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.
MP All Models Turn a "new" Sapphire RX580 PULSE into the "Mac Edition" card
- Thread starter h9826790
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I was wondering why did you go through all of this? was it because you want the boot screen / EFI shell access or better driver support in macOS?
I currently have a Nvidia GTX 970 in my Mac Pro 5.1 and am screwed now to upgrade to macOS Mojave because the GTX 970 has not drivers from apple or Nvidia. so thats why I am here looking to replace with a RX 580 and want the boot screen to allow for updates with no issues.
I currently have a Nvidia GTX 970 in my Mac Pro 5.1 and am screwed now to upgrade to macOS Mojave because the GTX 970 has not drivers from apple or Nvidia. so thats why I am here looking to replace with a RX 580 and want the boot screen to allow for updates with no issues.
No AMD GPU after R9-280X have boot screens or can be flashed to have.
Yeah, the rom for the Pulse RX 580 that was used in the Apple eGPU Dev kit just gives you slightly better driver support with a specific frame-buffer personality. There is no way to get boot screens with the RX 580 that I know of. Just keep an EFI card handy for the rare instances you do need a boot screen. It's not required for updates anymore.
yeah, already knew the R9-280X was the last, but wanted to know if it could be modified to support it. I dont understand why, EFI support is native in most cards now so it should just work. there must be something with the EFI shell on Mac?
[doublepost=1548457423][/doublepost]wait what? I have dont updates from 10.12 to 10.13 and 10.13 to 10.13.6 and all required a video to support it or it would just hang. How did you get yours to work without a Mac EFI support card?
[doublepost=1548457423][/doublepost]wait what? I have dont updates from 10.12 to 10.13 and 10.13 to 10.13.6 and all required a video to support it or it would just hang. How did you get yours to work without a Mac EFI support card?
Mac Pro up to MP5,1 use UGA, PCs and recent Macs uses GOP. NVIDIA supported both with RTX20xx GPUs, but no drivers yet.
If you have a card that has native macOS drivers (that are included in the version you are using and updating to) then it doesn't matter if it's EFI or not. EFI is only needed for Nvidia cards newer than Kepler that don't have built-in drivers. In that case the EFI driver gives you basic display functionality until you install the Nvidia driver. It's nice that you don't need to worry about that with new AMD cards.
Yeah so that explains it why I have issues. I have a GTX970 in my Mac Pro 5.1 and have to keep my GT120 just for updates. But with 10.14 and metal I can't upgrade at all because the GT120 does not support metal and the GTX970 will fail because no driver support. lol! so thats why I asked. Now it makes since why you said that. thanks man!
[doublepost=1548458032][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1548458032][/doublepost]
so I dont know what you are talking about UGA. I thought it was a BIOS and EFI difference what was why the video cars can or cannot work with during POST and before boot.
UGA is the protocol/API used by Apple with EFI Mac Pros, up to MP5,1, to have bootscreens and EFI boot support. GOP is the protocol/API used by every UEFI PC and all recent Macs.
You can’t have bootscreens with a GOP supported GPU into Mac Pros up to 2012.
Yes.
Last Mac Edition GPUs were Sapphire HD 7950, eVGA GTX 680 and PNY Quadro K5000 for Mac.
Nvidia RTX20xx GPUs have native UGA and GOP support, but without drivers you can’t run macOS with them yet.
Many thanks for this, but a clarifcation please?
Does this provide MacOS boot screen support?
Otherwise, High Sierra & Mojave support the card perfectly in my experience, except for boot screen, recovery boot etc.
No, the last AMD GPU that can be flashed to have Mac EFI (boot screens, single user mode, verbose mode support) is R9 280X.
No newer AMD GPU than R9 280X has UGA/MP5,1 EFI.
Wait, hold on - Does this mean that, whilst not supported by macOS, the RTX20-series is supported by the pre-boot environment on the cMP, and thus could have a boot screen?
That's incredible! Nvidia trying to make Apple like them again, hehe. With native driver support from Apple that could be really need for Mac Pro users!
I'm not holding my breath for new Nvidia web drivers, never heard so much back and forth from Nvidia. I'm currently using my RX580, while my GTX 1080 patiently awaits atop my Mac Pro collecting dust.
I mean, I think that once the next Mac Pro comes out, Apple might put in drivers for both AMD and Nvidia to facilitate users picking either GPU for the system - at least if it is as modular as people hope.
I'm not holding my breath for new Nvidia web drivers, never heard so much back and forth from Nvidia. I'm currently using my RX580, while my GTX 1080 patiently awaits atop my Mac Pro collecting dust.
The opposite here: I'm still using my GTX Titan X in High Sierra on the Mac Pro, but already have a spare RX 580 laying around. However, the difference between High Sierra and Mojave is for me not significant enough to upgrade immediately.
Another RX 580 as eGPU with the new Mac Mini using Mojave. These Sapphire RX 580 are so dirt cheap now that it doesn't really matter to have multiple. My GTX Titan X was way more expensive then....
After reading thru this 11 page thread I'm still uncertain what I should buy:
* Nitro+ RX580
- Someone said it may draw too much power?? Someone measured, and said it would be fine.
- Stupid RGB Logo Led
+ Cheaper than Pulse RX580
+ Better cooling
+ Dual firmware = flash away
* Pulse RX580
- worse cooling
- no dual firmware switch
+Might work with Orinoco Frame Buffer OOTB?
I don't like the idea of paying more to get less cooling on a GPU. Please help me chose! (on a Mac Pro 5,1)
Edit:
Found a post of tsialex hat said this: "Sapphire Nitro+, .. maximum power comsumpition of 237W, Mac Pro only can feed 225W."
And I found a better deal on the Pulse RX580, so the Pulse it is.
* Nitro+ RX580
- Someone said it may draw too much power?? Someone measured, and said it would be fine.
- Stupid RGB Logo Led
+ Cheaper than Pulse RX580
+ Better cooling
+ Dual firmware = flash away
* Pulse RX580
- worse cooling
- no dual firmware switch
+Might work with Orinoco Frame Buffer OOTB?
I don't like the idea of paying more to get less cooling on a GPU. Please help me chose! (on a Mac Pro 5,1)
Edit:
Found a post of tsialex hat said this: "Sapphire Nitro+, .. maximum power comsumpition of 237W, Mac Pro only can feed 225W."
And I found a better deal on the Pulse RX580, so the Pulse it is.
Last edited:
Same for Pulse . The reference version does not block .probably the MSI single fan too.
Slot 2 is still clear with the Pulse, and can have another card plugged in (whether it's good thermally, is a different story). The slot is literally occluded by the Nitro.
I used that card for a month and returned it precisely for that reason. There are many posts in this forum for the "wedges" solution when you install highpoint 7101A in the second slot.
[doublepost=1549873837][/doublepost]for me the card in the second slot was actually hitting the fans