the trajectory is good. and reports that they'd been looking at dedicated raytracing hardware in the past year are encouraging, even if their first attempt seemed to fall through.

-i do 3d work and have a 2080 ti tower sitting next to me that gets comparatively little use day to day. the macbook pro is plenty capable for lots of tasks and i don't feel hampered by it. the main thing is the unreal projects i'm on are windows only, so i need the tower when i'm working in the editor. ymmv, but saying these macs are bad at 3d is an oversimplification.

 

[GMShadow]

Re: Blender

We don’t have to guess what Apple is thinking there, they joined the Development Fund in late 2021 to help get Metal support up to snuff in Blender. There’s already been improvements and more will come.

 

[sunny5]

Are there any technical, commercial or marketing hurdles preventing Apple from achieving the performance of nVidia GPUs?

What could be Apple's next step? Hardware-based ray tracing? Hardware-based path tracing?

Apple GPU itself is slow, optimization is very difficult because of Metal, time and budget issue, macOS itself, OS market share, rendering method, and more...

 

[olimerkido2]

This is the 3rd year of migrating from Intel to ARM and yet I have to admit that Apple GPU is still poorer than what people are talking about. Let's face it, most of Mac "specialized" software such as video, music, photo, illustration, and more aren't really GPU intensive software at all. For video, it actually take advantages from media chips and ProRes chips so it's hard to say it heavily uses GPU performance and even if so, that's only one example.

On the other hand, most of GPU intensive software are either Nvidia based or Not Mac friendly. Blender is a great example as Apple supports directly with their resources and developers for Metal and Apple Silicon version but even on the latest version, the performance is still bad. Based on Blender benchmark, M1 Ultra is barely better than RTX 3050 which is a joke to me. It's very common and normal seeing posts about Mac GPU's poor performance from many other PC forums while Mac users clearly ignoring the fact. Resident Evil 8 is another great example. M1 Max cant even come close to mobile RTX 3070TI. Maybe that's why Nvidia's market share for external GPU is 80~90%.

How come GPU intensive software aren't really supporting Apple Silicon Mac? That's because Apple GPU's performance isn't really great at all. Yes, there are only a few software and task that Apple GPU MIGHT be better but that's only a few examples. Currently, Nvidia is leading most of GPU intensive software and market for a long time and Apple isn't even near them. Yes, there are only a few GPU intensive software/app such as Maxon Cinema 4D, Resident Evil 8, Blender, and etc but that's only a few example and does not really represent the entire market. I mean who even use Mac for GPU intensive workflow? That's what Mac users are thinking which is not a good thinking, why not?

I still dont get that a lot of people seem dont care about GPU performance. Apple GPU is NOT great and I only see lack of 3D field software which actually take advantage of GPU. Even Apple is investing a lot for 3D and AI/Machine learning which is ironic compared to what Apple GPU can do. If GPU performance matter, people dont really use Mac at all. I mean, is there any GPU intensive software on Mac like game, graphic design, 3D render, AI/Machine learning, and more? If so, how many? I can say only a few.







I have to question them: Does Apple really wish to stay and focus in 2D fields where GPU power isn't really necessary OR useful? Mac is well known for having a poor GPU performance for a while and ironically, Mac specialized software aren't GPU intensive which makes me doubt about Apple GPU. You might say, I dont care, no it's not, you are wrong, blah blah... But once you start comparing with RTX 30,40 series to Apple GPU, what will you say? If Power by Watt matters, it doesn't work on desktop especially in terms of maximum performance.

Whether you care about GPU performance or not, it's would be nice if Apple GPU get more performance for 3D fields of graphic intensive software to compete against Nvidia as they are dominating all GPU market by 80~90%. Beside, it was Apple themselves who compared M1 Max and Ultra to Nvidia and yet, they never get closed to them in terms of performance.

The only solution I can think of for now is to unlock the power limit for High Power mode. Currently, a Low Power mode actually use only high efficiency cores to reduce the power uses but a High Power mode? It doesn't do anything instead of controlling the fan speed which doesn't even work mostly. The power limit for all Apple Silicon GPU is too much especially for desktops. Or is that a limit of Apple Silicon? idk.









I'm not sure what you are thinking especially since many of you think Apple GPU's performance isn't bad or is great compared to RTX series as they only care about specific software but for me, it is very disappointing. Do they really wish limit what they are good at which isn't even GPU intensive at all? Is this why a lot of Mac Pro users concern about the current situation? The GPU market is keep increasing but after 3 years of using Apple Silicon Mac, I'm quite pessimistic about Apple's GPU performance unless they can change the tide with M3 series with 3nm + Ray tracing or something related to GPU like media chip or ProRes Encorder/Decorder is a great example.

At this point, I have no idea whether they only wish to focus on 2D markets or adventure to 3D markets and AI/Machine learning. Is this just me feeling this way?

The Apple Silicon GPUs are in fact very powerful, your confusing GPU power with software support, even a really powerful GPU can run a graphics app slowly if the app is poorly written for that GPU, developers have spent decades following the Nvidia way of graphics, you just need patience to wait for developers to slowly get used to Apple Silicon and Metal and eventually apps and games will run very well.