A desktop 3070 is said to be as fast as a desktop 2080 Super.
You results do give me hope though.
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.
M1 Pro/Max's GPU performance for gaming is quite poor.
- Thread starter sunny5
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You results do give me hope though.
Provided that there is a lot interest in the M1 Max's 57 billion transistors and 32-core GPU cores I can see the next 2022 Mac event or WWDC 2022 where in they'll show off Apple Silicon-optimized, Parallel & Crossover games.
It isnt stressed enough how big of a deal is 57 billion transistors of the M1 Max is. Its the most transistors on a 5nm process chip & the most transistors on a chip that was released in 2021.
This would make a great show case when they release the iMac Pro/27" & Mac Pro that are rumored to have multi die M1 Max SIP(?)
Apple couldn't do this 2 weeks ago as they didn't want to risk a leak on the M1 Max & M1 Pro.
It isnt stressed enough how big of a deal is 57 billion transistors of the M1 Max is. Its the most transistors on a 5nm process chip & the most transistors on a chip that was released in 2021.
This would make a great show case when they release the iMac Pro/27" & Mac Pro that are rumored to have multi die M1 Max SIP(?)
Apple couldn't do this 2 weeks ago as they didn't want to risk a leak on the M1 Max & M1 Pro.
Last edited:
That will never happen. Why would Apple show off Windows games? They want native Mac games (which they did show off on previous events)
It doesn’t make any sense. It’s like Nvidia trying to running Final Cut Pro to demonstrate how powerful their GPUs are.
It may not be used for the most graphically complex games, but it isn't intended for that and prices reflect that.
Apple is doing just fine by being able to match such a GPU in many aspects, as it doesn't have the huge power requirements.
apple doesnt support oculus but they are working on ar/vr themselves and now have the computing power to allow some pretty cool experiences if it doesnt end up being a standalone device. I am a huge fan of oculus and have owned since the dk2..but I think apple has the potential to do some really cool stuff.
I do look forward to getting my hands on one of these "cambria" headsets though
apple doesnt support oculus but they are working on ar/vr themselves and now have the computing power to allow some pretty cool experiences if it doesnt end up being a standalone device. I am a huge fan of oculus and have owned since the dk2..but I think apple has the potential to do some really cool stuff.
I do look forward to getting my hands on one of these "cambria" headsets though
I think the last event's suspicious lack of any mention of gaming should be a "sign" already.
Th
They do, but when 90% of computers run Windows, it makes no sense to deviate from that standard. (Bu the same logic)
Yes, and a 2080 Super is about 30% faster than a 2070 - so pretty much what I'm saying. I wasn't suggestion a Vega 64 matches a 2080, but the M1 is 30% faster than the Vega.
If anyone wants to see like for like, take a look at Baldur's Gate 3 as soon as Patch 6 gets an M1 release. Early versions of the M1 releases were very fast, somewhere around GTX 1650ti / 3050ti levels, Larian are compiling native ARM versions as the game is developed, not as an afterthought.
4x that should match a 3070 IMO, perhaps even a laptop 3080.
If you are talking about accelerometers and gyroscopes that can detect movement and orientation, no, Macs don't have them. No laptops have them. They are certainly not suitable for the same kind of AR/VR as handheld devices are. But if you want this kind of capability, an external device can solve it easily.
Oculus was not supported because the GPU performance was not there. Now it is. Not to mention that Apple offers VR-oriented functionality in Metal (adaptive resolution render targets with variable rasterization rate).
Still not sure what this has with gaming on macOS though.
Given how new the entire VR game is, Apple is likely to achieve a dominant position once their own VR hardware is out. They have created the necessary hardware and software supporting environment for it and they have the cash to push it.
Yeah, this argument has been mentioned again and again, and there is some truth to it. Would it help if Apple published games? Meh, not sure, but I already laid out my train of thoughts elsewhere. They do work with developers though, recent WWDCs features multiple sessions that highlighted their work with studios.
In the end, we will have to wait and see. Cultural change does not happen over night. Apple Silicon satisfies the necessary condition. The rest is up to the devs and the users.
Nintendo Switch is a dedicated gaming handheld. Its only purpose is gaming. We are talking about general-purpose laptops. And Nintendo Switch does not run any "AAA" games either.
Given the layers of translation and non-bespoke "game ready" drivers for the M1 (of any description) this is actually very impressive.
It's not uncommon to see multiples of 10% improvement from a game-specific driver update with AMD or Nvidia cards and the Mac drivers for M1 aren't written with games in mind AT ALL.
My 6900XT for example just got a driver update which included a 25% speed up (in one hit) for one game listed (name of which escapes me at the moment) in Windows. And this is for a card that's already as fast as basically anything out there for non-RT performance - with drivers AMD have been working on for literally decades.
Also, if you're buying a Mac Pro (or any laptop really) for high end gaming, you're doing it wrong.
It's not uncommon to see multiples of 10% improvement from a game-specific driver update with AMD or Nvidia cards and the Mac drivers for M1 aren't written with games in mind AT ALL.
My 6900XT for example just got a driver update which included a 25% speed up (in one hit) for one game listed (name of which escapes me at the moment) in Windows. And this is for a card that's already as fast as basically anything out there for non-RT performance - with drivers AMD have been working on for literally decades.
Also, if you're buying a Mac Pro (or any laptop really) for high end gaming, you're doing it wrong.
Windows drivers contain game-specific optimizations (low level tweaks and rewrite shaders that will be injected into app) to make them run faster. I can't imagine Apple doing it. Of course, the hope is that modern APIs make these kind of hacks unnecessary, that's also why Metal is so much closer to DX/Vulkan than OpenGL was.
The problem is... is Apple really interested in VR gaming headsets, or even VR gaming in general? Or are they more interested in making AR/VR general purpose frameworks for applications (not specific to gaming) on iPhones and iPads? I think we already have an answer to that.
If Apple is and has worked with major game studios, either these don't really get anywhere, or they are taking an awfully long time to get anywhere.
Again, the lack of any mention of gaming during the announcement of these new MacBooks is... a sign. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it's very clear that this generation of Apple Silicon is not meant for gaming, even though they are capable of some decent amount of it.
It depends on what you define as "AAA." Is it just... cutting edge graphics? Truly, no gaming console can ever have graphics as good as top-end gaming PCs. Most console games are running at anywhere between low to medium, or occasionally high, settings compared to any PC. And yet these console games can be classified as "AAA" all the same.
Does the Switch have "AAA" games? I'd argue it does. Compare the Switch to the PS3 and Xbox 360, and it's clear many Switch games, especially 1st party Nintendo games, can be considered "AAA". Because it's not graphics that dictate how "AAA" a game is, it's the gaming experience, isn't it?
In this instance, some "AAA" games like Tomb Raider and Hitman were ported to the Mac, but that's really... where everything has stopped for a long time. Neither Apple nor game studios care to push the status quo. It is not even an "egg vs chicken" problem anymore. It's simply that Apple and publishers... are just not interested.
I'm not sure how much more explicit Apple has to be about this. It's not like they prevent gaming, but thus far, they have not really pushed the Mac much as a gaming platform. Mac is still primarily marketed and directed toward content creators and developers as far as I can see. That's really all that it does. Beyond that, anything else is just "nice to have" but not a main focus.
In contrast, Microsoft does push gaming on Windows. It's not just the fact that they specifically made DirectX for gaming, but it's also that they created their own gaming brand (the XBox), bought game studios, made their own games, made their own consoles, and heck, they now have their own game streaming service. Apple... hasn't even started on making a gaming brand.
P.S.: I guess what I'm trying to say is... I've seen how gaming is on a Mac for... decades now. So telling me to "wait and see" at this point is just like... I'm not believing it. It's not like we never had MacBooks that were capable of gaming in the past, especially Intel MacBooks with discrete graphics. Those were capable of gaming during their respective generations. These exact same threads and conjectures were said all the way back then. Apple and game studios even gave us some hope by working together and making some ports. Decades later? Not a single thing has changed. Gaming on Mac is still a very distant after-thought, and is almost not even worth the effort.