In theory, assuming all other things are equal, a low-CPU-overhead API like Metal or DX12, will improve performance in games that are CPU bound, but make no difference to games that are GPU bound. GPU bound games are limited by the underlying GPU and/or the optimisation of the generated GPU shader code, where Microsoft have traditionally held a big advantage with D3D. Microsoft will claim numbers just as impressive for DX12 as Apple do for Metal, so we'll all just have to wait and see where things are when El Capitan finally launches.
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
In theory, assuming all other things are equal, a low-CPU-overhead API like Metal or DX12, will improve performance in games that are CPU bound, but make no difference to games that are GPU bound. GPU bound games are limited by the underlying GPU and/or the optimisation of the generated GPU shader code, where Microsoft have traditionally held a big advantage with D3D. Microsoft will claim numbers just as impressive for DX12 as Apple do for Metal, so we'll all just have to wait and see where things are when El Capitan finally launches.
That was kind of a key point of the comparison.
I was comparing Apple switching to Metal and dropping OpenGL immediately with the idea of Apple switching to x86 and dropping PPC immediately. Which isn't something that happened. And switching to Metal and instantly dropping OpenGL is also something that wouldn't happen.The discussion was about Apple removing OpenGL completely, preventing anything except for Metal apps from running.
--Eric
That was kind of a key point of the comparison.
Ah! My apologies then!
I thought the discussion was about *game developers* dropping OpenGL support and supporting Metal only in future releases / ports. That would obviously be less of an issue, if Apple retained OpenGL support - even if "deprecated" - in El Cap for playing older games. Then the only ones really left out in the cold would be those with older Macs that don't support El Cap or Metal. If El Cap has no OpenGL support, it's a lot more tricky.
Ignore me. Move along.. Nice weather we're having..
That was kind of a key point of the comparison.
The discussion was about Apple removing OpenGL completely, preventing anything except for Metal apps from running.
--Eric
Actually, it never was in my mind but I didn't make that clear I guess. I was simply unaware of whether OpenGL and Metal were absolutely and completely independent of one another since I am not well acquainted with specifics of Metal. It probably should have dawned on me that a new API would not have anything to do with a pre-existing one but it is generally better not to assume things you are not absolutely certain of. So I made the comment I did wondering about existing app compatibility. Now that it is clear there is no relationship at all between the two I understand it isn't an issue.
That said, while of course OpenGL would not be removed in El Capitan one does have to wonder how long before it is. I'd have to agree with what you meant to tell me which is that just like with Rosetta being provided for a time, OpenGL will remain for a time. Ultimately though, I'd better get around to a lot of games while that time is available to me.
And so once again thanks to the wonderful MacRumors community... all did become clear.
Mind that it's not only Apple's call to terminate OpenGL. Besides games, Apple is also making machines addressed to a professional target group. Many people belonging to this target group use s/w that requires OpenGL. If the companies creating this s/w won't jump on the Metal wagon anytime soon, Apple will have to keep OpenGL.
Looking back to the transition from PPC to Intel, I think it's safe to say that companies creating professional s/w are slower to adopt the new technologies (and most of the time for valid reasons).
Looking back to the transition from PPC to Intel, I think it's safe to say that companies creating professional s/w are slower to adopt the new technologies (and most of the time for valid reasons).
I thought I'd read Adobe has announced it will be using Metal in all its apps coming up but maybe I am wrong? That's pretty significant and not slow at all at least in announcing it. I wouldn't be so sure about Apple being compelled to keep anything in particular. After all, once Rosetta went away virtually everything had to be rewritten. Why would this be any different over a period of time to allow for a transition?
That's exactly the example I had in mind as well. IIRC the guys at Adobe took their sweet time before switching their apps to cocoa. Blizzard also never did for their older games, even though diablo 2 was still alive and kicking back then, leading people to play the windows version in wrappers or virtual machines.
Both of them were now presented by Apple as Metal adopters, but we'll have to see. There are also other s/w creators relying on OpenGL, that I'd bet they'll also take their sweet time before switching to Metal. So, I guess what I'm saying is that for some people using certain s/w, this period might be much longer than others.
Blizzard has confirmed that WoW will be ported to Metal, but I don't know about other games.
OTOH, Adobe hasn't confirmed anything, AFAIK. They made a somewhat disappointing statement on their forum that they were just exploring Metal and that users shouldn't expect to see Metal supported in the next updates of their apps.
The Foundry were much more explicitly, and will likely support Metal in some of their Apps.
OTOH, Adobe hasn't confirmed anything, AFAIK. They made a somewhat disappointing statement on their forum that they were just exploring Metal and that users shouldn't expect to see Metal supported in the next updates of their apps.
The Foundry were much more explicitly, and will likely support Metal in some of their Apps.
Let's say for a moment that Apple *do* support OpenGL in El Capitan, even if has one foot in the grave. Would that lead to more game developers / game porting companies reducing their workload, by dropping OpenGL support and migrating to Metal for all future games?
"You want to play our shiny new Metal game? Upgrade to El Cap, no problem!"
"You want to play our existing OpenGL game too? It's supported in El Cap too, no problem!"
But if Apple don't support OpenGL in El Capitan, any gamers with lots of OpenGL games might be slow to upgrade, as they would lose lots of their game collection. So, weirdly, dropping OpenGL support might hurt Apple by antagonising gamers and gaming companies, while supporting OpenGL in El Capitan might help push everyone into Metal!
"You want to play our shiny new Metal game? Upgrade to El Cap, no problem!"
"You want to play our existing OpenGL game too? It's supported in El Cap too, no problem!"
But if Apple don't support OpenGL in El Capitan, any gamers with lots of OpenGL games might be slow to upgrade, as they would lose lots of their game collection. So, weirdly, dropping OpenGL support might hurt Apple by antagonising gamers and gaming companies, while supporting OpenGL in El Capitan might help push everyone into Metal!
That OS X 10.11 still supports OpenGL is pretty much granted. As will OS X 10.12. How this will look like when OS X 10.13 comes out is the question…
Last edited:
We've been over this already; OpenGL support isn't going away any time soon. The question about whether developers will support Metal depends to some degree on how fast 10.11 adoption is. The safe thing to do is just to keep using OpenGL until the large majority is on 10.11 or later. However it's somewhat more complicated than that, given that "Game X supports Metal!" will be used as a marketing point. Apple might also offer incentives (which they've allegedly done in the past, such as only featuring iOS games that use Metal on the app store). Hence we have the post from Aspyr pointing out the fact that supporting both OpenGL and Metal will slow down porting games.
--Eric
Not sure what you are smoking, but Apple already DO support OpenGL in El Capitan.
OpenGL:
Version: 12.0.33
Obtained from: Apple
Last Modified: 11/06/2015, 08:32
Kind: Intel
64-Bit (Intel): Yes
Signed by: Software Signing, Apple Code Signing Certification Authority, Apple Root CA
Get Info String: OpenGL 12.0.33.0.0
Location: /System/Library/Frameworks/OpenGL.framework
Private: No
Version: 12.0.33
Obtained from: Apple
Last Modified: 11/06/2015, 08:32
Kind: Intel
64-Bit (Intel): Yes
Signed by: Software Signing, Apple Code Signing Certification Authority, Apple Root CA
Get Info String: OpenGL 12.0.33.0.0
Location: /System/Library/Frameworks/OpenGL.framework
Private: No
I was wondering the same. But come to think of it, supporting both of them is not really that weird, at least for some time. They need this flexibility right now, as there are absolutely no guarantees of how high the Metal adoption rate will be by the s/w makers. Last thing Apple needs right now is to be alienated.
There are no technical reasons at all. There's just a marketing-related assumption that since Metal is now a competitive API to openGL, Apple would want to push s/w creators towards adopting their new API. They might drop it eventually (I'd bet after a few years down the road, given that Metal will have the success Apple hopes for) just like they did with Rosetta, but not just yet.
I don't think that Metal needs OpenGL to also be present in order to work. Apple has taken their own way, so I'm sure that Metal is now totally independent from OpenGL development, even if it was started as a fork of it.
I meant competitive in a marketing sense, as all the s/w creators need to be convinced to switch.
I meant competitive in a marketing sense, as all the s/w creators need to be convinced to switch.
Antonis, of course it doesn't need to work. Apps that are using OpenGL, are communicating with it "by" Metal to the GPU. Same goes for OpenCL.
Let me put to you all this way. We will be pleasantly surpised with the framerate numbers on OSX if a game is properly ported to Metal, from DirectX.
Let me put to you all this way. We will be pleasantly surpised with the framerate numbers on OSX if a game is properly ported to Metal, from DirectX.
Nvidia seems to be able to handle releasing their own Web Drivers with decent frequency. would love to see the GPU vendors write their own OpenGL/Vulkan stacks for OS X if you're willing to download their web drivers so at least we can be on par with Windows in terms of multi-platform support. However, I do not see this being a reality that Apple would support for user experience for applications on OS X.
Writing Vulkan on top of Metal seems pretty wasteful to me. Especially, since they're supposed to low-level APIs. Unless the APIs match 1:1 (which they don't), you're still executing through a wrapper.
You keep saying or implying this, but there have been no 3rd-party benchmarks to support this claim. The iOS benchmarks I found were only around 10% in performance gain. I understand that it is easy to get hyped up after seeing demos and presentations. However, let's see what the real-world benchmarks have to show when they are released. An unreal engine OS X engineer (@marksatt) has said multiple times now about how you don't automatically get a big bonus just by switching to Metal. It doesn't magically make your GPU 50% faster.
Writing Vulkan on top of Metal seems pretty wasteful to me. Especially, since they're supposed to low-level APIs. Unless the APIs match 1:1 (which they don't), you're still executing through a wrapper.
You keep saying or implying this, but there have been no 3rd-party benchmarks to support this claim. The iOS benchmarks I found were only around 10% in performance gain. I understand that it is easy to get hyped up after seeing demos and presentations. However, let's see what the real-world benchmarks have to show when they are released. An unreal engine OS X engineer (@marksatt) has said multiple times now about how you don't automatically get a big bonus just by switching to Metal. It doesn't magically make your GPU 50% faster.
OpenCL & OpenGL are completely independent from Metal, they aren't built on top of it, because they all have different driver models and requirements. I'd expect all three will coexist for some time as there are simply too many applications out there that require them - they won't all jump ship at once.
Emphasis mine. Exactly this is Apple's raison d'être - if you want driver chaos then Android, Windows & Linux have you covered.
Yup, though the other way could conceivably work I wouldn't expect anyone to try it.
Ferazel's right. Mac Metal is in some ways already better than Mac OpenGL, but it will take substantial work on everyone's behalf to resolve all the long standing Mac porting caveats. It is always better to hope for steady improvement over time rather than instant miracles.
Ferazel, You forgot one thing. iOS benchmarks are on platform that is very well optimized, and yet, we see there increase in performance.
Games on OSX are underpowered. One and the same Game, on the same hardware, runs completely different compared to OSX. What people dont count is that, Games on OSX are 20% slower than on Windows. We have seen that just getting rid of overhead in Windows 10(which was the case of the film I have shown in another thread), without even fully supporting DirectX12, in fact working on DX11 gave 20-30% increase in performance. And that is just on Tahiti GPU, the same chip that is in Mac Pro.
Get this, that Metal is bringing HUGE optimization to OSX in terms of performance. Whole optimization is in the arms of developers. It will maybe not be faster than Windows platform, however it still can be, depending on how well developers will be at mastering the art of Metal, but it will get to max 5% of performance of Windows. And again, will allow to use dual GPUs from Mac Pro, if a developer will decide to optimize game for it.
About the performance: I posted that because I was under impression of someone who is involved in development of OSX version of a game that will be released in near future. I can't tell you more about this, as of right now.
Marksatt, what You have quoted, and answered too, was exactly what I meant.
Games on OSX are underpowered. One and the same Game, on the same hardware, runs completely different compared to OSX. What people dont count is that, Games on OSX are 20% slower than on Windows. We have seen that just getting rid of overhead in Windows 10(which was the case of the film I have shown in another thread), without even fully supporting DirectX12, in fact working on DX11 gave 20-30% increase in performance. And that is just on Tahiti GPU, the same chip that is in Mac Pro.
Get this, that Metal is bringing HUGE optimization to OSX in terms of performance. Whole optimization is in the arms of developers. It will maybe not be faster than Windows platform, however it still can be, depending on how well developers will be at mastering the art of Metal, but it will get to max 5% of performance of Windows. And again, will allow to use dual GPUs from Mac Pro, if a developer will decide to optimize game for it.
About the performance: I posted that because I was under impression of someone who is involved in development of OSX version of a game that will be released in near future. I can't tell you more about this, as of right now.
Marksatt, what You have quoted, and answered too, was exactly what I meant
.