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

jeanlain

macrumors 68020
Mar 14, 2009
2,463
958
Intel Xe on 11th gen is actually quite usable and better off than current M1/Pro/Max situation
Intel HD 6000 can also be quite usable and better off than current RTX 3080 situation. I'm using one right now! But I'm not sure this claim is useful to anyone.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,522
19,679
It's not. Have you compared its performance between macOS and Windows? I've done it many times.

No, I don't own this game. Looking around I see mention of ~20% performance difference between macOS and Bootcamp which is expected for most ports.

But I mean something different. Based on the Apple Silicon benchmarks I believe that this is a bad port for Apple Silicon specifically. Given at performance in other games (such as WoW, BG3 or Metro), I see no reason why Tomb Raider cannot perform better on Apple Silicon
 

JimmyjamesEU

Suspended
Jun 28, 2018
397
426
Alright then guys, if this is about performance in Mac games and not compatibility, enjoy your very real performance in your very pretend native Mac games. I figured you'd want both.

Jimmy, I discussed being able to switch to PC and not lose macOS at the native hardware level, while still being able to use Windows natively as well to open any game dating all the way back from the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s, up to today.
That’s fine. No need to get upset. Ignoring the fact that you can’t legally run macOS on a windows pc, if you’re happy with your solution fantastic.

I thought the discussion was about gaming performance of the M1 macs, not ecosystem. If you wish to change the topic now you’ve been corrected, feel free to start a different thread.

Enjoy you’re 70s games.
 

Lihp8270

macrumors 65816
Dec 31, 2016
1,143
1,608
Why? I don’t see how this is relevant? And RTX 3080 isn’t just made for gaming? Back in the day when I built my PC with a GTX 1080Ti - I used it mainly for *gasp* video editing, compositing and photoshop.

Those laptops aren’t just made for gaming.
It’s relevant because you said workstation cards are identical to consumer cards, yet they’re not.

I use my PC for stuff other than gaming too, but you know that’s not the point I am making or have ever made in this thread.

Apples marketing compared performance to gpus and laptops focussed on gaming, which is fine. They declared equal performance. Yet they don’t match that performance in the task that those chips are aimed at. This is totally expected.

The apple chip does match or exceed performance in some specific professional workflow tasks, which is impressive considering the power and heat etc.

My comments in this thread were in response to people saying “of course. Macs don’t game” which is obvious. But if apple didn’t want to be compared in gaming they shouldn’t have marketed their performance in comparison to machines focussed on gaming.
 

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,522
19,679
Alright then guys, if this is about performance in Mac games and not compatibility, enjoy your very real performance in your very pretend native Mac games. I figured you'd want both.

Of course we want both. But we know that compatibility sucks. Apple Silicon Macs do not magically make the compatibility woes go away, but they don't make them any worse, and they certainly offer the potential to make them better by finally offering good performance AND sane development environment. Something that Intel Mac has severely lacked.

Jimmy, I discussed being able to switch to PC and not lose macOS at the native hardware level, while still being able to use Windows natively as well to open any game dating all the way back from the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, 10s, up to today.

And how is that supposed to make my life better? What if I don't care about running all that fabulous software? What if I care about having a fast laptop with decent battery life? Besides, you are quite optimistic if you think that modern Windows will seamlessly run all legacy applications. If I want to run retro games, I can use a dos emulator anyway.
 

mi7chy

macrumors G4
Oct 24, 2014
10,625
11,298
Well, these things were obvious from the start. Sorry, who here is actually arguing that Macs have better compatibility with current games or that they are cheaper than gaming laptops with similar performance levels? What you say is so trivial that I am wondering why you even mention it.

This thread so far is discussing gaming performance, not compatibility. We all know that compatibility sucks.

Compatibility affects ease of setup/use which is the hurdle before performance and hasn't been discussed. Typical users want similar effortless experience to iPad where they can go to app store, download and play so like Steam. Majority won't jump through hoops of buying additional software components and trial and error of running through Crossover, Parallels, etc. They'd buy a console or gaming desktop/laptop before losing their sanity.
 

raknor

macrumors regular
Sep 11, 2020
136
150
Compatibility affects ease of setup/use which is the hurdle before performance and hasn't been discussed. Typical users want similar effortless experience to iPad where they can go to app store, download and play so like Steam. Majority won't jump through hoops of buying additional software components and trial and error of running through Crossover, Parallels, etc. They'd buy a console or gaming desktop/laptop before losing their sanity.
Majority don't play games so don't care about any of this.
 

JimmyjamesEU

Suspended
Jun 28, 2018
397
426
Compatibility affects ease of setup/use which is the hurdle before performance and hasn't been discussed. Typical users want similar effortless experience to iPad where they can go to app store, download and play so like Steam. Majority won't jump through hoops of buying additional software components and trial and error of running through Crossover, Parallels, etc. They'd buy a console or gaming desktop/laptop before losing their sanity.
Nonsense. Typical users want great hashcat performance.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: januarydrive7

JimmyjamesEU

Suspended
Jun 28, 2018
397
426
Compatibility is intrinsically linked to performance. You have to run all your games in compatibility layer upon compatibility layer when using an M1. If you wish to discuss theoretical performance, and not the real world situation, forgive me for my error and I will not intervene with your glee.
Absolute nonsense. Performance is linked to performance, compatibility is linked to choice. Both are great but don’t start talking about one, then decide it’s less important once you get proved wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Romain_H

jeanlain

macrumors 68020
Mar 14, 2009
2,463
958
Alright then guys, if this is about performance in Mac games and not compatibility, enjoy your very real performance in your very pretend native Mac games.
Tell that to the OP.
We're fine thanks. I won't use a Apple Silicon Mac for gaming.
 

JimmyjamesEU

Suspended
Jun 28, 2018
397
426
Typical users want versality, performance and bang for the buck.

First time users don't care about things they can't do.
Disagree. I have it on good authority that the only way to judge performance is by running hashcat, preferably by the geniuses at phoronix.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: leman

JimmyjamesEU

Suspended
Jun 28, 2018
397
426
Just ... what. I gamed for half my adult life on Intel MBPs, with access to the full Steam library, the full GOG library, it was endless. I was the greatest setup I could imagine as a Mac lover that also had a passion for games. That is gone, all of it. It's all gone. This is a very strange statement.

Anyways, back to performance talk. Jimmy is kicking me out with his wit.
I used facts, but I recognize this would be a difficult concept for you. Perhaps you provide the board with more fascinating hypervisor talk?
 

Joe Dohn

macrumors 6502a
Jul 6, 2020
840
748
Dual GPUs, which the Mac doesn't have, are also incredibly useful for type 1 hypervisor bare metal virtualization. Meaning you can install macOS on a PC, today, and get full native performance with no compatibility concerns or future software update anxiety.

Actually, there is another way: GPU paravirtualization. Which is a fancy expression for something like "sending virtualization instructions straight to the GPU".

The only company that seems to do this really well is... Microsoft, with both WSL-g and their virtualized Windows sandboxes. I tested the sandbox mode, and considering it acts like a virtual machine, I was astonished by smooth it ran. And apparently, WSL-g and runs very, very smoothly.

Here is a demo of WSL-g in action. Notice how fast it runs, considering there's a whole virtualization layer out there:
 

jeanlain

macrumors 68020
Mar 14, 2009
2,463
958
No, I don't own this game. Looking around I see mention of ~20% performance difference between macOS and Bootcamp which is expected for most ports.
Most Metal ports of AAA games are actually done by Feral (I won't consider moltenVK games). Other games usually don't have bult-in benchmark tools, or are simply minor games that non one bothered to compare between macOS and Windows, performance-wise. One exception is BL3, which is about twice slower on macOS.

SoTR performance on Metal is between the DX11 and DX12 version of the game on my iMac (closer to DX12 in fact). Linus Sebastian has shown basically identical performance between macOS and bootcamp on the 16" MBP.
Brad Olivier said on the Ars Technica forum that SoTR performs better on macOS than on Windows when using an intel iGPU. Feral spent extra resources to make this game run on entry-level Macs. Most other developers wouldn't have bothered.
Feral does a great Job, they don't do bad ports. If they didn't exist we'd have almost zero AAA games running Metal beyond a few titles using UE4 or Unity IDEs, Blizzard (that are on their way out) and Larian games.
 
Last edited:

leman

macrumors Core
Oct 14, 2008
19,522
19,679
Compatibility affects ease of setup/use which is the hurdle before performance and hasn't been discussed. Typical users want similar effortless experience to iPad where they can go to app store, download and play so like Steam. Majority won't jump through hoops of buying additional software components and trial and error of running through Crossover, Parallels, etc. They'd buy a console or gaming desktop/laptop before losing their sanity.

I consider myself a fairly active gamer. I have never played a game via Crossover. I think I played some old games via Parallels. But almost everything I am interested in is either available for the Mac natively or via GeForce Now. Your mileage might wary.

Considering the other matter you mention — culture is in the state of constant flux. Not long time ago, the idea of x86 on a supercomputer would seem laughable. Today almost all supercomputers were x86 machines. Tomorrow, half of them will be ARM-based. Things change, and in technology they change quickly. Mac is not a good platform for gaming today. It might become one tomorrow though — the big roadblocks (performance, predictability, tooling) have been cleared.
 

tmoerel

Suspended
Jan 24, 2008
1,005
1,570
So what if gaming performance is poor. These are pro machines for professional workflows. They are insanely fast for image processing and video editing. They are great for content production.
These machines are not meant for the counter productive gaming consumption which is bringing absolutely nothing to the world! Get a life and use your time wisely!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.