The band on the Titanic kept playing till the ship sank.
Unlike some folks here, however, they were never under the illusion that they weren't going to get wet.
Nor did they get upset at those pointing out the rising waters.
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.
Apple's Glass Jaw revealed by Steam VR test
- Thread starter MacVidCards
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The band on the Titanic kept playing till the ship sank.
Unlike some folks here, however, they were never under the illusion that they weren't going to get wet.
Nor did they get upset at those pointing out the rising waters.
I think it's pretty obvious that, if Apple plans on releasing VR-related hardware, they will supply the performance to power it when they announce their VR hardware. If not, they will have probably figured out how to accomplish what they plan to do with VR, but on less-demanding hardware.
You can't seriously compare a company's current tech to a product they haven't even announced yet. That makes you look like a complete idiot, OP. Yes, I know you have a business to promote, but attacking a company for something they haven't even announced yet is extremely petty.
You can't seriously compare a company's current tech to a product they haven't even announced yet. That makes you look like a complete idiot, OP. Yes, I know you have a business to promote, but attacking a company for something they haven't even announced yet is extremely petty.
I work as a CAD software application consultant and besides being a gimmick (the customer walking around in the model) there is no real added value for VR here. CAD is all about what the customer needs to see, not an experience, and more importantly the derived work drawings for the builders. And all in the most time efficient way as possible of course. Same was the case for 3D glasses/monitors, it was a short lived hype but in practice no one uses it in CAD.
The only true appliance I see for VR is in education and/or entertainment (the later being the most important).
To Be honest I did not look at the images in detail.
I had an expectation that the rant was actually related to these tests being run under OS X as Steam is one of the few services that actually looks after mac users, though this is another example where even steam can't be bothered, and know that gaming on macs suck.
Forget VR, macs as a whole, hardware wise are inadequate for general gaming. So I find it comical the OP, ignores the base fact and complains about not having a top end system that qualifys for VR specs.
Ditto on the Apple side, there is no Business case to support adequate gaming needs of some users, VR actually has high requirements.
Even if apple updates the Mac Pro with new GPUs, you would be a moron to spend that much money for a computer that "can" game....
Though Frankly, someone with a nMP can get an external GPU right now and get much improved gaming performance, the option is there, TB2 is adequate.
Ironically the OPs whole business model is based on Mac not being able to game, and him supplying a product , not our fault Apple changed the Mac pro so that he no longer can sell his GPUs, and people have provided alternative solutions with external GPUs that no longer require his custom firmware....bummer (I've not followed the external GPU developments, but believe your can use non custom cards)
Ive done my share of Mac Game bashing, will continue to do so, they suck, though this thread is silly.
[doublepost=1456731733][/doublepost]
Have you realised that in 2016 VR sucks and has high level requirements?
the company I work for has VR game development, Ive played with the games they are developing, its far from being a pleasant experience, we are good 3-4 years from it being ready for mainstream. Have you actually used it for a longer period of time? Cause what is killing it right now is VR motion sickness, I had a good chat with the development team and its a huge obstacle.
You make it sound like in 2016 you slap on a VR set and its and amazing experience.......Hell NO!
Comeback in 3 years, when everyone is got a viable product out, and Apple still has Crap GPUs and complain about it.
Yes, 3d printers were going to change our lives, 3D movies, iPad Pro, apple watch.....welcome to the new fad.
I get to play with VR everyday at work if I like, the experience sucks, I get motion sickness after a while, its ****, gaming infant of the monitor is 1000% better. I'll jump into VR in 2-3 years, when the hardware improved significantly and worry about what apple offer in 2019....
Try it for about an hour on your head, and come back and tell us how awesome and life changing it is.....
I am sorry that wishing Apple would at least make an effort to remain current is such an affront.
My appologies.
My appologies.
Why is someone a moron if they spend a bunch of money for a workstation and also expect it to handle games? HP, Dell, Lenovo all sell expensive workstations that can game. Why not Apple? Why is this moronic?
The main purpose being gaming. Heck, I can use my gaming PC as a workstation....
People getting into VR will not be buying Workstations, they will purchase gaming PCs.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect a manufacturer's top specced graphics workstation to be capable of handling some gaming. An HP Zxxx series with dual Titans or 9xx series GPUs can certainly chew up some Crysis or whatever the hot benchmark or game is now. Why can't a Mac Pro? It is absolutely not foolish to expect this capability from a $10k Mac Pro with top of the line GPUs. The longer you guys forgive Apple for this crap is the longer they will keep serving it as caviar.
Wake up and make some noise.
Okay, So I had a play to see what this Steam Test means from my perspective.
So my gaming PC 3970x running at 4.9, with 32GB ram and 2X Titan oc'd in SLI is middle grade! lol
Hell, if a Mac Pro is also matching my gaming system in the middle grade! That's one hell of a good gaming PC, cause I don't have any issues with games currently out!
From my perspective the test actually makes the Mac pro out to be a great gaming computer
Maybe the OP could sell me some 980ti's, Cause they kick my titans.....and look awesome for VR!
If moving to VR means selling my current rig that has no issues in ANY games, just to experience it, stuff that. When my system in general struggles with games, I'll upgrade, I'm not upgrading to this current fad. Before that, i'll plug in a 3rd Titan.
[doublepost=1456735762][/doublepost]
If the Current Mac Pro can match my gaming PC in games, One awesome workstation that can game!
Just pointing out this test is somewhat flacky......
So my gaming PC 3970x running at 4.9, with 32GB ram and 2X Titan oc'd in SLI is middle grade! lol
Hell, if a Mac Pro is also matching my gaming system in the middle grade! That's one hell of a good gaming PC, cause I don't have any issues with games currently out!
From my perspective the test actually makes the Mac pro out to be a great gaming computer
Maybe the OP could sell me some 980ti's, Cause they kick my titans.....and look awesome for VR!
If moving to VR means selling my current rig that has no issues in ANY games, just to experience it, stuff that. When my system in general struggles with games, I'll upgrade, I'm not upgrading to this current fad. Before that, i'll plug in a 3rd Titan.
[doublepost=1456735762][/doublepost]
A PC running at 4.9Mhz at 6 cores, with 2x Titan in SLI gets the same middle ground pass as a current Mac Pro.
If the Current Mac Pro can match my gaming PC in games, One awesome workstation that can game!
Just pointing out this test is somewhat flacky......
You obviously do not understand the far reaching implications of VR. It is not just a gaming platform. And no, typical gaming rigs would likely melt or thermal throttle under my workloads. Workstations are about 24/7, 100% loads. Even good gaming rigs aren't built to take that (and if they are, they are not running top speed CPUs, etc. and are likely rebranded workstation rigs). Those of us who depend on these machines to make money know that it's worth a sacrifice in a few GHz and whatnot in order to have high reliability.
I know what a workstation is. Game on yours if you like.
My workstation is just for work, I have a gaming PC to play around on, while the workstation does its stuff in the background.
My gaming rig would have no issues with your workloads, it would run cool (watercooled), the problem is the hardware, you don't get the reliability of workstation equivalent components. Though if I wanted as a secondary purpose to use my gaming rig for 6 hours to complete some workstation tasks, it will do them faster.....might throw an error...but its sure can be used for that.
Setting up a gaming PC, is not just hardware, its software as well, that I would not let anywhere near my Workstation for stability reasons.
As I have stated, the company I work for, 1/2 the company is heavy into VR, you may find I understand VR better than yourself. My point is, we are in the infancy, comeback in 2-3 years and lets have a chat what VR is offering.
I don't think the test sees both Titans.
I meant to post a comparison with the nMP using a GTX780SC 6GB via eGPU. It got a similar score, not in green. It is same basic card as Titan.
I'm afraid that what this exposes is that the back end of Apple's GL drivers (the part they do) is a train wreck.
While a Maxwell card in Windows can nail this test with ease, even a high-end Kepler struggles. In OSX a GTX780 is still quite competitive with Maxwell in OpenGl.
I would call it a poor test but 3DMark gives similar ranking to high end Kepler vs. high end Maxwell.
Point your Titan(s) at their current test, you will find it quite far behind Maxwell cards.
Not actually a good thing. Shows how far Apple has left OSX to wither on the vine while hosting events to launch new watch bands.
Does this not show that VR requirements are very high? A £1000 GPU from late 2013 is just middle ground ....
The vast majority of PC users have GPUs in 2016 less powerful than a 2013 Titan.
Most manafacturers do not offer systems that hit the green...
Thanks for posting the current state of things Mac So far it looks like Steam has gone the nVidia route. When will you be providing the eGPU solution. For those of us interested in VR right now this may be route to follow. nVidia only solution worries me. ATI/AMD and our ol Pal's at Apple will hopefully step in here to answer the challenge. Been waiting tooo long now to see AMD "Gemini" Dual Fury Card. Really starting to wonder about things. Everyone here should pray for good healthy competition to remain. A nVidia only world will not burn as brightly when now one is there to challenge them.
So far it looks like Steam has gone the nVidia route. When will you be providing the eGPU solution. For those of us interested in VR right now this may be route to follow. nVidia only solution worries me. ATI/AMD and our ol Pal's at Apple will hopefully step in here to answer the challenge. Been waiting tooo long now to see AMD "Gemini" Dual Fury Card. Really starting to wonder about things. Everyone here should pray for good healthy competition to remain. A nVidia only world will not burn as brightly when now one is there to challenge them.And I work in engineering and we can't wait to get some great VR setup.
You don't know how useful it is until you tried it in a pro setting. Being able to move around and look by yourself at the structure you can find quirk and error that a simple screen capture can't convey.
It doesn't "feel" "Apple like" to support something that a user is going to strap to their head.
This isn't a glass jaw - Apple never said they were making a computer for someone else's implementation of VR, or any for that matter. Would it be nice to have the option to play VR video games that you can only get to by installing a copy of Windows on to your Mac? - Sure, why not. Is it a glass jaw? - does not having this ability knock out the Mac Pro? Not even a little.
I'm sure if and when Apple wants to get into VR they will do it their way.
I am also sure they will not let some other companies benchmark that doesn't even run on their native platform compel them to do something.
Think of this like the old Windows mobile phones or a Palm Treo, they were great in their day, they did their job decently, Apple came along and flipped the mobile world on it's head with a much better vision and implementation and now we're all much better off for it. If VR ever got to the scale of those early smartphones I'm sure Apple would start thinking about an implementation. At that point I don't think they will give an F what Steam does or thinks about it, though I am pretty sure Steam would want to support it.
This isn't a glass jaw - Apple never said they were making a computer for someone else's implementation of VR, or any for that matter. Would it be nice to have the option to play VR video games that you can only get to by installing a copy of Windows on to your Mac? - Sure, why not. Is it a glass jaw? - does not having this ability knock out the Mac Pro? Not even a little.
I'm sure if and when Apple wants to get into VR they will do it their way.
I am also sure they will not let some other companies benchmark that doesn't even run on their native platform compel them to do something.
Think of this like the old Windows mobile phones or a Palm Treo, they were great in their day, they did their job decently, Apple came along and flipped the mobile world on it's head with a much better vision and implementation and now we're all much better off for it. If VR ever got to the scale of those early smartphones I'm sure Apple would start thinking about an implementation. At that point I don't think they will give an F what Steam does or thinks about it, though I am pretty sure Steam would want to support it.
It's the Cupertino infinite pretzel logic loop.
It goes something like this.
If Apple doesn't make something, you don't need it.
If you don't need it, Apple won't make it.
Apple doesn't make it, so you don't need it.
Or, Apple doesn't make VR or AR capable computers,
because VR & AR, take your choice here,
"are for gamerz" or because "Vr & AR in 2016 sucks".
Apple users aren't gamers and don't want anything that sucks,
ergo...
Think different indeed.
Last edited:
Hang on.
wait....Sony, Dell, samsung, toshiba.....heck let me reword this.
What mainstream manufactures provide an off the shelf Desktop that hits the Green? Ive had a quick look.... not many mate. Apple is not alone here. On would argue the Mac pro with D700 is on par with the industry, though dam expensive.
Feel free to fill in the list below.
1: Alienware
High end GPUs are mainly used in Custom/self builds, people buying these do not buy off the shelf systems. Apple's customers don't build their own computers, one reason they choose apple is to avoid this.
On a side note, Id be interested in your results of the nMP running the test using an external GPU.
Did you read the opening post or look at the pretty pictures?
Or just jump in with the appologies?
There are a couple nMP with eGPU results.
Pretty much ANY machine you can put a Nano or 970 (or better) gets a green on this test.
Not high end esoteric hardware. Just the modern stuff. APPLE DOESNT OFFER ANY.
Or just jump in with the appologies?
There are a couple nMP with eGPU results.
Pretty much ANY machine you can put a Nano or 970 (or better) gets a green on this test.
Not high end esoteric hardware. Just the modern stuff. APPLE DOESNT OFFER ANY.
Drifting off topic but finding use for VR in a professional environment is part of the whole I guess. However, I have serious doubts CAD is a field where you can make a solid argument for its advantage
Try selling it then You'll see the lack of interest from the market.
Really can't wait? I've not heard a single engineer asking when our CAD software will implement VR, not one.
Ok, ok, I can see a case being made for a customer "walking" around in a structure (albeit not time-efficient) to sell the project in uncommon situations where a render alone does not give enough of a feeling.
But an engineer walking around in his own drawing? Looking for structural mistakes? That is not only very time-consuming, but also not a very secure engineering method yet alone a very strange one! You let the CAD software take care of finding errors/impossibilities. Not walking around in your structure looking for a needle in a haystack.
Come on, VR in the engineering process itself has no added value. I understand why saying this may seem attractive to readers here but in reality it is time-efficiency that counts.
Try selling it then
You'll see the lack of interest from the market.Really can't wait? I've not heard a single engineer asking when our CAD software will implement VR, not one.
Ok, ok, I can see a case being made for a customer "walking" around in a structure (albeit not time-efficient) to sell the project in uncommon situations where a render alone does not give enough of a feeling.
But an engineer walking around in his own drawing? Looking for structural mistakes? That is not only very time-consuming, but also not a very secure engineering method yet alone a very strange one! You let the CAD software take care of finding errors/impossibilities. Not walking around in your structure looking for a needle in a haystack.
Come on, VR in the engineering process itself has no added value. I understand why saying this may seem attractive to readers here but in reality it is time-efficiency that counts.
Actually, most of the new generation of architects I know are jonesing hard for VR creation tools to mature and becoming widely available. CAD software can find stray points and glitches – but it can't point out design problems, gauge the "feel" of a building, or any of the other hundreds of things that can only be judged by a subjective human experience.
Being able to experience walking around your structure as you build it will absolutely take CAD to the next level, and is not frivolous in any way.
Drifting off topic but finding use for VR in a professional environment is part of the whole I guess. However, I have serious doubts CAD is a field where you can make a solid argument for its advantage
Try selling it then
Really can't wait? I've not heard a single engineer asking when our CAD software will implement VR, not one.
Ok, ok, I can see a case being made for a customer "walking" around in a structure (albeit not time-efficient) to sell the project in uncommon situations where a render alone does not give enough of a feeling.
But an engineer walking around in his own drawing? Looking for structural mistakes? That is not only very time-consuming, but also not a very secure engineering method yet alone a very strange one! You let the CAD software take care of finding errors/impossibilities. Not walking around in your structure looking for a needle in a haystack.
Come on, VR in the engineering process itself has no added value. I understand why saying this may seem attractive to readers here but in reality it is time-efficiency that counts.
So because you haven't personnaly met an engineer that want VR you say it isn't wanted. Do you know how dumb that is?
I work for one of the major Hydro power company in North America which employs thousands of engineers and you can bet that we want VR! Having your personnal see the inside installation and/or structure as if they were there instead of flying them hundreds of miles just to take a peek is a godsend. You single point data collection doesn't represent the VR market even if your ego tells you otherwise.
So in the end, how does for this idea the Steam VR test show the performance of Mac Pro?
I rather wait for the end result with judgments about Mac Pro, and VR
. P.S. What you describe is practical implementation of context switching between graphics and compute. I have to say - VR looks exciting.