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.
OS X Metal for OS X?
- Thread starter Surfheart
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They've got to be looking into it, right? Borderlands 2 and the Pre Sequel? Hint hint
They've got to be looking into it, right? Borderlands 2 and the Pre Sequel? Hint hint
We are (of course!), but also realize that it could be a significant amount of work to backfill. Going forward however it will be standard for a lot of what we do.
Shucks, thanks! So much respect for all the support shown here for us and our friends at Feral!
Excellent news. This article that just got dumped in my mailbox is further exciting me:
WWDC 2015: Why Metal for Mac OS X is a Big Deal for Mac Gaming
written by Russ Looney on June 10, 2015 in Development Diaries and Special Feature
There were a lot of big announcements this week at Apple’s annual WWDC event, but the one that Mac gamers should be most interested in is the reveal of Metal, Apple’s new graphics technology for OS X.
We reported earlier that Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering, Craig Federighi, made some impressive claims about Metal during WWDC. Federighi stated that “running a game in Metal instead of the standard Open GL graphics standard gives an app 50 percent improvement in rendering performance, 40 percent improvement in efficiency (which gives a better battery life), and 10 times improvement in drawing performance.”
But based on those statements alone, it’s still hard to determine what the advent of Metal for OS X will really mean for gaming on the Mac. So to get those missing answers, we spoke with Aspyr Media’s Director of Technology, Jez Sherlock, to see what he thought about Metal, how it will impact the future of Mac gaming, and how Aspyr is incorporating the technology into their own titles.
Q: Let’s start with the basics: What exactly is Metal on Mac?
Jez Sherlock: Metal is a low level rendering API. Lower level and more lightweight than OpenGL. What this means is that it has less overhead, so there is increased potential for getting higher graphics performance.
Q: How will Metal affect various hardware and GPU configurations? Will Nvidia and AMD have to release new hardware or updates? Also, are there Mac hardware profiles that potentially can’t support Metal, or is it a ubiquitous technology?
JS: Metal isn’t GPU manufacturer-specific, so almost everyone on a Mac should enjoy the benefits of Metal (with exceptions for much older hardware and anything El Capitan isn’t intended to support). The fact that Apple is switching over to using it for OS level rendering should mitigate any concerns about its ubiquity and support.
This is essentially a guarantee that it will run well on a wider variety of hardware and that it is well supported. Since it is more lightweight, it’s easier for those authoring it to manage than say, for example, OpenGL.
Q: What are the potential benefits for gamers?
JS: A lower level rendering API means increased throughput to the GPU (read: improved graphical capabilities and performance). The fact that we have a more lightweight graphics driver with less overhead means we can ask the GPU to do more and expect the CPU to be able to cope with passing on the request and not get in the way.
Further, gamers should see higher framerates and improved visuals. In particular, the less we are stalling the GPU, the more time we can expect it to spend on rendering the increased number of pixels necessary to support a retina display.
On top of that, a more lightweight driver is going to help minimize driver related issues. As a result, issues that were traditionally at the driver level will (if they occur at all) be in a level we control, which in turn means we aren’t dependent on anyone else to fix these issues and we can respond faster, in theory having fewer bugs.
Q: What are the potential drawbacks for gamers?
JS: If there is a drawback it relates to OpenGL. In some cases there will be a need to support legacy solutions. This is time consuming for us and eats into time we could put to better use (such as focusing on Metal), which in turn is a drawback to the end user. The goods news for everyone is that Aspyr has been thinking about this problem for some time.
Q: What are the potential advantages for Mac game developers?
JS: We can send more data down the graphics pipeline, in turn demanding more of the GPU and drawing more things on the screen. We can create better performing, better looking games and do so on a more lightweight API.
Q: What are the potential hurdles for Mac game developers?
JS: A more lightweight API means we have to shoulder some of the burden and responsibility previously handled by a higher-level API. In short, this means we actually have to do more work. However, it’s a good tradeoff because in those places where we have to author more software, we can customize it to our game. It’s vitally important to understand this because it’s a hurdle, yes, but ultimately a win for all. This is kind of the point of Metal because it allows us to address an area we previously had no control over.
Q: How soon will Aspyr be using Metal in games?
JS: We haven’t decided the timing yet, but our efforts are going well, and I want to make sure that we don’t rush anything. Not rushing means we will be able to bring it to more games sooner and do so with a better quality in mind.
Q: How will Aspyr be taking advantage of Metal?
JS: Aspyr has created our own proprietary technology to help expedite converting games from Windows PC to Mac. Recently we’ve been updating that technology to be less dependent on OpenGL so that we can better support multiple platforms. Metal has come along at a very fortunate time for us because these changes mean we are taking advantage of it now – it’s been the pioneering technology that is helping us to prove out our more flexible graphics technology.
I am also quite excited about the potential for some of the games we bring to Mac to potentially be faster than the original graphics API, meaning Mac games may be faster than their PC counterparts. It’s incredibly advantageous for us to be able to bring over a Windows game running on a higher level API and run it on a Mac for a lower level, faster API.
Finally, we hope to take advantage of Metal to improve some of our prior releases. Aspyr continues to update and maintain catalog games, so don’t be surprised if we do Metal updates to some of the more demanding titles.
Q: How do you think the introduction of Metal for OS X will affect Mac gaming in general?
JS: Lots of ways. Performance and improved visuals are the easy ones, and we should see wider support of full resolutions. However, we should not forget that Metal’s origin is mostly with gaming in mind, so this is a big thing for Mac gaming in general. It adds considerable fuel to the idea of Macs as serious gaming machines. I would expect this sort of obvious support to make Mac game development more attractive to new players and, in turn, even more competitive. That’ll mean more games on Mac, more of them doing so natively, and the best ones to come through Aspyr of course!
written by Russ Looney on June 10, 2015 in Development Diaries and Special Feature
There were a lot of big announcements this week at Apple’s annual WWDC event, but the one that Mac gamers should be most interested in is the reveal of Metal, Apple’s new graphics technology for OS X.
We reported earlier that Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering, Craig Federighi, made some impressive claims about Metal during WWDC. Federighi stated that “running a game in Metal instead of the standard Open GL graphics standard gives an app 50 percent improvement in rendering performance, 40 percent improvement in efficiency (which gives a better battery life), and 10 times improvement in drawing performance.”
But based on those statements alone, it’s still hard to determine what the advent of Metal for OS X will really mean for gaming on the Mac. So to get those missing answers, we spoke with Aspyr Media’s Director of Technology, Jez Sherlock, to see what he thought about Metal, how it will impact the future of Mac gaming, and how Aspyr is incorporating the technology into their own titles.
Q: Let’s start with the basics: What exactly is Metal on Mac?
Jez Sherlock: Metal is a low level rendering API. Lower level and more lightweight than OpenGL. What this means is that it has less overhead, so there is increased potential for getting higher graphics performance.
Q: How will Metal affect various hardware and GPU configurations? Will Nvidia and AMD have to release new hardware or updates? Also, are there Mac hardware profiles that potentially can’t support Metal, or is it a ubiquitous technology?
JS: Metal isn’t GPU manufacturer-specific, so almost everyone on a Mac should enjoy the benefits of Metal (with exceptions for much older hardware and anything El Capitan isn’t intended to support). The fact that Apple is switching over to using it for OS level rendering should mitigate any concerns about its ubiquity and support.
This is essentially a guarantee that it will run well on a wider variety of hardware and that it is well supported. Since it is more lightweight, it’s easier for those authoring it to manage than say, for example, OpenGL.
Q: What are the potential benefits for gamers?
JS: A lower level rendering API means increased throughput to the GPU (read: improved graphical capabilities and performance). The fact that we have a more lightweight graphics driver with less overhead means we can ask the GPU to do more and expect the CPU to be able to cope with passing on the request and not get in the way.
Further, gamers should see higher framerates and improved visuals. In particular, the less we are stalling the GPU, the more time we can expect it to spend on rendering the increased number of pixels necessary to support a retina display.
On top of that, a more lightweight driver is going to help minimize driver related issues. As a result, issues that were traditionally at the driver level will (if they occur at all) be in a level we control, which in turn means we aren’t dependent on anyone else to fix these issues and we can respond faster, in theory having fewer bugs.
Q: What are the potential drawbacks for gamers?
JS: If there is a drawback it relates to OpenGL. In some cases there will be a need to support legacy solutions. This is time consuming for us and eats into time we could put to better use (such as focusing on Metal), which in turn is a drawback to the end user. The goods news for everyone is that Aspyr has been thinking about this problem for some time.
Q: What are the potential advantages for Mac game developers?
JS: We can send more data down the graphics pipeline, in turn demanding more of the GPU and drawing more things on the screen. We can create better performing, better looking games and do so on a more lightweight API.
Q: What are the potential hurdles for Mac game developers?
JS: A more lightweight API means we have to shoulder some of the burden and responsibility previously handled by a higher-level API. In short, this means we actually have to do more work. However, it’s a good tradeoff because in those places where we have to author more software, we can customize it to our game. It’s vitally important to understand this because it’s a hurdle, yes, but ultimately a win for all. This is kind of the point of Metal because it allows us to address an area we previously had no control over.
Q: How soon will Aspyr be using Metal in games?
JS: We haven’t decided the timing yet, but our efforts are going well, and I want to make sure that we don’t rush anything. Not rushing means we will be able to bring it to more games sooner and do so with a better quality in mind.
Q: How will Aspyr be taking advantage of Metal?
JS: Aspyr has created our own proprietary technology to help expedite converting games from Windows PC to Mac. Recently we’ve been updating that technology to be less dependent on OpenGL so that we can better support multiple platforms. Metal has come along at a very fortunate time for us because these changes mean we are taking advantage of it now – it’s been the pioneering technology that is helping us to prove out our more flexible graphics technology.
I am also quite excited about the potential for some of the games we bring to Mac to potentially be faster than the original graphics API, meaning Mac games may be faster than their PC counterparts. It’s incredibly advantageous for us to be able to bring over a Windows game running on a higher level API and run it on a Mac for a lower level, faster API.
Finally, we hope to take advantage of Metal to improve some of our prior releases. Aspyr continues to update and maintain catalog games, so don’t be surprised if we do Metal updates to some of the more demanding titles.
Q: How do you think the introduction of Metal for OS X will affect Mac gaming in general?
JS: Lots of ways. Performance and improved visuals are the easy ones, and we should see wider support of full resolutions. However, we should not forget that Metal’s origin is mostly with gaming in mind, so this is a big thing for Mac gaming in general. It adds considerable fuel to the idea of Macs as serious gaming machines. I would expect this sort of obvious support to make Mac game development more attractive to new players and, in turn, even more competitive. That’ll mean more games on Mac, more of them doing so natively, and the best ones to come through Aspyr of course!
And especially this (emphasis mine):
Q: How will Aspyr be taking advantage of Metal?
JS: Aspyr has created our own proprietary technology to help expedite converting games from Windows PC to Mac. Recently we’ve been updating that technology to be less dependent on OpenGL so that we can better support multiple platforms. Metal has come along at a very fortunate time for us because these changes mean we are taking advantage of it now – it’s been the pioneering technology that is helping us to prove out our more flexible graphics technology.
I am also quite excited about the potential for some of the games we bring to Mac to potentially be faster than the original graphics API, meaning Mac games may be faster than their PC counterparts. It’s incredibly advantageous for us to be able to bring over a Windows game running on a higher level API and run it on a Mac for a lower level, faster API.
Finally, we hope to take advantage of Metal to improve some of our prior releases. Aspyr continues to update and maintain catalog games, so don’t be surprised if we do Metal updates to some of the more demanding titles.
Q: How will Aspyr be taking advantage of Metal?
JS: Aspyr has created our own proprietary technology to help expedite converting games from Windows PC to Mac. Recently we’ve been updating that technology to be less dependent on OpenGL so that we can better support multiple platforms. Metal has come along at a very fortunate time for us because these changes mean we are taking advantage of it now – it’s been the pioneering technology that is helping us to prove out our more flexible graphics technology.
I am also quite excited about the potential for some of the games we bring to Mac to potentially be faster than the original graphics API, meaning Mac games may be faster than their PC counterparts. It’s incredibly advantageous for us to be able to bring over a Windows game running on a higher level API and run it on a Mac for a lower level, faster API.
Finally, we hope to take advantage of Metal to improve some of our prior releases. Aspyr continues to update and maintain catalog games, so don’t be surprised if we do Metal updates to some of the more demanding titles.
Brianna's optimistic assessment of matching or exceeding D3D performance in UE4 is certainly my ambition, but with DX12 on the horizon and the significant head-start MS & the GPU vendors have in optimising their HLSL/D3D shader compilers I feel it might take awhile.
Metal is a much nicer API, but we (engine devs, Apple, GPU vendors) are really just the beginning the work to get the most out of graphics on the Mac. For UE4 it will take a lot more work to squeeze all the GPU cycles we can out of Metal so I will be working on it for some time to come.
Other platforms, like Linux, may adopt Vulkan as their counterpart to Metal but it isn't clear to me (as a developer) why I'd want both on Apple's platforms since they serve the same goal of low CPU overhead, high GPU performance.
Not true. Between stints at Feral I worked for Frontier Developments who have always developed their own game engine with no obvious intent to license it out. What a custom internal engine gives you is a competitive advantage to make the engine serve your games rather than be tied to the needs of the original developer. The Frontier engine wasn't perfect, but much of the fundamental components stand up well compared to the others I've worked on. Their engine was just focused on very different aspects of game-development than something like UE4.
Licensing it out wouldn't be free money - at Epic we work very hard supporting licensees of UE4 and that takes time & effort, neither of which are free. You can't just throw your engine out into the wild and abandon it - you've got to have the developer relations & support staff as well as the dedicated time to fix bugs reported by your licensees. Plus your licensees now benefit from your technology, which not every company is willing to risk. Not every studio wants to be Epic/Unity etc.
I am just wondering if Metal will support old Macs as it would be great to help my aging 2010 MBA with an NVIDIA 320M. Considering that Metal for iOS was only supported on the iPhone 5s onward, I expect nothing lower than Haswell/Broadwell, probably not even Sandy and Ivy bridge.
If you're an exclusive Mac developer, you have absolutely no reason to concern yourself with Vulkan. That said, it's complete exclusion from OSX does balkanize the platform somewhat, since Windows and Linux both will have access to it. It'd make it a little more difficult for multiplatform devs to port their applications between the Big Three.
Are you sure? I know Vulkan is heavily based upon Mantle, but thought DX12 and Metal were more or less their own thing, only similar in concept and execution.
Consider me corrected.
Though the question remains, is AMD still defining the standards, with everyone else tweaking a bit here and there to taste, or are we going to eventually end up with a bunch of vastly different APIs that all sprang from the same code base?
My only and major hope for this development is that there's a strict division of responsibilities between Metal and Vulcan/OpenCL/OpenGL whereby allowing users to update their Khronos to the full and usable API direct from Khronos like the transition to going direct to Oracle for Java. That would allow the developers to choose which API or both in concert to use for their code. Best of both worlds.
its a long thread so apologies if its been covered somewhere in here, i saw something about it being compatible with all macs since 2012. does this mean nothing before 2012 will be compatible, or that all models from 2012 plus some from earlier will be compatible. since my 2011 27" is more powerful than a lot of machines produced afterwards it'd be dissappointing if it wasnt compatible.
Power has nothing to do with compatibility. It has to do with the architecture of the hardware.
Specifically; 2012 was the start of AMD's GCN architecture, NVIDIA's Kepler architecture, and Intel's 7th Gen architecture. These architectures are still used in current Macs.
The only addition is Intel's 8th, but only the 2015 13'' RMBP and 2015 RMB uses it.
NVIDIA released Maxwell in 2014, but nothing in Apple's lineup uses it.
So it was basically designed for the latest Macs; back-to-2012 systems just happen to use the same core hardware, so they're compatible too.
Last edited:
You seriously misunderstand that slide. That's a PR spin. AMD describes themselves as innovation leader regarding new APIs (possibly rightfully so). That does not mean any (except for Vulkan) are actually technically related to Mantle except for sharing similar concepts.Yes, Im sure.
Even AMD has said so:
I'm not a strictly single platform developer, though my primary focus at Epic is the Mac version of UE4. Much of work on OpenGL has benefitted Linux & at some point I'll need to do some work there too. Vulkan might become important there.
Balkanisation would imply that OpenGL offered a reliable, robust cross-platform solution that was actually used, which it never did & that we are suddenly breaking up into separate API islands. We were already there. No-one runs the UE4 OpenGL renderer on Windows, for the obvious reason that the Direct3D drivers are routinely better. Every different platform/vendor GL driver would be subtly broken requiring per-platform or per-vendor code to work around. OpenGL became a mess as the standards body (first ARB then Khronos) struggled to unify the disparate demands of large platform holders (e.g. Apple, Microsoft), software developers (i.e. games vs. CAD) or even the GPU vendors themselves. In the end there was simply too much internecine politics and no-one appears to have been satisfied.
Though I do hope that Vulkan turns out well, I'm quite happy with distinct APIs that match the platforms & work (mostly) as advertised. I'll still have bugs to workaround, but now the maintenance cost is isolated to the affected platform alone. Which is exactly how things are done on console...
DX12, Metal & Vulkan are effectively trying to solve the same problem, though their initial features sets might not be the same the goal is: Low CPU overhead, direct(-ish) access to the GPU via a minimal & sane hardware abstraction API. You only need one of the three. I really don't see where OpenGL or OpenCL fit in this brave new world except as legacy technologies supported for backward compatibility with existing code.