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

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
Should have tried this while the card was still in there. I am back to the 780. maybe worth to try before uninstalling the Nvidia driver?

THANK you for your information 88409!!! I appreciate it very much!
[doublepost=1521558617][/doublepost]

just learning how to post in a forum!! sorry: here's the missing part:

- How are you powering the card?

I ordered a new dual mini 6 pin to 8 pin cable: seems to be working: fans are both running upon startup?

- Do you have FileVault enabled? FileVault is not compatible with cards that do not show the boot screen.
I do not use this.

- Did you uninstall the NVIDIA web driver prior to dropping in the 580?

No I did not, because I wanted t be sure to be able to go back to the 780 just in case.
here's the q: the Nvidia driver is set to macdriver - I had to go through some terminal uninstall of the startup of the Nvidia driver so it would NOT go to the web driver and I thought that should be ok with the 580, but maybe I need to uninstall the Nvidia driver completely? Just wondering: If that does not work - how can I go back to using the 780? I might end up with NO WAY of having a monitor and would not know how to make it work?

maybe I should create a second startup disk with just no Nvidia drivers and boot from there?

Also wondering: is there any way to tell I have a faulty card?

AFAIK, High Sierra support all 780 (regardless Rev A or B) natively. No web driver required.
 

Mcmonk

macrumors newbie
Mar 3, 2018
3
3
Ha! Got it up and running. It really works just out of the box: you just need a functional card! The first one I received, probably was open box, there were even some minor packaging pieces missing... not happy about Amazon selling this like that. For that matter the cables I got from Amazon also did not work: the 8 pin adaptors did not fit. So all in all 1.5 weeks spent with faulty orders from them. The ones ordered directly from Hong Kong took 8 days - but are perfect.
On the happy side: the card now works with Nvidia driver still installed ( but deactivated: set to Mac driver ) - I uninstalled them and that also works.
It is a pretty tight fit for the PCI-e slot on the bottom. I have every other slot packed with cards and made a little plastic spacer to make sure the fans of the 580 do not touch anything above...
Thank you for your input! It helped me verify all the steps and finally decide to order a second card.
 

jhero

macrumors 6502
Jan 10, 2005
356
8
Not near an Apple Store
Just an update on my RX580 experience: I started off in 10.13.2 and updated to 10.13.3 after having flashed my card using h9826790's method to make it a "Mac Edition". I primarily run Adobe apps and everything seemed fine at first but as I started to go through the day to day, I started noticing graphical glitches appearing in my exports, and random oddities I didn't experience with my old GTX 970. For example, I run dual monitors, and when the displays would be awoken from sleep, not both displays would wake up at the same time. Meaning all windows that sat in the sleeping display would move to the awake display… Not a big deal but an annoyance. I could have probably fixed this by adjusting the kext but that would require disabling SIP and I was not willing to do that.

I figured I might as well update to 10.13.4 beta that was said to support the RX580 natively and I did… Same issues kept happening… So I said why not just flash to the actual Pulse rom (in this thread a couple pages back) as I figured I had nothing to lose. Made sure I had the same ram as the rom suggested and flashed away… Still the same glitches were happening.

10.13.4 and the actual Pulse rom went nowhere so I tried one more thing, I flashed back to the stock rom the card came with. Bingo! So far it's been 2 days and the system has been behaving normally. No render glitches and my monitors both wake up at the same time. About Mac correctly recognizes the card as Radeon RX 580 8192 MB. I also ran the test to see what link speed I am at and it is 2.5. That is no biggie, as long as I have stability!

TLDR; If you're having odd issues with the RX580, update to 10.13.4 (asap if you can) and flash to the stock rom the RX580 came with.

AZBeZ6L.png
 

MisterAndrew

macrumors 68030
Sep 15, 2015
2,895
2,390
Portland, Ore.
It looks like 10.13.4 beta 7 has improved support for all RX 580s. It's grouped with the specific Pulse model number 113-4E3531U in the driver.

"AMD9500Controller 113-4E353BU ATY ,Orinoco Radeon RX 580 113-4E3531U AMD ,RadeonFramebuffer Radeon Polaris Radeon Pro WX 7100 Radeon Pro WX 5100 Radeon RX 570 Radeon RX 480 Radeon RX 470 Radeon Pro WX 4100 Radeon RX 460 Radeon RX 560 Radeon RX 550"
 

MrBungleBear

macrumors newbie
May 1, 2008
28
2
UK
But why oh why won't they (Apple) issue some sort of firmware update that gives us the boot screen on other cards so that I can take out the stock card in my macpro 5,1 and have the space to put in a dual ssd card? Darn it. Already lost a slot with my dual-rx480-O8G.
 

Parez24

macrumors newbie
Jul 17, 2018
1
0
Malaysia
h9826790, thanks for this. VERY helpful. Given that this is more or less a wiki post, is there any chance you could add a bit more info on what utility to use to flash the card with and how to go about it?

Can you dump and flash in Mac OS or just Windows?

Is there a way of determining the original part number from Mac OS or do you need to head over to Windows to dump the ROM or use GPU-Z to find it?

Thanks.

Hey squid, I have the same gpu as you. Even the part number. But I have lost the original bios. Mind forwarding me your original bios so I could have a look please?

Send it to farizfadzimi@gmail.com would be great!

Thank you
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
Just want to dig out this old thread.

When I wrote this thread. I didn't have the RX580, but now I have it. And I found that despite High Sierra now can correctly ident the RX580, but this mod still has some extra function.

This is the screen capture when my Sapphire PULSE RX580 8GB with original part number (113-1E3870U-O49). MacOS only assign the generic RadeonFramebuffer.
Screen Shot 2018-08-23 at 04.27.52.png


But if I mod the part number to 113-4E353BU-O4E, macOS will give me the Orinoco Framebuffer.
Screen Shot 2018-08-23 at 04.35.29.png


Not sure if this help anything in MacOS yet. However, we know the part number still means something.
 

LightBulbFun

macrumors 68030
Nov 17, 2013
2,900
3,195
London UK
Just want to dig out this old thread.

When I wrote this thread. I didn't have the RX580, but now I have it. And I found that despite High Sierra now can correctly ident the RX580, but this mod still has some extra function.

This is the screen capture when my Sapphire PULSE RX580 8GB with original part number (113-1E3870U-O49). MacOS only assign the generic RadeonFramebuffer.
View attachment 777317

But if I mod the part number to 113-4E353BU-O4E, macOS will give me the Orinoco Framebuffer.
View attachment 777316

Not sure if this help anything in MacOS yet. However, we know the part number still means something.

I wonder if its worth submitting a bug report to apple that not all Sapphire Pulse RX 580s are using the frame-buffer apple assigned to them originally

because not having a proper frame-buffer personality can make a difference in some cases (especially when it comes to multi monitor and weird monitor support) (it would be interesting to look through the kexts and see if any other cards have such frame-buffers which are assigned via BIOS part numbers, I imagine the Radeon Pro 580 eGPU box is one since that one uses the Yelcho Frame buffer and obviously does not get assigned it via a Boot EFI)
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
I wonder if its worth submitting a bug report to apple that not all Sapphire Pulse RX 580s are using the frame-buffer apple assigned to them originally

because not having a proper frame-buffer personality can make a difference in some cases (especially when it comes to multi monitor and weird monitor support) (it would be interesting to look through the kexts and see if any other cards have such frame-buffers which are assigned via BIOS part numbers, I imagine the Radeon Pro 580 eGPU box is one since that one uses the Yelcho Frame buffer and obviously does not get assigned it via a Boot EFI)

Good point, we should submit a bug report for that.

Update 1: bug report submitted
 
Last edited:

Stux

macrumors member
Jun 25, 2018
37
11
FWIW, I find the same thing with my Pulse RX580 8GB. Not sure if it makes a difference.
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
FWIW, I find the same thing with my Pulse RX580 8GB. Not sure if it makes a difference.

You mean your PULSE RX580 also can't get the Orinoco framebuffer by default?

You can follow the steps in post #1 to dump the ROM and open it. Then you should able to see the part number straight away.
 

Stux

macrumors member
Jun 25, 2018
37
11
You mean your PULSE RX580 also can't get the Orinoco framebuffer by default?

Exactly.

You can follow the steps in post #1 to dump the ROM and open it. Then you should able to see the part number straight away.

Yeah, I did, its not one of the magic 2... but I'm not sure if there is any real reason to do it at this stage. Pitty Polaris editor doesn't support 256KB bioses.
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
Exactly.

Yeah, I did, its not one of the magic 2... but I'm not sure if there is any real reason to do it at this stage. Pitty Polaris editor doesn't support 256KB bioses.

The PolarisBiosEditor 1.6.7 may able to fix the checksum issue. I didn't try that on my own yet. But I used that to edit the voltage pointer, GPU clock, memory voltage, etc for my 256kB PULSE VBIOS, and it's definitely working.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/sapphire-pulse-rx580-8gb-vbios-study.2133607/#post-26377909

So, may be it can fix the check sum if we mod the part number. At least, it can automatically fix the check sum after we mod the other parameters.

In any case, I can 100% sure that the method in post #1 still work, my check sum difference is 1A (Hex), all I need to do is just change the "1988-2010" to "0000-2010" (1+9+8+8 = 1A in Hex), then my card has the correct Orinoco framebuffer.

At this moment, I have absolutely no idea if this really has any benefit yet, because the Radeon Framebuffer seems working good on the PULSE RX580. So, if you has any concern, I will say no need to mod. But until a day the card shows abnormal behaviour (e.g. can't wake up properly after sleep), then this can be the fix.
 

Squuiid

macrumors 68000
Oct 31, 2006
1,877
1,713
The PolarisBiosEditor 1.6.7 may able to fix the checksum issue. I didn't try that on my own yet. But I used that to edit the voltage pointer, GPU clock, memory voltage, etc for my 256kB PULSE VBIOS, and it's definitely working.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/sapphire-pulse-rx580-8gb-vbios-study.2133607/#post-26377909

So, may be it can fix the check sum if we mod the part number. At least, it can automatically fix the check sum after we mod the other parameters.

In any case, I can 100% sure that the method in post #1 still work, my check sum difference is 1A (Hex), all I need to do is just change the "1988-2010" to "0000-2010" (1+9+8+8 = 1A in Hex), then my card has the correct Orinoco framebuffer.

At this moment, I have absolutely no idea if this really has any benefit yet, because the Radeon Framebuffer seems working good on the PULSE RX580. So, if you has any concern, I will say no need to mod. But until a day the card shows abnormal behaviour (e.g. can't wake up properly after sleep), then this can be the fix.
I don't know enough about what the Framebuffer does, but could it be a reason for the significant difference in our RX 580 benchmark results? Your score was quite a bit higher than mine on very similar hardware if I recall.
 

Pressure

macrumors 603
May 30, 2006
5,180
1,544
Denmark
I don't know enough about what the Framebuffer does, but could it be a reason for the significant difference in our RX 580 benchmark results? Your score was quite a bit higher than mine on very similar hardware if I recall.
It's basically there to assign the correct port layout, e.g. how many DisplayPorts and HDMI.

-------------------------AMD9500Controller.kext-------------------------

Orinoco (5) @ 0x620f0
DP, DP, HDMI, HDMI, DDVI
000400000403000000010101000000001204060100000000
000400000403000000010201000000002205040300000000
000800000402000000010300000000001102010200000000
000800000402000000010400000000002103050400000000
040000000400000000010500000000000000030600000000

Exmoor (6) @ 0x62170
LVDS, LVDS, DP, DP, DP, DP
020000000001000000010151000000002205020400000000
020000000001000000010261010000001204010300000000
000400000403000000010343000000001102030100000000
000400000001000000010431000000002103050500000000
000400000403000000010523000000001000040200000000
000400000001000000010611000000002001050500000000

Acre (3) @ 0x622e0
DP, HDMI, DDVI
000400000403000000010101000000001102020100000000
000800000402000000010200000000002103050400000000
040000000402000000010300000000000000030500000000

Huallaga (3) @ 0x62330
DP, DP, HDMI
000400000403000000010101000000001204040300000000
000400000403000000010201000000001102010200000000
000800000402000000010300000000002103050400000000

Palena (5) @ 0x623f0
LVDS, DP, DP, DP, DP
020000000001000039050108000000002001010100000000
000400000001000000010243000000001000020200000000
000400000403000000010313000000002103030300000000
000400000403000000010453000000001102040400000000
000400000403000000010533000000001204050500000000

Guariba (6) @ 0x62470
DP, DP, DP, HDMI, DDVI, DP
000400000403000000010101000000001204060100000000
000400000403000000010201000000002205040300000000
000400000403000000010301000000001102010200000000
000800000402000000010400000000002103050400000000
040000000402000000010500000000000000030600000000
000400000001000000010601000000002001020500000000

Dayman (6) @ 0x62500
DP, DP, DP, HDMI, DDVI, DP
000400000403000000010101000000001204060100000000
000400000403000000010201000000002205040300000000
000400000403000000010301000000001102010200000000
000800000402000000010400000000002103050400000000
040000000402000000010500000000000000030600000000
000400000001000000010601000000002001020500000000

Baladi (6) @ 0x62590
DP, DP, DP, DP, DP, DP
000400000403000000010300000000001204030300000000
000400000403000000010100000000001102010100000000
000400000403000000010200000000002103020200000000
000400000403000000010400000000002205040400000000
000400000403000000010500000000001000050500000000
000400000403000000010600000000002001060600000000

OPM (5) @ 0x62620
DP, DP, DP, DP, DP
000400000403000000000001000000001102020200000000
000400000403000000000001000000002103030300000000
000400000403000000000001000000001204010100000000
000400000403000000000001000000001000040400000000
000400000403000000000001000000002001050500000000
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squuiid

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
I don't know enough about what the Framebuffer does, but could it be a reason for the significant difference in our RX 580 benchmark results? Your score was quite a bit higher than mine on very similar hardware if I recall.

No, I got those result before I change the part number.
 

Squuiid

macrumors 68000
Oct 31, 2006
1,877
1,713
No, I got those result before I change the part number.
Exactly :) Mine has one of the magic 2 part numbers, I didn't have to mod it and it has always had the Orinoco Framebuffer. (The one I did mod was at the office.)

Now that you have modded it, would you mind benchmarking again to see if your results changed?
Unlikely given what I now know of what the Framebuffer actually does but worth a try perhaps.
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
Exactly :) Mine has one of the magic 2 part numbers, I didn't have to mod it and it has always had the Orinoco Framebuffer. (The one I did mod was at the office.)

Now that you have modded it, would you mind benchmarking again to see if your results changed?
Unlikely given what I now know of what the Framebuffer actually does but worth a try perhaps.

I can. But I need to create another ROM image to test, my current ROM downclocked to 1243MHz, and run at about 1.02V, which only achieve ~14000 score in Luxmark 3.

I have to put it back to 1366MHz or at least 1300MHz to test if I can achieve ~15000 with the Orinoco framebuffer.
 

Squuiid

macrumors 68000
Oct 31, 2006
1,877
1,713
I can. But I need to create another ROM image to test, my current ROM downclocked to 1243MHz, and run at about 1.02V, which only achieve ~14000 score in Luxmark 3.

I have to put it back to 1366MHz or at least 1300MHz to test if I can achieve ~15000 with the Orinoco framebuffer.
Oh, don't worry then! :) Thanks anyway.
 

h9826790

macrumors P6
Original poster
Apr 3, 2014
16,656
8,587
Hong Kong
Exactly :) Mine has one of the magic 2 part numbers, I didn't have to mod it and it has always had the Orinoco Framebuffer. (The one I did mod was at the office.)

Now that you have modded it, would you mind benchmarking again to see if your results changed?
Unlikely given what I now know of what the Framebuffer actually does but worth a try perhaps.

100% sure part number mod / Orinoco framebuffer won't limit the Sapphire PULSE RX580's performance now.

I just tried some different settings, and end up able to achieve this with the part number modded.
Screen Shot 2018-08-24 at 01.16.48.png


(I will update the RX580 VBIOS study thread to explain how to get this performance)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Squuiid

TheStork

macrumors 6502
Dec 28, 2008
296
190
Whoa! This thread has gotten me concerned. Before this thing about the part # came up, I bought a Sapphire RX 580 Pulse 8GB card not thinking that a part # would mean anything. Looking at my card now, I see the part # is 299-1E387-000SA. Is Apple somehow cuing on part #s? If so, did I just shoot myself in the foot?
 

Squuiid

macrumors 68000
Oct 31, 2006
1,877
1,713
Whoa! This thread has gotten me concerned. Before this thing about the part # came up, I bought a Sapphire RX 580 Pulse 8GB card not thinking that a part # would mean anything. Looking at my card now, I see the part # is 299-1E387-000SA. Is Apple somehow cuing on part #s? If so, did I just shoot myself in the foot?
Well, have not see that part number before! Regardless, follow the guide in the first post and you'll convert it into one of the two recognised OOTB cards.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.