AMD FirePro D500 graphics card (Mac Pro Late 2013) doesn’t meet Oculus Rift’s specifications

[koyoot]

...but you can't run graphics on dual D300s on Apple OSX.

We are discussing OS X, or Windows? Is Rift for OS X?

Are you unable to run dual GPUs under Windows? Is it not possible to execute graphics on dual GPUs under Windows?

What is the core count of D300s? What is the core count of R9 290? Does the core count of R9 290 divide by 2 and give D300s core count?

Will D500 and D700 have higher core count and more horsepower than single R9 290 to run Rift?

Im not asking to get your answers because they are obvious.

 

[AidenShaw]

We are discussing OS X, or Windows? Is Rift for OS X?

Are you unable to run dual GPUs under Windows? Is it not possible to execute graphics on dual GPUs under Windows?

What is the core count of D300s? What is the core count of R9 290? Does the core count of R9 290 divide by 2 and give D300s core count?

Will D500 and D700 have higher core count and more horsepower than single R9 290 to run Rift?

Im not asking to get your answers because they are obvious.

Are you suggesting that people should buy the MP6,1 to run Windows?

Are you assuming that Crossfire scales linearly on unknown applications?

So much for Apple's hype almost three years ago on the GPUs in the MP6,1. We now see the emperor's clothes (or not).

 

[MMcCraryNJ]

From what I believe the Playstation VR is released December 31st 2016.
Amazon accidentally listed it in Canada (approx £550 gbp) and the Oculus Rift is said to be about £350 (this is from a UK newspaper article).

Both the December 31st date and the price listing were placeholders only. Sony has said on multiple occasions that PS VR will be released in the first half of 2016. And the price was just a placeholder price...Amazon has no inside information as to what the retail price of it will be. Amazon also has a habit of putting up pre-order pages with much higher prices than they anticipate the product being...this is due to the fact that Amazon has a pre-order price match guarantee, where if the price drops on a pre-order before the release date, they will give you the lower price automatically. Thus, if Amazon low-balled their pre-order prices, they would be obligated to ship you an item at their low-balled price, meaning they lose money.

TL;DR - Amazon has no such insider information, and both the release date and the price were meant as placeholders only and are not accurate.

What we do know, direct from Sony, and until they say otherwise: PS VR will be out in the first half of 2016, and while they haven't made any firm price announcements, they claim it will be priced "Similar to a new console platform". Many people are expecting a US $399 price for the hardware itself, and a $499 bundle with the camera, Move controller, etc.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Not interested in these excuses. I'll look at app performance instead.

Buyers don't need excuses for the choices they make. Only they know what they need to get the job done. There is some crossover where some people will use gaming machines for work or perhaps they don't have the funds for a workstation and make due with what they can afford.

 

[bogg]

Are you suggesting that people should buy the MP6,1 to run Windows?

Are you assuming that Crossfire scales linearly on unknown applications?

So much for Apple's hype almost three years ago on the GPUs in the MP6,1. We now see the emperor's clothes (or not).

Oculus Rift still doesn't support OS X so why is the discussion regarding crossfire in OS X even relevant to this thread. It is one of the reasons rift isn't supported on OS X sure, but the topic is regarding Windows as the rift compliance test only run on Windows...

 

[maflynn]

[MOD NOTE]
Stop with the arguing and bickering.

 

[ghislain]

Finally the Oculus Rift is available for pre-order. The people from Oculus provided a Rift compatibility tool for Windows to find out if your PC is compatible. I ran this tool in Bootcamp, on Windows 10 and it appears the pro-level AMD FirePro D500 cards in my expensive Mac Pro (late 2013) don’t meet the Rift’s recommended specification.

I’m going to order a Rift anyway because I think VR is to most exciting technology since... yeah well... the internet. I just sincerely hope I’m not going to have to buy a separate computer on top of my almost €4000 costing Mac Pro to enjoy the technology to the fullest.

What do you guys think, start saving up for a new computer?

Same for me with D700. This is ridiculus...

 

[bogg]

Same for me with D700. This is ridiculus...

First of, you guys do realize that the firepros probably got selected for their OpenCL performance (which is still really good and you basically need dual gtx980:s or gtx970:s to beat the dual d700 setup).
Also that application probably only parses a list of pre approved hardware and doesn't do any benchmarking to give you the result (from my understanding of it).
Crossfire enabled d500 and d700 setups should be more than enough for the oculus rift

 

[ghislain]

Even so, this thing is far too expensive...

 

[netkas]

First of, you guys do realize that the firepros probably got selected for their OpenCL performance (which is still really good and you basically need dual gtx980:s or gtx970:s to beat the dual d700 setup).
Also that application probably only parses a list of pre approved hardware and doesn't do any benchmarking to give you the result (from my understanding of it).
Crossfire enabled d500 and d700 setups should be more than enough for the oculus rift

Actually big NO here.

you know what is critical in VR? latency. That's why you need good gpu able to provide high fps to get low latency.

You know what CrossFire adds? it adds more latency. double the latency for a frame to be rendered (compared to same fps on single gpu card).

looks at it the other way. For example you have 40 fps on single D700 in windows. That's not enough for vr.

You enable CrossFire and getting now 70-75 fps. sounds good. But latency (time between you move controller and until you see the result on display) remained exactly same as in 40 fps case. Still not good for VR.

 

[bogg]

Actually big NO here.

you know what is critical in VR? latency. That's why you need good gpu able to provide high fps to get low latency.

You know what CrossFire adds? it adds more latency. double the latency for a frame to be rendered (compared to same fps on single gpu card).

looks at it the other way. For example you have 40 fps on single D700 in windows. That's not enough for vr.

You enable CrossFire and getting now 70-75 fps. sounds good. But latency (time between you move controller and until you see the result on display) remained exactly same as in 40 fps case. Still not good for VR.

Didn't think about latency, thanks for pointing that out!
[doublepost=1452512653][/doublepost]

Even so, this thing is far too expensive...

Then you shouldn't have bought it? Only buy things that do what you want and you can afford

 

[koyoot]

Are you suggesting that people should buy the MP6,1 to run Windows?

Are you assuming that Crossfire scales linearly on unknown applications?

So much for Apple's hype almost three years ago on the GPUs in the MP6,1. We now see the emperor's clothes (or not).

Im am not suggesting anything. Rift is currently available for Windows only.

Secondly, dual GPU setup does not run exactly Crossfired in VR application. One GPU is for one display in this case. They are running simultaneously but on different displays. Of course, they have to be synched, but for that you have API. Similar case is with wide, robust GPU with asynchronous compute. Two copies of the same application shown on two displays. At least in the first form of VR.

About Latency. So far Nvidia touted that their latency is in the range of 57 ns, which is not enough. AMD and Carmack said that you need latency of 20 ns to get appreciable experience of VR. AMD GPUs are not having problem with this. And in LiquidVR API they dual GPU setups are not recognized as Crossfire.

 

[Arron Rouse]

I don't really understand why my Mac Pro would last longer if I don't play games on it.

There's a huge pressure on gamers to upgrade -- a few frames per second lower than your friend and he's beating you? Maybe you need a new graphics card to beat him. Or a new game is being hyped and all of the early reviews show that you'll only get 29FPS but an i7 with a GTX980 gets 39FPS. And so on. In gaming, every few months there's something new released that might push your system beyond its capabilities. You've got £1000+ of machine under regular pressure from £40 pieces of software.

If you don't use a Mac Pro for gaming, the only upgrade pressure it gets is from the professional applications that you use and your own happiness with their performance. So it lasts longer.

For example, I've got a mate who uses a bought-new Power Mac G5 for Quark. It still does what he wants so the only upgrade it has ever had is more memory. On the other hand, his games PC has changed every few years.

--------

Separate note on the topic of VR and Oculus Rift. Here in the UK, the biggest retail chain is PC World. For a laugh I went and had a look at what would and wouldn't be capable of using the Rift. Of the 102 types of PC they stock, 49 of them are specifically games machines. None of the non-gaming PCs made the minimum spec.

Of the 49 gaming PCs, only 24 met the base specs for Rift and the cheapest was £1000. Of the 24, only 11 were beyond the base specs. The cheapest of those 11 was £1500.

There will probably be a good profit to be made in a few months for system builders. I'm expecting a lot of signs saying something like, "Get your custom Rift machine here! Guaranteed to exceed the minimum requirements! Only £1500!" The really good thing for those system builders will be that the base spec is a GTX970. Which means that all of those Rift machines will need to be upgraded next year when the games developers start trying to outdo each other with eye candy.

 

[linuxcooldude]

There's a huge pressure on gamers to upgrade -- a few frames per second lower than your friend and he's beating you? Maybe you need a new graphics card to beat him. Or a new game is being hyped and all of the early reviews show that you'll only get 29FPS but an i7 with a GTX980 gets 39FPS. And so on. In gaming, every few months there's something new released that might push your system beyond its capabilities. You've got £1000+ of machine under regular pressure from £40 pieces of software.

If you don't use a Mac Pro for gaming, the only upgrade pressure it gets is from the professional applications that you use and your own happiness with their performance. So it lasts longer.

For example, I've got a mate who uses a bought-new Power Mac G5 for Quark. It still does what he wants so the only upgrade it has ever had is more memory. On the other hand, his games PC has changed every few years.

--------

Separate note on the topic of VR and Oculus Rift. Here in the UK, the biggest retail chain is PC World. For a laugh I went and had a look at what would and wouldn't be capable of using the Rift. Of the 102 types of PC they stock, 49 of them are specifically games machines. None of the non-gaming PCs made the minimum spec.

Of the 49 gaming PCs, only 24 met the base specs for Rift and the cheapest was £1000. Of the 24, only 11 were beyond the base specs. The cheapest of those 11 was £1500.

There will probably be a good profit to be made in a few months for system builders. I'm expecting a lot of signs saying something like, "Get your custom Rift machine here! Guaranteed to exceed the minimum requirements! Only £1500!" The really good thing for those system builders will be that the base spec is a GTX970. Which means that all of those Rift machines will need to be upgraded next year when the games developers start trying to outdo each other with eye candy.

Quite true. A bulk of the current PC's out there don't meet the minimum requirements either. Its going to be quite costly to even use VR, unless you already have the minimum requirement PC.

 

[h9826790]

I think in 2016, PS VR is the safest way to enjoy this new tech. It may be expensive, but most likely still relatively cheap. And we don't have to worry about crash / driver / performance issue etc. Of course, PS VR most likely is very very game orientated, unlike VR in the PC which can do much more. But until this tech is mature in the PC world, and have enough review to prove that running VR in PC have better experience than on the PS4. I won't invest too much for VR on PC.

Yes, it looks like very easy to meet the minimum requirement, just a 970. But I am sure the experience won't be as good as the PS VR due to optimization. Just like running any PC game with only the minimum requirement hardware, they just won't do better job than the PS4.

 

[tuxon86]

I think in 2016, PS VR is the safest way to enjoy this new tech. It may be expensive, but most likely still relatively cheap. And we don't have to worry about crash / driver / performance issue etc. Of course, PS VR most likely is very very game orientated, unlike VR in the PC which can do much more. But until this tech is mature in the PC world, and have enough review to prove that running VR in PC have better experience than on the PS4. I won't invest too much for VR on PC.

Yes, it looks like very easy to meet the minimum requirement, just a 970. But I am sure the experience won't be as good as the PS VR due to optimization. Just like running any PC game with only the minimum requirement hardware, they just won't do better job than the PS4.

Considering that the PS4 APU has trouble delivering 1080p/60fps consistently I don't have that much faith in the PS VR delivering a good first impression of the tech.

 

[Arron Rouse]

Considering that the PS4 APU has trouble delivering 1080p/60fps consistently I don't have that much faith in the PS VR delivering a good first impression of the tech.

A fair thing to worry about but the devs will be hitting a fixed target. They'll be able to tune it to the PS4 graphics chip so that you always get smooth VR. Oculus and SteamVR developers will have to QA for loads of different graphics chips.

 

[koyoot]

Considering that the PS4 APU has trouble delivering 1080p/60fps consistently I don't have that much faith in the PS VR delivering a good first impression of the tech.

Why not? Angry Birds will not have a problem tu run even in 4K on that hardware

P.S. I would love to see Journey on PS VR.

We are getting slightly off topic

 

[tuxon86]

A fair thing to worry about but the devs will be hitting a fixed target. They'll be able to tune it to the PS4 graphics chip so that you always get smooth VR. Oculus and SteamVR developers will have to QA for loads of different graphics chips.

They've trouble getting smooth plain gpu performance in games presently even with half resolution games. Look at the list of compatible games on wiki and tell me how they'll achieve that when rendering two screens...
[doublepost=1452542660][/doublepost]

Why not? Angry Birds will not have a problem tu run even in 4K on that hardware

P.S. I would love to see Journey on PS VR.

We are getting slightly off topic

Even funnier... Think of the PS VR combined with a "Move" like gesture system... The sales of personnal invalidity insurance and home repairs will hit the roof

 

[h9826790]

Considering that the PS4 APU has trouble delivering 1080p/60fps consistently I don't have that much faith in the PS VR delivering a good first impression of the tech.

The PS VR will come with an "extra device" to drive the VR, Sony didn't say what is it, but most likely is an eGPU. Otherwise, there is no way it can deliver 90FPS with good graphics (yes, they said it need 90FPS to get good VR experience, 60PFS may be good for playing video games on TV, but not VR). And I guess this is one of the reason why the VR package is more expensive than the PS4 itself, because that powerful eGPU(s) is expensive.

IMO, that Amazon price accident is not a 100% accident, but Sony want to know how public react to this price. They sell the PS4 at a too low price. AFAIK, which is actually lower than their cost (I mean the total cost, not just the hardware's value), they lost money by selling every single console. And this is the reason why they try very hard to make the new "cut down" version (on the other hand, MS making an upgrade version XB1 with SSHD and a much better controller, because they can make more money by selling more and better hardware). I am not sure if Sony can do this again on the VR. Even though Sony can get extra income by selling games, but at this moment, most of the profit in the console gaming industry goes into MS pocket. Sony get the market, but not the money (like the Android's phone).

They may want to get some money back by selling the VR hardware. TBH, I really doubt if they can do it. The public already react to that "leak price", and most people said it's too high (because they compare it to that "abnormally low" price PS4). And now Sony stuck. If they sell the VR at a
"proper price", gamer may not buy it. But if they sell it at lower price again, they may again lost more money by selling more hardware, which is not a good idea for them.

 

[tuxon86]

The PS VR will come with an "extra device" to drive the VR, Sony didn't say what is it, but most likely is an eGPU. Otherwise, there is no way it can deliver 90FPS with good graphics (yes, they said it need 90FPS to get good VR experience, 60PFS may be good for playing video games on TV, but not VR). And I guess this is one of the reason why the VR package is more expensive than the PS4 itself, because that powerful eGPU(s) is expensive.

Would be funny if that eGPU is a GTX970

 

[Arron Rouse]

They've trouble getting smooth plain gpu performance in games presently even with half resolution games. Look at the list of compatible games on wiki and tell me how they'll achieve that when rendering two screens...

Sure you're right to worry but there are several factors behind the varying frame rates on PS4. Think of it this way: when you're gaming on a PC and things start to lag, you can turn down some of the eye candy, drop the anti-aliasing, cut down the filtering and so on. It's quite possible that's what they'll do for VR. Or they could muck it up horribly as you're fearing.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Yawn...Apple is not interested in bleeding edge technology until a market has matured, thats if they plan on using it at all or design their own. As mentioned, Oculus Rift is mostly used for gaming at this time, something that the majority of Mac Pro users users is not its primary function. Maybe when we see applications geared toward pro users such as CAD, engineering which is what the Mac Pro was designed to do. Not for playing kids games.



Apple already does, its called iOS. Gaming on the mobile platform has already passed gaming on the PC. Apples Gaming Center has more users then XBox Live.

Funny, these guys at Pixar must be playing kids games:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-oculus-rift-virtual-reality-movie-henry.html

The sad reality is that the nMP is incapable of letting people do and entire category professional media work (ie VR). While the cMP will.

 

[MMcCraryNJ]

Out of the hundreds of gaming and tech press that have spent significant hands-on time with the PS VR, as well as the general public that have attended tech shows and the like, I have not heard or read a single major complaint about PS VR. Many have outright stated that they could not detect a single performance difference from the Oculus Rift experience. Some of stated that the tracking is indeed better on Sony's machine. Many have also stated that the headset itself is a lot more comfortable to wear, due to the weight being evenly supported by the top of the head and not the face/bridge of the nose, which also means people who wear corrective eyeglasses can play in total comfort as well.

A gaming PC can run laps around the PS4 in terms of raw power, nobody can deny that. But people often forget the significant advantage PS4 developers have, and that's coding much closer to the metal than on the PC platform. With PS VR, developers will be able to target one set of system specs and deliver a constant experience for everyone.

I really don't foresee any major issues with PS VR in terms of performance or quality. As stated, 90fps is the base minimum for frame rate, and they are also providing developers tools to more easily obtains 120fps in less graphically demanding titles.

And as noted, the price differential between an Oculus setup and a PS VR setup is significant. The Oculus experience really won't be one that's worthy of a $800-$1100 up charge (considering the PC spec you need to run it)

 

[mcnallym]

Funny, these guys at Pixar must be playing kids games:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-oculus-rift-virtual-reality-movie-henry.html

The sad reality is that the nMP is incapable of letting people do and entire category professional media work (ie VR). While the cMP will.

MacVidCards has looked at and even with the top CPU then the CPU doesn't come up to scratch in terms of meeting the recommended CPU performance for Oculus Rift. You will get the GPU grunt but not the CPU.

The nMP can provide the CPU but not the GPU.

Probably why OSX isn't under the target OS.

Just in case you missed it here it is below.

So, quick update. First up, looks like no Mac Pro ever made is going to meet the specs out of the box.

They specifically requires an AMD R9 290, which is Hawaii. ie, the generation AFTER 7970/R9 280X/D700.

And the SDK versions specifcally say after AMD 7xxx and "no multi GPU". So, no Mac Pro ever made meets this.

I just tried with a 5,1 sporting a single X5690, and it told me my CPU wasn't good enough. I followed the link and it told me that it was all about single core speed and apparently the age of an i7 3.46 makes it slower than the required i5 4590 3.3.

That being said, my guess is that they have put those standards pretty high to make sure the original experience is awesome, and not average. But I doubt they will have "locks" to keep mid level stuff out, and if they do, someone like Netkas will find a "fix". Stuff without enough VRAM may be excluded however by functional limits. As a "for instance" I can tell you from experience that Uningine Valley will crash and quit on Extreme HD if you don't have at least 1GB of VRAM. I could see this requiring more than 2 or 3GB, which would exclude all but D700.

I think I'm still the only one to get eGPU working on Windows with nMP but eGPU with other Macs will likely work as well. Will be silly if I have to put the 3.7 4-Core back in to get it to say "A-OK"

All in all, with the vast and sweeping compromises made for "thin and shiny" over function, Occulus Rift will not be putting a good light on Macs.