Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

joevt

macrumors 604
Jun 21, 2012
6,966
4,259
Drivers for the 6600XT came with Monterey 12.1, so I don't think that would work... but I could be wrong, also why are you still running Mavericks in 2022?

@tsialex any idea if this will work? This is a really weird scenario
Without drivers, a Mac can usually use the EFI framebuffer that was initialized before macOS boots (you may need OpenCore or RefindPlus to initialize the EFI framebuffer of certain GPUs in certain Macs). It won't have EDID reading and resolution switching and acceleration. Without acceleration, you won't get UI blur effects (the menubar and login screen and some other UI elements will be a solid color). You can at least switch between retina mode and not retina mode (both modes use the same resolution).

My MacPro3,1 with GTX 680 has the latest revision of every macOS version 10.4 (Tiger) to 12.4 (Monterey). GTX 680 driver doesn't exist properly until 10.8 (Mountain Lion) but I can still use the older macOS installations.
 

troncomac

macrumors newbie
Nov 18, 2008
15
1
Actually I need Maverick in order to run protools HD: I have protools HD DSP cards, its audio interface and all my audio stuff connected to it for audio recording in real time. For mixing audio and graphics/video I would then move to Monterey... In the meantime yesterday my macpro could not boot, showing graphics glitches (vertical red bars on both screen, also on the OC boot menu). I suspect the 7950 has gone... hopefully it's not a mobo related problem!
 

troncomac

macrumors newbie
Nov 18, 2008
15
1
Just to let you know: I tried to substitute the 7950 with a 560RX I had at work. It worked and the red stripes disappeared. Moreover I managed to boot in mavericks through open core!
 

macsoundsolutions

macrumors regular
Jan 12, 2010
205
101

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2022-06-11 at 5.45.02 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2022-06-11 at 5.45.02 PM.png
    61.2 KB · Views: 312
  • A7553D35-6143-4425-ADFF-B7723968EED3_1_105_c.jpeg
    A7553D35-6143-4425-ADFF-B7723968EED3_1_105_c.jpeg
    171.1 KB · Views: 249
  • RX6800XT METAL.png
    RX6800XT METAL.png
    103.2 KB · Views: 217
  • RX6800XT OPEN CL.png
    RX6800XT OPEN CL.png
    114.7 KB · Views: 230
  • IMG_9955.jpeg
    IMG_9955.jpeg
    464.2 KB · Views: 301
  • IMG_9953.jpeg
    IMG_9953.jpeg
    611.2 KB · Views: 273
  • Rise of the Tombrader 6800xt.jpeg
    Rise of the Tombrader 6800xt.jpeg
    426.7 KB · Views: 271

Alexis Noel

macrumors regular
Apr 27, 2020
112
106
Houston
I have created a patch that allows AMD RX6600/RX6800/RX6900 cards to work on a Mac Pro 4,1/5,1 (and maybe a 3,1? I have no idea if that's even possible). I examined ROM dumps of RX6600/6600XT and RX6800/6800XT/6900XT from various manufacturers, and every one I looked at used the same (broken) AMD reference code in the x86_64 EFI section (the manufacturer-specific differences are in the non-EFI section). While it's certainly possible that some cards won't do that, it looks like a one-size-fits-all patch may be possible here. (As with all such things, this comes without any warranty, use at your own risk, the usual caveats apply.)

I do not possess an RX6x00 card to test with. @caingraywood was generous enough to perform tests on his XFX SWFT309 RX6800XT and Sapphire Nitro+ RX6900XT cards. Many thanks to him.
(NOTE that this has been tested on RX6800XT and RX6900XT, but the RX6600/6600XT has NOT yet been tested. There is no reason it shouldn't work, but you should be aware that if you try it, you're the tester. Please let me know if you do try an RX6600/6600XT.)

Because I don't have one of these cards, I can't offer any real assistance with the flashing process. As I understand it, the ATIflash/AMDVBFlash utilities will work with the RX6x00 cards, but you'll need to investigate this on your own (and hopefully post your findings here, so others can benefit as well). (Note that @caingraywood was using a hardware flasher for his tests, so I don't think he can offer software flashing advice, either.)

Attached is a ZIP file containing a MacOS program named FixRX6x00ROM. It's a command-line program you run from a Terminal session. You should not need any special permissions; however, programs sometimes lose their executable mode bits when using ZIP, so you may need to execute chmod 755 FixRX6x00ROM after unzipping.

You'll need to acquire a dump of your current ROM, using whatever means you have available (ATIflash/AMDVBFlash/other). Once you have that, make a copy and put it somewhere safe, then you can run ./FixRX6x00ROM {filename} from a Terminal session (e.g. ./FixRX6x00ROM RX6800XT.XFX.SWFT309.original.BIN)

FixRX6x00ROM does the following:
  • Reads the dump of your current ROM, verifies that it's of the expected format
  • Searches the dump of your current ROM for the AMD Reference code (6600 or 6800/6900).
  • If the AMD Reference code is found, replaces it with the correct (6600 or 6800/6900) patched code.
  • Creates a patched file named the same as the original, but with ".PATCHED" appended (e.g. RX6800XT.XFX.SWFT309.original.BIN.PATCHED). Your original ROM dump file is left unmodified.

If your current ROM does not appear to be properly formatted, or it does not contain the AMD Reference code, FixRX6x00ROM will display an appropriate message and do nothing else. If the patcher fails for your ROM, please zip up the ROM dump and PM it to me. I'll take a look at it when I can.

If FixRX6x00ROM successfully patches your ROM, you can then flash the patched ROM back to your video card (again, using whatever means you determine to be appropriate), and it should then work with MacOS. IMPORTANT NOTE: apparently, for the RX6x00(XT) to work with MacOS, you'll need to be running OpenCore, WhateverGreen, Lilu, and include agdpmod=pikera in your boot-args. Failure to do this will almost certainly result in a black screen after booting. (Again, I don't have a card to play with, so any questions regarding the boot-args or the specific configuration of OpenCore, WhateverGreen, and/or Lilu need to be asked of someone else.)

The patch itself is only five bytes. The EFI code in the ROM is compressed, though, so making any change causes the entire EFI section to change - that's why, if you compare your original ROM file and the patched ROM file, you'll see a lot more than 5 bytes changed.

IMPORTANT: This patch does not attempt to provide pre-boot support (e.g. it won't let you see the native Apple boot picker). If you require that, MVC apparently provides that functionality. This patch simply fixes the bug in the AMD code that prevented the card from booting properly. With the patch, these cards should behave just like any other non-Mac video card - black screen until either OpenCore initializes or the MacOS drivers load.
ALSO: The patch does not modify clock speeds, temperature thresholds, timing data, or anything other than the EFI initialization process - if you've tweaked your card, the tweaks should still be there after patching (alternatively, you can tweak the card after patching as well, assuming your tweak program doesn't overwrite the patch).

The patched ROMs have also been tested on a non-Mac system. The nature of the patch is such that it shouldn't affect operation on non-Mac systems (i.e. it should work just fine on a Windows or Linux system), and small-scale testing supports that. I'm interested to hear if anyone finds an exception where a non-Mac doesn't work properly.

And before anyone asks: even though patching the Mac Pro BootROM seems like the cleaner solution (which would allow these cards to work unmodified), that's a much larger project that creates some new problems of its own. In this case, patching individual cards is actually the better solution, at least IMHO.

[EDIT: to cut down on the back-and-forth between MacOS and Windows during this process, in a later post I attached both a Windows (command-line) version of the patcher program and copies of various RX6x00 ROMs from TechPowerUp, already pre-patched.]

Courtesy of @caingraywood:

1650536306200-png.1994480

1650524931122-png.1994432

1650524963695-png.1994433


And now, back to the AVX integration problem that's been driving me up the wall...

[EDIT (for clarity): that last sentence refers to my AVX emulator, which is an entirely separate project that has nothing to do with the RX6x00 patch. I only detoured into the RX6x00 code because I was frustrated with the AVX project.]


I have an XTXH variant 6900XT in my cMP with the current Martin Los's OC package (0.8.0). The card shows display when I unplug and plug in my monitor. The system only shows is as Navi21 16GB card. I seem to be only getting limited access to the GPU. Can't run benchmarks or try any games. Have not tried any A/V production projects yet. HW Access says enabled.

Per https://dortania.github.io/GPU-Buyers-Guide/modern-gpus/amd-gpu.html#navi-23-series :
  • The XTXH variant (Device ID: 0x73AF) is supported with WhateverGreen 1.5.2 and spoofing device-id to 0x73AE.
I don't see the above in the plist, so I'm assuming it is outside of the current OC package? How would I spoof the device-id of the GPU?

Additional note: I did do the ROM Patch noted above.
 

Alexis Noel

macrumors regular
Apr 27, 2020
112
106
Houston
Ended up using a regular, XTX, reference 6900 XT and everything is working normally as of now.

Only thing is I need to hot-plug the monitor every now and then. Mostly on boot and after the cMP being asleep for sometime. Is there a way to remedy this?
 

prefuse07

Suspended
Jan 27, 2020
895
1,073
San Francisco, CA
Ended up using a regular, XTX, reference 6900 XT and everything is working normally as of now.

Only thing is I need to hot-plug the monitor every now and then. Mostly on boot and after the cMP being asleep for sometime. Is there a way to remedy this?

That should not be happening indeed -- are you running Monterey or something?
 

troncomac

macrumors newbie
Nov 18, 2008
15
1
I finished purchasing a XFX 6600 XT (SWFT 210), followed the instructions and now it flawlessly works on my cMP 5.1. Now, how can I reliably test its performance? BTW I attached a 2010 27" iMac via display port and it works perfectly as an external display! Monterey on cMP and High Sierra on iMac
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
I finished purchasing a XFX 6600 XT (SWFT 210), followed the instructions and now it flawlessly works on my cMP 5.1. Now, how can I reliably test its performance? BTW I attached a 2010 27" iMac via display port and it works perfectly as an external display! Monterey on cMP and High Sierra on iMac
Luxmark scores usually quite stable. There, it can help to check if your card is performing reliably.
 

Ashok.Vardhan

macrumors member
Oct 4, 2017
87
33
Visakhapatnam, India
I think I saw someone applied it to 6950. Sometimes the device-id can be spoofed to a supported card and it will work, but there is no guarantee. It is a trial/error process.

This reminded me of an experience using the Panasonic P2 B-series cards and the subsequent P2 C-series cards. Functionality wise, in all basic specifications the B and C series cards were identical, data-throughput, inbuilt hardware/firmware (flash chips, circuit board), etc. The only difference between the new SKU# and the old SKU# were that they were manufactured at different facilities.

However, the card readers associated with P2 format i.e. AU-XPD1 drives, within the AU-XPD1 itself there are two hardware types. One type that supported "B series expressP2 cards". The latest version of this type is Ver.1.20; and those of an earlier version (say Ver.1.1) which did not.

The firmware update file for both these readers was common, and the firmware version of each unit was automatically recognized so that it could be updated. Between the two AU-XPD1 versions (1.20 and 1.1) there was no physical difference, i.e. the slot format had not changed, yet newer series (B and C) could not be read on ver.1.1 card readers.

All of them still being the same "P2 format".

As end users there is a tendency to think parent manufacturer introduced new versions because of updated hardware, different factory installed firmware, etc. Not always the case.

Sometimes the spoofing might work, if it is something like a different model# or sku# because of just being from a different factory that produced them.

I would have never known, unless the Panasonic company representative explained all the complicated history of the differences in a forum, because some users started to think C-series were "faster" because they were a newer iteration.

And internally the Panasonic P2-card themselves were actually SDHC/SDXC cards connected together in a RAID architecture to achieve faster read/write speeds (for which Panasonic were charging a hefty premium from the actual costs of their individual internal components)
 
Last edited:

prefuse07

Suspended
Jan 27, 2020
895
1,073
San Francisco, CA

Acceleroto

macrumors member
Jul 11, 2009
39
2
Huge thanks to @Syncretic for the patch! I just updated my 2010 cMP to Monterey and a Sapphire Pulse 6600XT (11309-03-20G). It seems to be working great. The Geekbench Metal results are over 8x the GTX780 I replaced.

No real issues with the update/upgrade, except for the typical RTFM ones. ;) I used my original ATI 5870 to have the boot screen when I did the OCLP macOS bump, then reverted the root patches to get the GPU acceleration working. The 6600XT BIOS patch was cake on a Windows machine. Also, no power mod is needed for this card. For now, I'm just using the 2x6-pin to 8-pin adapter I used on my 780. I have a 2x mini to 8-pin around here somewhere...

Thanks!!

Screen Shot 2022-06-21 at 11.06.13 PM.png Screen Shot 2022-06-21 at 11.33.03 PM.png Screen Shot 2022-06-21 at 10.34.34 PM.png
 
Last edited:

thirdhonk

macrumors member
Mar 20, 2022
47
38
Just curious, is the Gigabyte 6900 XT the only 6900 XT card that fits in the 5,1 without removing the side blowing fan? Most seem to be 320 mm or so while the Gigabyte is only 286 mm.
 

MarkC426

macrumors 68040
May 14, 2008
3,693
2,096
UK
Exactly what is the difference between 6900xt (PC card) and the w6900x mpx (2019 Mac Pro card), in terms of performance/power...?
Considering it's 6x the cost.....
 

Matty_TypeR

macrumors 6502a
Oct 1, 2016
641
555
UK
The Gigabyte 6900xt is one of the only cards that fits in the 7.1 mac pro also. I have a sapphire 6900xt which would not fit inside, 320mm long. but have to say the gigabyte card works well. The reference AMD 6900xt also fits inside, both cards are 2.5 slot though, so in a mac pro 5.1 swallow up 3 pcie slots.

I have no idea why the apple W6900X is 6x the cost, does it not have 32g ram and passive heatsink with its unique power from the board no PCie power cables. not sure if that warrants 6x the price though, Apple tax of course.
 

MarkC426

macrumors 68040
May 14, 2008
3,693
2,096
UK
Yeah, just curious.
The 6900xt is about £950 on Amazon
The w6900x is £5900 (£6000 from Apple)

It does have 32 rather than 16.
Being an MPX card must have more benefits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Matty_TypeR

startergo

macrumors 603
Sep 20, 2018
5,020
2,282
W6900x has infinity link and more memory. It is the fastest AMD card.
The Gigabyte 6900xt is one of the only cards that fits in the 7.1 mac pro also. I have a sapphire 6900xt which would not fit inside, 320mm long. but have to say the gigabyte card works well. The reference AMD 6900xt also fits inside, both cards are 2.5 slot though, so in a mac pro 5.1 swallow up 3 pcie slots.

I have no idea why the apple W6900X is 6x the cost, does it not have 32g ram and passive heatsink with its unique power from the board no PCie power cables. not sure if that warrants 6x the price though, Apple tax of course.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.