Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Apple M1 Ultra With 20 CPU Cores, 64 Core GPU, 32 Core Neural Engine, Up To 128GB Memory

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ladis
    replied
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

    You twisted what I said. I said that the main game engines all support Vulkan, game developers actually have to turn it on/enable it which many are lazy to do so

    Vulkan's advantage is that its cross platform and in the context of Apple it would actually allow them to have many more games then they have now. Many game developers refuse to release games on Mac because of Metal, if Mac at least had Vulkan then it would be a lot more trivial to port games over.
    Main engines support all APIs, to cover all possible needs of their customers. But it's not the developers being lazy, in fact it's nothing with them (as you say, it's just a switch). It's the companies to hire more testers to test more codepaths.

    The reason (mainly small) developers don't release their games on Apple is because of the platform's price barrier. API differences are covered by engines and libraries, even opensource ones. Metal even uses the same shader language as OpenGL, so you rewrite only the boilerplate code around. Also how much is Vulkan cross platform? It's not on Mac, iOS, Windows UWP (Microsoft Store), Window on ARM, Xbox, PS. On Switch it's only a second class API added later. On Android only newer devices have it, 5 years ago 93% devices didn't have it. Similar for Linux - for my Radeon 7850 (GCN 1.0) Vulkan support came years after Windows.

    Also the reason, why so little games is currently on Mac, is because they switched the processor architecture and especially games have a problem with the emulation (even streaming from Steam on another PC was broken recently). It's similar to Linux - you are actually better running Windows version of the game. In the case of Mac, use e.g. Parallels with 3D acceleration to run AAA x86 games in Windows for ARM.

    Leave a comment:


  • mdedetrich
    replied
    Originally posted by Ladis View Post

    Believe whatever you want. You are obviously not the target group. But as I talked with people from HP and Dell, PC will have a big problem.

    My picked two things:
    1. You're mistaken. 90% games on Windows are DirectX. Because Vulkan is not on Xbox. Fun fact, DX12 is also on Windows 7 - used by some games from Blizzard and Cyberpunk 2077. Second fun fact, even DX12 was available before Vulkan, so Microsoft is in the same position as Apple - why to switch to Vulkan now?
    You twisted what I said. I said that the main game engines all support Vulkan, game developers actually have to turn it on/enable it which many are lazy to do so

    Originally posted by Ladis View Post
    2. That was a reaction to someone who listed advantages of having Vulkan on a platform. I told an example of why it's not needed. Fortunately others are not dumb trolls reacting vulgarly to things they don't understand.
    Vulkan's advantage is that its cross platform and in the context of Apple it would actually allow them to have many more games then they have now. Many game developers refuse to release games on Mac because of Metal, if Mac at least had Vulkan then it would be a lot more trivial to port games over.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ladis
    replied
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

    1. Every major game engine supports it even on windows, either that or DX12 which is Microsoft's equivalent of Vulkan but there is zero chance of Apple of adopting DirectX so I don't get what your point here is because it honestly sounds like you are arguing for the sakes of arguing.

    2. No s**t, what has this got to do with anything,
    Believe whatever you want. You are obviously not the target group. But as I talked with people from HP and Dell, PC will have a big problem.

    My picked two things:
    1. You're mistaken. 90% games on Windows are DirectX. Because Vulkan is not on Xbox. Fun fact, DX12 is also on Windows 7 - used by some games from Blizzard and Cyberpunk 2077. Second fun fact, even DX12 was available before Vulkan, so Microsoft is in the same position as Apple - why to switch to Vulkan now?

    2. That was a reaction to someone who listed advantages of having Vulkan on a platform. I told an example of why it's not needed. Fortunately others are not dumb trolls reacting vulgarly to things they don't understand.

    Leave a comment:


  • mdedetrich
    replied
    Originally posted by Ladis View Post

    For something to become an industry standard, it has to exist for a long time and be used by many companies from various fields (e.g. not only games). Because of that, old OpenGL on macOS is more of an industrial standard than Vulkan.
    Thats not the definition of industry standard, thats the definition of being used for a long period of time

    Originally posted by Ladis View Post
    HDMI 2.1 is not about $2, it can be up to one billion. The SoC was designed long ago and now is put in the last devices in the M1 line. They can't rebuild it or wait for M2. Don't forget this is not a crappy PC with huge case where you can fit large mainboard containing tons of conversion chips.
    I was obviously talking about $2 per device, not $2 globally. Also on an item that has a profit of 40-60% per device, this is completely benign in terms of cost.

    Originally posted by Ladis View Post
    Microsoft Windows is the same like macOS about 3rd party APIs. They also support libraries converting other APIs, e.g. OpenGL, to their API, e.g. Direct3D. Microsoft is also not responsible for OpenGL and Vulkan on Windows, that's on GPU makers. Do you think they make other APIs on their own GPU? Their SoC Microsoft SQ1 (based on Qualcomm SoC) has only Direct3D ;-)
    Your conflating so many things, including graphics card makers, operating systems and API's. If we are talking about cross platform graphics API's that are low level, Vulkan is the standard. Every major game engine supports it even on windows, either that or DX12 which is Microsoft's equivalent of Vulkan but there is zero chance of Apple of adopting DirectX so I don't get what your point here is because it honestly sounds like you are arguing for the sakes of arguing.

    The matter of fact that when Metal came out there was a good argument for Apple creating a new API and its because Vulkan wasn't mature yet. Now that Vulkan is mature and Metal is from a pure API standpoint a 95% subset of the Vulkan API (if this wasn't the case then MoltenVK either wouldn't exist or if it did no one would use it because it would be way too slow) there is no reason for Apple to not adopt it.

    And if coder is correct about Apple "supporting" MoltenVK than I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is actually working on it behind the scenes.

    Originally posted by Ladis View Post
    PS: It's a common misconception that Zink requires Vulkan. It can use anything underneath. E.g. on Windows on ARM it uses the Direct3D driver API, means the same API the userspace Direct3D API uses.
    No s**t, what has this got to do with anything,

    Leave a comment:


  • Ladis
    replied
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post

    ...
    For something to become an industry standard, it has to exist for a long time and be used by many companies from various fields (e.g. not only games). Because of that, old OpenGL on macOS is more of an industrial standard than Vulkan.

    HDMI 2.1 is not about $2, it can be up to one billion. The SoC was designed long ago and now is put in the last devices in the M1 line. They can't rebuild it or wait for M2. Don't forget this is not a crappy PC with huge case where you can fit large mainboard containing tons of conversion chips.

    Microsoft Windows is the same like macOS about 3rd party APIs. They also support libraries converting other APIs, e.g. OpenGL, to their API, e.g. Direct3D. Microsoft is also not responsible for OpenGL and Vulkan on Windows, that's on GPU makers. Do you think they make other APIs on their own GPU? Their SoC Microsoft SQ1 (based on Qualcomm SoC) has only Direct3D ;-)

    PS: It's a common misconception that Zink requires Vulkan. It can use anything underneath. E.g. on Windows on ARM it uses the Direct3D driver API, means the same API the userspace Direct3D API uses.

    Leave a comment:


  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by mdedetrich View Post
    Also iirc Apple isn't stating to use "MoltenVK on Apple if you need Vulkan" because they never official supported it.
    I think I read in some article about Khronos that Apple is semi-officially backing MoltenVK. I mean, not in that they're providing any support for it, but I guess they said something like "if you want to use Vulkan on an Apple platform, Molten VK is the way to do it". Like, basically acknowledging its existence and presumably suggesting they won't do anything to torpedo it.

    Leave a comment:


  • piotrj3
    replied
    Originally posted by Developer12 View Post

    Who the hell said anything about vulkan on the M1? Yeah it'd be nice but nobody is working on it or talking about it *at all.*

    If we do ever come to that bridge? You can patch over a LOT with compute shaders. It just won't be pretty.
    Thing is if you have Vulkan, you can leverage Zink. dxvk, Angle and pretty much use all other APIs with pretty good performance.

    Leave a comment:


  • mdedetrich
    replied
    Originally posted by coder View Post
    Really? What if the problem is just a Metal API limitation, rather than an underlying hardware limitation?


    Apple's GPUs are derived from Imagination Tech's designs, starting in the post-Vulkan era. And Imagination Tech had numerous contributors to the Vulkan 1.0 specification.



    Also, considering Vulkan's portability goals, I find it hard to believe the core feature set wouldn't work well on M1 hardware.
    As far as I understand (could be wrong here), Metal is a subset of Vulkan and because of this even MoltenVK cannot implement Vulkan properly (and by properly I mean the base Vulkan spec, not all of the extensions) simply because there is no equivalent in Metal.

    The interesting question is whether those missing features in Metal are just purely software/API wise (and hence Apple can theoritically just add that functionality to Metal to make it easier for MoltenVK or just implement Vulkan) OR if those limitations are because of hardware (i.e. implementing that part of the API would be slow because of the way M1's hardware is designed). Whats definitely the case is that Metal was deliberately designed to be very close to M1's hardware.

    Also iirc Apple isn't stating to use "MoltenVK on Apple if you need Vulkan" because they never official supported it. In the game industry if you want to release a game on Vulkan and support Mac then yeah a lot of people say "use MoltenVK" but its not typical Apple to say something like that, and if they would properly support Vulkan then they would actually ship it with Mac. I think Apple really learned their lesson with OpenGL here, they don't want to get burned with having half assed support for some API (even if there are legitimate reasons for that).

    Leave a comment:


  • mdedetrich
    replied
    Originally posted by Ladis View Post
    [*]The industry standard is OpenGL, not Vulkan. At least we agree that there's no point for Apple to implement Vulkan (if ever was).
    The industry standard is both OpenGL and Vulkan. They are both very different in design with OpenGL's design being outdated and increasingly irrelevant. Also in context of Apple using the argument that OpenGL is an "industry standard" is hilarious because its well known that Apple's OpenGL implementation was both terrible and outdated which is historically one of the main reasons why game companies refused to release their games on Apple (although to be fair this is also reflective of OpenGL's bad design especially when it comes to games)

    Originally posted by Ladis View Post
    [*]Such problems are only for people switching from PC. Apple users don't have this problem as their previous Macs also didn't have a better version of HDMI.
    PS: Reviewers have to complain about something. When it's only about some port(s), you know the device is perfect.
    Firstly, the argument that previous versions of Mac didn't have HDMI 2.1 is not one that you should be using. By that logic you can argue anything, i.e. if a Mac comes out with an outdated display its fine because the previous mac had an outdated display (and you can use this logic to perpetuity).

    The point that you are conveniently ignoring is that

    1. There is no reason NOT to have HDMI 2.1 except for maybe the extra $2 that it costs and for a device with the amount of markup that Apple's products have, that is fine
    2. No one cares about Apple's reasons for not putting HDMI 2.1, nor does anyone care about what previous devices have HDMI 2.0 or not. The product has a price and HDMI is a universal standard.

    Furthermore if Apple actually releases another Apple TV like product that wants to market to high end TV's they have to use HDMI 2.1 anyways so its not like something that they were never going to do. Not every device runs on displayport or USB-C

    Using your attitude, then Apple shouldn't have even released the macbook pro's with HDMI. Either support it properly (which with a 2k+ laptop machine that easily has the GPU horsepower for 2.1 thats not debatle) or if you really cannot spend that $2 to go from HDMI 2.0 to 2.1 then don't bother with HDMI 2.0 on such a laptop at all. Apple would would save a lot more money and not only that because previous Mac devices didn't have HDMI a lot of Mac users that did need HDMI would have a dock which they could reuse (and thats using your argumentation about what typical Apple users do).
    Last edited by mdedetrich; 13 March 2022, 05:48 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • coder
    replied
    Originally posted by Developer12 View Post
    Who the hell said anything about vulkan on the M1? Yeah it'd be nice but nobody is working on it or talking about it *at all.*
    Well, I had said Imagination's newly open-sourced Vulkan driver could potentially prove useful, in this endeavor.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X