Apple’s new MetalFX Upscaling system will compete with AMD FSR, Nvidia DLSS

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
25,779
At this year's WWDC, Apple announced a surprising new system coming to its Metal 3 gaming API that may sound familiar to PC gamers: MetalFX Upscaling

The system will leverage Apple's custom silicon to reconstruct video game graphics using lower-resolution source images so that games can run more efficiently at lower resolutions while looking higher-res. This "temporal reconstruction" system sounds similar to existing offerings from AMD (FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0) and Nvidia (Deep Learning Super-Sampling), along with an upcoming "XeSS" system from Intel

Based on how the system is described, it will more closely resemble AMD's system, since Apple has yet to announce a way for MetalFX Upscaling to leverage its custom-made "Neural Engine" system...

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022...-like-image-reconstruction-to-games-on-macos/
 
"Apple wants triple-A gaming back..."

When was it ever there in the first place? I can recall times when Macs got a few games, but the only time I can recall Apple being serious about gaming was the dawn of iOS. That's no knock on Apple either. That was a conscious decision.
 
"Apple wants triple-A gaming back..."

When was it ever there in the first place? I can recall times when Macs got a few games, but the only time I can recall Apple being serious about gaming was the dawn of iOS. That's no knock on Apple either. That was a conscious decision.
Pretty much only for a specific period of time in like the mid-80's to very early 90's, honestly. Even then, DOS had more, but Mac from that era was an absolute powerhouse compared to the 286/386 machines of the day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
AAA gaming has been on Mac for far longer than just the 80s/90s, but it was mostly dev dependent than anything.

Here’s some games that came to macOS:
COD 4
All Blizzard titles before Overwatch (StarCraft II, Warcraft III, Diablo III, etc)
All id Software titles before Quake 4 (including titles like Rage and Doom 3).
Bioshock 1/2/Infinite
Deus Ex: MD

Those are just some off the top of my head. There was basically a big drop off in terms of AAA porting/development after around 2012 or so. Which, likely coincides with Apples continued depreciation of OpenGL and the start of Metal (which was 2012).

The thing is, Apple has the dev teams to make games made for Vulkan easily portable to Metal right now it’s third party tools that do this, but Apple themselves could step in and make it nearly seamless if they chose. The entrenched part of the market is really DX. (My personal editorial starts here…) However considering the flaming turd that Windows 10 is and Windows 11 is developing into, I really hope devs start using Vulkan more and appreciating Linux and Mac more. Letting companies such as Steam with Arch Linux and Mac have a bigger share of the market, while decentralizing power away from Microsoft.

I think gaming should be bigger than any one company. And right now I think Microsoft is pushing monopoly with control over consoles and desktops as well as a huge percentage of major IP through acquisitions.
 
AAA gaming has been on Mac for far longer than just the 80s/90s, but it was mostly dev dependent than anything.

Here’s some games that came to macOS:
COD 4
All Blizzard titles before Overwatch (StarCraft II, Warcraft III, Diablo III, etc)
All id Software titles before Quake 4 (including titles like Rage and Doom 3).
Bioshock 1/2/Infinite
Deus Ex: MD

Those are just some off the top of my head. There was basically a big drop off in terms of AAA porting/development after around 2012 or so. Which, likely coincides with Apples continued depreciation of OpenGL and the start of Metal (which was 2012).

The thing is, Apple has the dev teams to make games made for Vulkan easily portable to Metal right now it’s third party tools that do this, but Apple themselves could step in and make it nearly seamless if they chose. The entrenched part of the market is really DX. (My personal editorial starts here…) However considering the flaming turd that Windows 10 is and Windows 11 is developing into, I really hope devs start using Vulkan more and appreciating Linux and Mac more. Letting companies such as Steam with Arch Linux and Mac have a bigger share of the market, while decentralizing power away from Microsoft.

I think gaming should be bigger than any one company. And right now I think Microsoft is pushing monopoly with control over consoles and desktops as well as a huge percentage of major IP through acquisitions.
I was just talking about when they were technically 'the best', since there was a period of time they absolutely had the best hardware on any consumer available device. However, that was that very short period 30+ years ago. I still remember paying nearly $15k for a fully decked out Mac IIfx back in the day.
 
I find it funny that Apple is now concerned about gaming after 2 years of releasing their M1 hardware. Not that gaming was a major factor of owning an Apple laptop but at the least you could use bootcamp or Parallels and still get decent performance on Intel based Macs. Seems that Apple now realized that some Macbook owners did care about playing games on their overpriced computer hardware. Go visit Apple gaming sections of Reddit and it's filled with very upset M1 owners that they can't play Eldin Ring, CyberPunk 2077, or even Doom Eternal. You know, some of the most popular games released for the past 2 years on PC. The answer Apple M1 users give is get a console or using a Streaming service to play these games. They created a wiki that shows what games work and don't with crossover or Parallels.

The main issue for M1 owners is that they're on ARM, MacOSX, and the graphics API of choice by Apple is Metal. Compared to Linux where the majority of Linux machines like Steam Deck run on x86 and the API of choice is Vulkan, both of which are very well understood for game developers and for running Windows games on Linux. Apple's MetalFX should piss off M users as it shows that Apple is continuing their insane use of the Metal API instead of implementing Vulkan. It's not like Apple couldn't implement Vulkan and Metal API's like Windows has DX12 and Vulkan. Also upscaling was originally for Ray-Tracing not being fast enough for gaming so that's why Nvidia and AMD have DLSS and FSR. The new M2 doesn't seem to have Ray-Tracing hardware and probably lacks GPU performance like the M1, hence why MetalFX was probably created.
 
The new M2 doesn't seem to have Ray-Tracing hardware and probably lacks GPU performance like the M1, hence why MetalFX was probably created.
Apple has had full raytracing support for Metal since XCode 10.2 which launched alongside iOS 12.
 
I find it funny that Apple is now concerned about gaming after 2 years of releasing their M1 hardware. Not that gaming was a major factor of owning an Apple laptop but at the least you could use bootcamp or Parallels and still get decent performance on Intel based Macs. Seems that Apple now realized that some Macbook owners did care about playing games on their overpriced computer hardware. Go visit Apple gaming sections of Reddit and it's filled with very upset M1 owners that they can't play Eldin Ring, CyberPunk 2077, or even Doom Eternal. You know, some of the most popular games released for the past 2 years on PC. The answer Apple M1 users give is get a console or using a Streaming service to play these games. They created a wiki that shows what games work and don't with crossover or Parallels.

The main issue for M1 owners is that they're on ARM, MacOSX, and the graphics API of choice by Apple is Metal. Compared to Linux where the majority of Linux machines like Steam Deck run on x86 and the API of choice is Vulkan, both of which are very well understood for game developers and for running Windows games on Linux. Apple's MetalFX should piss off M users as it shows that Apple is continuing their insane use of the Metal API instead of implementing Vulkan. It's not like Apple couldn't implement Vulkan and Metal API's like Windows has DX12 and Vulkan. Also upscaling was originally for Ray-Tracing not being fast enough for gaming so that's why Nvidia and AMD have DLSS and FSR. The new M2 doesn't seem to have Ray-Tracing hardware and probably lacks GPU performance like the M1, hence why MetalFX was probably created.

Care to point to these "Apple gaming sections" where this is supposedly happening? I checked r/macgaming and I see people asking for technical help with CrossOver and the like, but none of them are "very upset" that they can't play Elden Ring on their Macs. Would they like to? Certainly. But you generally know that going into Mac ownership, and there's this radical thing called a game console that lets you play those games well without spending a fortune on GPUs or compromising on noise or portability.

Apple's use of Metal is a mixed bag. Embracing Vulkan would make it easier to port some games, but at the same time, it also controls optimization in a way it couldn't with Vulkan. I'm not sure that referencing Linux really helps your case. Linux is an insignificant speck on the gaming landscape outside of the Steam Deck, and even then Valve's hardware isn't going to make Nintendo break out in a sweat.

I see MetalFX, RE8 and No Man's Sky as Apple taking its first steps toward improving gaming on the Mac. With that said, Apple is almost certainly going to upgrade gaming on its own terms; it's not going to simply dupe the Windows world, either in its computer designs or its software support. And frankly, it doesn't have to care. Apple has been growing ahead of the PC industry curve for a while now, and its business model is such that it doesn't need to sacrifice profit or chase every possible audience. Gaming is something Apple will use to make a MacBook or iMac more appealing; it's not going to make generic ATX towers or otherwise bend over backward to court a segment that it knows it's not going to dominate.
 
Apple has had full raytracing support for Metal since XCode 10.2 which launched alongside iOS 12.
Does the hardware exist?
Care to point to these "Apple gaming sections" where this is supposedly happening? I checked r/macgaming and I see people asking for technical help with CrossOver and the like, but none of them are "very upset" that they can't play Elden Ring on their Macs. Would they like to? Certainly.
Eldin Ring isn't a new game but when it was released a few months ago you got posts like these. It's a fairly long post. The most recent posts have M1 users wondering if they'll get the new features of the M2. It's a valid concern.
But you generally know that going into Mac ownership, and there's this radical thing called a game console that lets you play those games well without spending a fortune on GPUs or compromising on noise or portability.
Yes I mentioned this as a response to M1 users who wanted to play games on their M1 Mac. The Apple M1's that cost far more than any GPU you could buy even during the height of the crypto boom. You do know you could buy a gaming laptop cheaper than a RTX 3090 right?
Apple's use of Metal is a mixed bag. Embracing Vulkan would make it easier to port some games, but at the same time, it also controls optimization in a way it couldn't with Vulkan.
You do know that Nvidia, AMD, and Intel keep adding to Vulkan to get what they need, just like Apple could do. Nobody really supports Metal because again it's only on Apple hardware.
I'm not sure that referencing Linux really helps your case. Linux is an insignificant speck on the gaming landscape outside of the Steam Deck, and even then Valve's hardware isn't going to make Nintendo break out in a sweat.
The point I'm making is that Linux has a lesser path to resistance when it comes to gaming than Apple M1 Macs. Valve did go to Apple first for Mac OSX to make their Steam machines before going Linux. Also Linux's popularity has nothing to do with this but I wouldn't say Nintendo isn't breaking a sweat. Nvidia might be more afraid than Nintendo at this point.
I see MetalFX, RE8 and No Man's Sky as Apple taking its first steps toward improving gaming on the Mac. With that said, Apple is almost certainly going to upgrade gaming on its own terms; it's not going to simply dupe the Windows world, either in its computer designs or its software support. And frankly, it doesn't have to care. Apple has been growing ahead of the PC industry curve for a while now, and its business model is such that it doesn't need to sacrifice profit or chase every possible audience. Gaming is something Apple will use to make a MacBook or iMac more appealing; it's not going to make generic ATX towers or otherwise bend over backward to court a segment that it knows it's not going to dominate.
I've heard this before back when Apple was promoting Halo and Connectix Virtual Station. You don't think that Apple had issues with gaming when they were on PowerPC? Their move to x86 was the best thing they could have ever done and now they fucked it up by going ARM. Apple's only chance to get gaming on Mac is to start with Vulkan support. Back when Valve tried to release Steam Machines they thought they could get away with Linux ports of games. They did the right thing and added Wine A.K.A Proton to Steam and now Windows games work on Linux. Valve is the king of AAA and Indie gaming, which is what the Apple M1 lacks. If Valve felt the need to back Vulkan by not only creating a Vulkan driver for Intel but also for AMD and even enhancing it's performance for them, then Vulkan is a big deal. Valve realized they couldn't force developers to port games to the barely 1% of the gaming market that was Linux.

Comparing linux to Apple isn't very different in that the percent of Steam users is about the same. The difference is that Intel Mac's make up 60% while the rest is listed as VirtualApple, whatever that is. So the majority of Apple users still use Intel Macs to play games, which is just fragmenting the market. So Apple who has a fragmented market, is pushing their Metal API which the overwhelming majority of developers who just use the MetalVK wrapper to avoid learning it because again they have like 1.4% of the Steam market share. Apple needs to start by adding Vulkan support and just leave Metal as an option for developers who want to edge out in performance, assuming that Metal even has that advantage.
 
Does the hardware exist?
Yes it does it on their own raster cores, it takes a hit but not as big a hit as it does on AMD and Nvidia hardware.
But the M2 looks like it may have dedicated cores as part of the Metal 3 specification.
 
You do know that Nvidia, AMD, and Intel keep adding to Vulkan to get what they need, just like Apple could do. Nobody really supports Metal because again it's only on Apple hardware.
It's not that they don't support Metal, most developers don't actually support any language, they program in a mark-up language that their environment converts to DX, Vulkan, and what ever else they checked.
The problem is Metal has some fundamental differences that don't make complex ports easy, the hard limit on 500,000 resources per argument buffer makes many of the canned visual effects and texture mapping methods completely incompatible with DX12 and Vulkan as they support well over 1 Million, so what you then have to do is take any of those canned calls and rebuild them from scratch for Mac, that is more work than the market share is worth. Hopefully, with the upcoming Metal 3 API this and many other limitations like it get fixed, it would make ports a far easier thing to do.
 
It's not that they don't support Metal, most developers don't actually support any language, they program in a mark-up language that their environment converts to DX, Vulkan, and what ever else they checked.
The problem is Metal has some fundamental differences that don't make complex ports easy, the hard limit on 500,000 resources per argument buffer makes many of the canned visual effects and texture mapping methods completely incompatible with DX12 and Vulkan as they support well over 1 Million, so what you then have to do is take any of those canned calls and rebuild them from scratch for Mac, that is more work than the market share is worth. Hopefully, with the upcoming Metal 3 API this and many other limitations like it get fixed, it would make ports a far easier thing to do.
I don't think this will change how developers support Metal. Right now the go to method is MoltenVK, which was developed by Valve of all things. Developers will always use the path of least resistance and right now Vulkan is the best path. No matter how technically superior something is, though I've heard that Vulkan is still better, the industry will always go for the easy path. As long as MoltenVK exists, that's what developers will use.
 
I don't think this will change how developers support Metal. Right now the go to method is MoltenVK, which was developed by Valve of all things. Developers will always use the path of least resistance and right now Vulkan is the best path. No matter how technically superior something is, though I've heard that Vulkan is still better, the industry will always go for the easy path. As long as MoltenVK exists, that's what developers will use.
Even if they did, their compiler is just going to dump out the compiled mac software in "Metal" so as far as the mac is concerned it's native metal. Fixing some of the deep-down issues with Metal (fingers crossed) just lets developers check one more box under their compile outputs.
But yes there are more options now for Vulkan than there ever were for OpenGL which is fantastic because developing for OpenGL was not one of my better work experiences... But hey it paid my tuition.
 
Eldin Ring isn't a new game but when it was released a few months ago you got posts like these. It's a fairly long post. The most recent posts have M1 users wondering if they'll get the new features of the M2. It's a valid concern.
I don't see people in that community wailing about being unable to play Elden Ring; they'd like to, but they're not surprised. Someone experienced enough to frequent Reddit isn't going to buy a Mac and wonder why they can't play all the latest AAA games.


Yes I mentioned this as a response to M1 users who wanted to play games on their M1 Mac. The Apple M1's that cost far more than any GPU you could buy even during the height of the crypto boom. You do know you could buy a gaming laptop cheaper than a RTX 3090 right?
I... don't think you've actually looked at Mac pricing. An M1 Mac mini is $699; a MacBook Air is $999. Yes, you can get decent gaming PCs for less than the price of an RTX 3090 (and not far off the prices of the Macs I've mentioned), but please don't exaggerate the price of entry for getting a Mac.


The point I'm making is that Linux has a lesser path to resistance when it comes to gaming than Apple M1 Macs. Valve did go to Apple first for Mac OSX to make their Steam machines before going Linux. Also Linux's popularity has nothing to do with this but I wouldn't say Nintendo isn't breaking a sweat. Nvidia might be more afraid than Nintendo at this point.
Source on the Steam Machine claim? If Valve thought Apple would license Mac OS X (it's been macOS for years) for Steam Machines, that'd be incredibly naive. Apple was done licensing its platforms years before that point. And if Valve wanted to use the Darwin kernel, it didn't need Apple's permission.


I've heard this before back when Apple was promoting Halo and Connectix Virtual Station. You don't think that Apple had issues with gaming when they were on PowerPC? Their move to x86 was the best thing they could have ever done and now they fucked it up by going ARM. Apple's only chance to get gaming on Mac is to start with Vulkan support. Back when Valve tried to release Steam Machines they thought they could get away with Linux ports of games. They did the right thing and added Wine A.K.A Proton to Steam and now Windows games work on Linux. Valve is the king of AAA and Indie gaming, which is what the Apple M1 lacks. If Valve felt the need to back Vulkan by not only creating a Vulkan driver for Intel but also for AMD and even enhancing it's performance for them, then Vulkan is a big deal. Valve realized they couldn't force developers to port games to the barely 1% of the gaming market that was Linux.

Comparing linux to Apple isn't very different in that the percent of Steam users is about the same. The difference is that Intel Mac's make up 60% while the rest is listed as VirtualApple, whatever that is. So the majority of Apple users still use Intel Macs to play games, which is just fragmenting the market. So Apple who has a fragmented market, is pushing their Metal API which the overwhelming majority of developers who just use the MetalVK wrapper to avoid learning it because again they have like 1.4% of the Steam market share. Apple needs to start by adding Vulkan support and just leave Metal as an option for developers who want to edge out in performance, assuming that Metal even has that advantage.
I'm very aware of Apple's issues with gaming in the PowerPC era. But this is not the PowerPC era, and Apple Silicon is not like the G3/G4/G5. Apple at the time was hamstrung by IBM and Motorola, both of whom suffered from process limitations and a general lack of interest in aggressively developing consumer CPUs. Apple switched to Intel chips not because it didn't want to keep using PPC, but because there was no way it could realistically stuff the G5 into laptops.

Moving to x86 was a smart move at the time... but so was moving to ARM. Unlike in the PPC era, Apple now has real control over chip design and manufacturing partners. The company went from struggling to make Intel chips fit its design goals (see the throttling in the 16-inch MBP) to making laptops that can clearly outperform Windows rivals in some cases while offering better battery life and less noise. For that matter, making desktops that stand out more clearly versus their Windows counterparts.

Would Vulkan help bring more games? Yes. But Apple really, really isn't worried about preserving its existing Steam share or adding absolutely every game it can. The company is mainly interested in using gaming as a selling point, and courting the mainstream. It would likely be happy just improving Metal's gaming functionality (as it is to some degree with Metal 3 and MetalFX) to the point where it can attract commitments from a few big developers; hey, our cool new MacBook Air can play the latest Resident Evil. And don't forget, Metal is already in use on virtually all of the 1.8 billion active iPhones and iPads... this is not a niche API.
 
I don't see people in that community wailing about being unable to play Elden Ring; they'd like to, but they're not surprised. Someone experienced enough to frequent Reddit isn't going to buy a Mac and wonder why they can't play all the latest AAA games.



I... don't think you've actually looked at Mac pricing. An M1 Mac mini is $699; a MacBook Air is $999. Yes, you can get decent gaming PCs for less than the price of an RTX 3090 (and not far off the prices of the Macs I've mentioned), but please don't exaggerate the price of entry for getting a Mac.



Source on the Steam Machine claim? If Valve thought Apple would license Mac OS X (it's been macOS for years) for Steam Machines, that'd be incredibly naive. Apple was done licensing its platforms years before that point. And if Valve wanted to use the Darwin kernel, it didn't need Apple's permission.



I'm very aware of Apple's issues with gaming in the PowerPC era. But this is not the PowerPC era, and Apple Silicon is not like the G3/G4/G5. Apple at the time was hamstrung by IBM and Motorola, both of whom suffered from process limitations and a general lack of interest in aggressively developing consumer CPUs. Apple switched to Intel chips not because it didn't want to keep using PPC, but because there was no way it could realistically stuff the G5 into laptops.

Moving to x86 was a smart move at the time... but so was moving to ARM. Unlike in the PPC era, Apple now has real control over chip design and manufacturing partners. The company went from struggling to make Intel chips fit its design goals (see the throttling in the 16-inch MBP) to making laptops that can clearly outperform Windows rivals in some cases while offering better battery life and less noise. For that matter, making desktops that stand out more clearly versus their Windows counterparts.

Would Vulkan help bring more games? Yes. But Apple really, really isn't worried about preserving its existing Steam share or adding absolutely every game it can. The company is mainly interested in using gaming as a selling point, and courting the mainstream. It would likely be happy just improving Metal's gaming functionality (as it is to some degree with Metal 3 and MetalFX) to the point where it can attract commitments from a few big developers; hey, our cool new MacBook Air can play the latest Resident Evil. And don't forget, Metal is already in use on virtually all of the 1.8 billion active iPhones and iPads... this is not a niche API.
Honestly I’m surprised there hasn’t been word of Apple poaching developers to start up their own first party studio.
They’ve been gobbling up AR talent for the last while So I’m expecting something there soon enough, but I’ve heard nothing from them on the gaming front which baffles me.
 
I don't see people in that community wailing about being unable to play Elden Ring; they'd like to, but they're not surprised. Someone experienced enough to frequent Reddit isn't going to buy a Mac and wonder why they can't play all the latest AAA games.
Experienced people is not the people who buy computers, both Mac or Windows. They had a friend that told them get a Mac because it's great and they bought a Mac. They're not going to do research on what Macs can and can't do. One day a friend says play Eldin Ring because it's great and when they try on their Mac they're surprised it doesn't work.
I... don't think you've actually looked at Mac pricing. An M1 Mac mini is $699; a MacBook Air is $999. Yes, you can get decent gaming PCs for less than the price of an RTX 3090 (and not far off the prices of the Macs I've mentioned), but please don't exaggerate the price of entry for getting a Mac.
So what about the M1 Pro or Max models? Bet those are real cheap... right? You're talking about base models which Apple has long since upgraded from, along with pricing.
Source on the Steam Machine claim?
What this?
https://www.statista.com/statistics...ems-used-on-the-online-gaming-platform-steam/
If Valve thought Apple would license Mac OS X (it's been macOS for years) for Steam Machines, that'd be incredibly naive. Apple was done licensing its platforms years before that point. And if Valve wanted to use the Darwin kernel, it didn't need Apple's permission.
This is something I've heard somewhere. Makes sense since Steam Machines with Apple behind it would have probably been more successful than Linux.
I'm very aware of Apple's issues with gaming in the PowerPC era. But this is not the PowerPC era, and Apple Silicon is not like the G3/G4/G5. Apple at the time was hamstrung by IBM and Motorola, both of whom suffered from process limitations and a general lack of interest in aggressively developing consumer CPUs. Apple switched to Intel chips not because it didn't want to keep using PPC, but because there was no way it could realistically stuff the G5 into laptops.
Yes but it also had a lot to do with Windows and x86. You don't think Apple G4 and G5 users didn't complain of the lack of software that WinTel had? The move to x86 solved those problems. It's also a problem for Linux and why Proton was made. You can't out do x86 Windows when it comes to software support.
Moving to x86 was a smart move at the time... but so was moving to ARM. Unlike in the PPC era, Apple now has real control over chip design and manufacturing partners. The company went from struggling to make Intel chips fit its design goals (see the throttling in the 16-inch MBP) to making laptops that can clearly outperform Windows rivals in some cases while offering better battery life and less noise. For that matter, making desktops that stand out more clearly versus their Windows counterparts.
Apple making their own hardware has a lot to do with other people making it for them. Remember ARM which I'm sure they redesigned is still ARM's design. Their GPU is Imagination's PowerVR with a lot of poaching engineers involved. It's not entirely their tech. It is legally theirs but as time goes on I can't see this working out for them. The most stricking thing about the M2 is their doubling of GPU cores and yet only gaining 35% increase in performance? By Apple's claim of course. 100GB/s of unified memory bandwidth, but the M1's also had stupid fast memory but couldn't touch a RTX 3060 in performance. They're not a hardware company like AMD, Nvidia, and Intel. I see it as a bad move.
Would Vulkan help bring more games? Yes. But Apple really, really isn't worried about preserving its existing Steam share or adding absolutely every game it can. The company is mainly interested in using gaming as a selling point, and courting the mainstream. It would likely be happy just improving Metal's gaming functionality (as it is to some degree with Metal 3 and MetalFX) to the point where it can attract commitments from a few big developers; hey, our cool new MacBook Air can play the latest Resident Evil. And don't forget, Metal is already in use on virtually all of the 1.8 billion active iPhones and iPads... this is not a niche API.
This isn't new to the industry. Sega Saturn, PS3, Glide API, and many more did the same thing and they failed. AMD made Mantle and they knew it would fail, but that got moved to Vulkan and some parts of DX12. Sony thought like Apple that they could make this complicated hardware that you'd have to learn but then all your code would only work on the PS3. Like Apple, Sony thought they were so big that you'd have no choice but to learn this. They all had this one game that showed off what you could do with this hardware but in the end the industry moved to the path with least resistance.

Already we see developers using MoltenVK to avoid needing to learn Metal. Just like developers used 2D for the background on the Sega Saturn because they didn't want to learn to use the 3D Quads that Sega had on it. The PS3 developers just used the PowerPC and ignored the SPE's on the Cell chip. Glide was abandoned for OpenGL. So Apple who has 10% to 13% laptop market share wants developers to not only learn a API that is only used on their hardware, but learn ARM and MacOSX while also dealing with all the left over Intel Macs that are still the majority of the market. iOS gaming is not comparable to Windows and consoles. Mobile games don't make as much use of the hardware as much as PC and console. Let alone have the storage for games like Cyberpunk 2077.

 
  • Like
Reactions: kac77
like this
Honestly I’m surprised there hasn’t been word of Apple poaching developers to start up their own first party studio.
They’ve been gobbling up AR talent for the last while So I’m expecting something there soon enough, but I’ve heard nothing from them on the gaming front which baffles me.
There were murmurs Apple might buy EA or another big developer to jumpstart its gaming efforts. It'd probably keep the console development around, but it's safe to say that Windows (and probably Xbox) development wouldn't last long. I'd get a kick out of Madden fans having to buy a Mac if they wanted to play on a computer.
 
There were murmurs Apple might buy EA or another big developer to jumpstart its gaming efforts. It'd probably keep the console development around, but it's safe to say that Windows (and probably Xbox) development wouldn't last long. I'd get a kick out of Madden fans having to buy a Mac if they wanted to play on a computer.
EA approached Apple, but also Microsoft, Sony, and just about everybody else. Apple wouldn’t burden themselves with an existing brand, especially one with the history and reputation of EA. They would poach the talent they were interested in and start fresh.
 
There were murmurs Apple might buy EA or another big developer to jumpstart its gaming efforts. It'd probably keep the console development around, but it's safe to say that Windows (and probably Xbox) development wouldn't last long. I'd get a kick out of Madden fans having to buy a Mac if they wanted to play on a computer.
At this point Apple could buy studios like what Microsoft and Sony have been doing recently and force people to use a Mac, but with Spiderman coming to PC we can see how well that'll work out. Wintel is too big for Apple and there's not enough money in Apple's offshore tax evading accounts to buy enough studios to make gaming on Mac a thing. Look at Epic and how they failed to capture the same staying power as Steam. What Apple would need to do is look at Amazon and how they're bringing new games to the market. That's what they're doing with AppleTV, and also failing at it. You take Madden away from the people who play them on Xbox and Playstation, you'd not only piss off those customers as they won't want to play their favorite game on a Mac, but they'll feel their loyalty was betray and will look elsewhere to get their handegg fix. You also need to realize that not everyone wants to buy overpriced Apple hardware over a Windows PC, Xbox, or Playstation.

 
Behold the power of Vulkan.

"The other new extension is VK_EXT_metal_objects and allows for interacting with Apple Metal API objects. This extension was worked on by Mozilla and MoltenVK developers. This VK_EXT_metal_objects implementation is only relevant to Vulkan on Apple platforms supporting the Metal API and doesn't provide any help for seeing Metal on other targets or any other magical additions... Basically it allows for importing or exporting underlying Metal objects associated with specific Vulkan objects, helping efforts like MoltenVK that allow Vulkan to run on macOS/iOS platforms."


https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Vulkan-1.3.217
 
Experienced people is not the people who buy computers, both Mac or Windows. They had a friend that told them get a Mac because it's great and they bought a Mac. They're not going to do research on what Macs can and can't do. One day a friend says play Eldin Ring because it's great and when they try on their Mac they're surprised it doesn't work.
Yes, most people who buy computers aren't terribly experienced... but they're not the ones posting on Reddit, and that means you don't have evidence to show that people buy Macs and then gripe that they can't play Elden Ring (not "Eldin Ring," by the way). You're just speculating.


So what about the M1 Pro or Max models? Bet those are real cheap... right? You're talking about base models which Apple has long since upgraded from, along with pricing.
They're not cheap, but the entry models didn't go away. You also strongly implied that M1 Macs as a whole cost "far more" than GPUs did during the crypto boom; that's either poor writing or a demonstrably false claim. Besides, you're making a disingenuous argument here — you say Macs are overpriced in one breath while effectively stating that gamers should buy PCs with GPUs that often cost as much or more as a game console, and during the worst shortages more than some entire Macs.


This is something I've heard somewhere. Makes sense since Steam Machines with Apple behind it would have probably been more successful than Linux.
So it's a junk rumor, then. I've found no evidence of it online (not even sketchy claims), and it makes no sense given that Apple wasn't going to license macOS to any third party.


Yes but it also had a lot to do with Windows and x86. You don't think Apple G4 and G5 users didn't complain of the lack of software that WinTel had? The move to x86 solved those problems. It's also a problem for Linux and why Proton was made. You can't out do x86 Windows when it comes to software support.
Eh, not as much as you think it did. Boot Camp was a nice-to-have to get Windows users to switch at a time when that was a priority. Apple only paid minimal attention to drivers and overall software support (I should know, I used it — did you?). Yes, the option was helpful for playing Windows games or running the occasional proprietary work app, but you still didn't buy a Mac primarily to run Windows software.

Yes, Windows on x86 has the strongest software support. But the software landscape has also changed in the 16 years since the Intel transition. You're less likely to be missing an app on the Mac; if it isn't native, you're probably using a web version anyway. Games obviously remain a sore point, but consoles also do a much better job of covering the gaps than they did in 2006.


Apple making their own hardware has a lot to do with other people making it for them. Remember ARM which I'm sure they redesigned is still ARM's design. Their GPU is Imagination's PowerVR with a lot of poaching engineers involved. It's not entirely their tech. It is legally theirs but as time goes on I can't see this working out for them. The most stricking thing about the M2 is their doubling of GPU cores and yet only gaining 35% increase in performance? By Apple's claim of course. 100GB/s of unified memory bandwidth, but the M1's also had stupid fast memory but couldn't touch a RTX 3060 in performance. They're not a hardware company like AMD, Nvidia, and Intel. I see it as a bad move.
Given that Apple's Mac sales rebounded with M1 and are still ahead of the curve several quarters later, I doubt Tim Cook is wringing his hands worrying about the Mac's future.

Also, not a hardware company like AMD/Intel/NVIDIA? Get the hell out. Apple has been shipping custom chips since 2010 and makes chips for products as small as earbuds and smartwatches. It might be based on ARM and PowerVR, but it's far from a slight tweak. AMD is using Intel's architecture for its CPUs, while NVIDIA is relying on ARM for chips ranging from Tegra to the Grace CPU meant for data centers and supercomputers. Why do you think NVIDIA was trying to buy ARM... for kicks? Intel is about the only one you can say truly controls every aspect of its main chip offerings.


Already we see developers using MoltenVK to avoid needing to learn Metal. Just like developers used 2D for the background on the Sega Saturn because they didn't want to learn to use the 3D Quads that Sega had on it. The PS3 developers just used the PowerPC and ignored the SPE's on the Cell chip. Glide was abandoned for OpenGL. So Apple who has 10% to 13% laptop market share wants developers to not only learn a API that is only used on their hardware, but learn ARM and MacOSX while also dealing with all the left over Intel Macs that are still the majority of the market. iOS gaming is not comparable to Windows and consoles. Mobile games don't make as much use of the hardware as much as PC and console. Let alone have the storage for games like Cyberpunk 2077.
You... missed the point. It's not that mobile games don't have as many resources to work with; it's that Apple sells hundreds of millions of devices using Metal per year. While only a fraction of those are Mac users, think about that from a developer's perspective. Many developers already know how to write for Metal, and that common framework makes it relatively easy to produce a game that reaches a massive audience. It'd require extensive tweaking to make sure the game shines on all platforms, of course, but someone writing a Windows or Android game doesn't have that option.
 
Yes, most people who buy computers aren't terribly experienced... but they're not the ones posting on Reddit, and that means you don't have evidence to show that people buy Macs and then gripe that they can't play Elden Ring (not "Eldin Ring," by the way). You're just speculating.
Yea and then I step in and tell them to buy a Windows laptop and that buying Apple is a mistake. Remember, I'm the Linux guy who runs Linux Mint exclusively, and I'm telling you to buy a AMD Ryzen Windows laptop.
They're not cheap, but the entry models didn't go away.
The entry models don't hold up in performance compared to AMD entry level products. Maybe against Intel because Intel is still trying to get their act together. Also the entry level M1's don't get as hot and don't go through as much battery life compared to the Pro and Max models.
You also strongly implied that M1 Macs as a whole cost "far more" than GPUs did during the crypto boom; that's either poor writing or a demonstrably false claim. Besides, you're making a disingenuous argument here — you say Macs are overpriced in one breath while effectively stating that gamers should buy PCs with GPUs that often cost as much or more as a game console, and during the worst shortages more than some entire Macs.
There's a lot wrong here that I'm going to make a bulletin.
  • Firstly you're the one suggesting that people should buy a desktop GPU. I keep saying RTX 3060 but it doesn't just exist as a PCIe graphics card. Laptops weren't as effected as GPU's when it comes to mining inflation, such as the ASUS - ROG Zephyrus 14" https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-r...b-ssd-moonlight-white/6452913.p?skuId=6452913
  • Secondly, consoles were and are still very much effected by the scalpers. It's better now but for a long time you couldn't easily find a PS5 for less than $1k. To say that GPU's cost more than game consoles is ignoring the reality of the past 2 years.
  • There's a reason why M1 based Mac's didn't have a scalper or mining shortage.
  • There's a reason why everyone says that Apple products are overpriced.
    savigVO.jpg
Eh, not as much as you think it did. Boot Camp was a nice-to-have to get Windows users to switch at a time when that was a priority. Apple only paid minimal attention to drivers and overall software support (I should know, I used it — did you?). Yes, the option was helpful for playing Windows games or running the occasional proprietary work app, but you still didn't buy a Mac primarily to run Windows software.
Excuse me but do you speak for all Mac users?
Yes, Windows on x86 has the strongest software support. But the software landscape has also changed in the 16 years since the Intel transition. You're less likely to be missing an app on the Mac; if it isn't native, you're probably using a web version anyway.
That really depends on what you want to do. This can also be applied to Linux but there's always this one app that forces me back to Windows. Like this app for TBC Retribution. Or this application that converts PS2 games to work on PS3. Or that some emulators like Yuzu which are not ported to Mac. It's not a normal use case but these are issues I run into as a Linux user, that Mac users will also run into. The difference is that I can boot back into Windows.
Games obviously remain a sore point, but consoles also do a much better job of covering the gaps than they did in 2006.
If you need more hardware to do what a single Windows PC does then that's fiscally irresponsible.
Also, not a hardware company like AMD/Intel/NVIDIA? Get the hell out. Apple has been shipping custom chips since 2010 and makes chips for products as small as earbuds and smartwatches. It might be based on ARM and PowerVR, but it's far from a slight tweak. AMD is using Intel's architecture for its CPUs, while NVIDIA is relying on ARM for chips ranging from Tegra to the Grace CPU meant for data centers and supercomputers. Why do you think NVIDIA was trying to buy ARM... for kicks? Intel is about the only one you can say truly controls every aspect of its main chip offerings.
Just about everyone has made a custom ARM chip. Apple has made the best but Apple is taking advantage of the fact that Intel hasn't done much to compete while AMD's Ryzen CPU's were catching up to Intel and are now beating Intel, because before that the Bulldozer CPU's weren't competitive. Basically the whole x86 market is dysfunctional. Also Intel stopped giving AMD their designs after 1984, which broke the agreement. Apple and ARM is not the same as AMD and Intel. Once Intel gets their act together and AMD stops delaying the release of their technology they made 2 years ago, then things will get better.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxdXaBaTSFM0cX3vI52owZMQRGJyy9mm5J
You... missed the point. It's not that mobile games don't have as many resources to work with; it's that Apple sells hundreds of millions of devices using Metal per year. While only a fraction of those are Mac users, think about that from a developer's perspective. Many developers already know how to write for Metal, and that common framework makes it relatively easy to produce a game that reaches a massive audience. It'd require extensive tweaking to make sure the game shines on all platforms, of course, but someone writing a Windows or Android game doesn't have that option.
I get what you're saying but you're also missing my point. The most popular games on iOS are not games that will push a developers to make AAA games like you see on PC and console. There are a few notable games like Diablo Immortal :spitoutdummy: Apex Legends and Call of Duty. The majority of games on iOS are games like Subway Surfers, Candy Crush, Roblox, Fill the Fridge :bored: and Among Us. These are not games that will force developers to learn Metal API the same as Red Dead Redemption 2 will. Keep in mind it's not like these games don't already exist on Android using Vulkan or OpenGL, so I don't see how this benefits Apple by making developers lives harder with Metal. Even going so far to remove apps using MoltenVK. This is not a company that will go far with gaming.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxamMZKyVZg0p9Z_RHO2AuZsc7gmFFJoQ8
 
Yea and then I step in and tell them to buy a Windows laptop and that buying Apple is a mistake. Remember, I'm the Linux guy who runs Linux Mint exclusively, and I'm telling you to buy a AMD Ryzen Windows laptop.
And then they ignore you because you believe the world revolves around PC gaming, and that your personal preferences should be forced on everyone else. They get a Mac if it makes sense for their overall needs, and are likely to be very content.

The entry models don't hold up in performance compared to AMD entry level products. Maybe against Intel because Intel is still trying to get their act together. Also the entry level M1's don't get as hot and don't go through as much battery life compared to the Pro and Max models.
Eh, when the M1 arrived it was stomping comparable Ryzen-based laptops in at least some respects. There's no doubt that Apple kicked Intel's ass, at least until 12th-gen Core showed up. And remember, the first M1 Macs went on sale in fall 2020... yeah, I'd hope that x86 laptop chips from 2022 would fare better. If the M1 was still as competitive now as it was two years ago, AMD and Intel would be in deep trouble. I just hope it doesn't take too long for M2 to filter across the lineup. As it stands, I still get a kick out of knowing that a fanless ARM laptop was outperforming noisier, shorter-lived x86 laptops at similar prices.


There's a lot wrong here that I'm going to make a bulletin.
  • Firstly you're the one suggesting that people should buy a desktop GPU. I keep saying RTX 3060 but it doesn't just exist as a PCIe graphics card. Laptops weren't as effected as GPU's when it comes to mining inflation, such as the ASUS - ROG Zephyrus 14" https://www.bestbuy.com/site/asus-r...b-ssd-moonlight-white/6452913.p?skuId=6452913
  • Secondly, consoles were and are still very much effected by the scalpers. It's better now but for a long time you couldn't easily find a PS5 for less than $1k. To say that GPU's cost more than game consoles is ignoring the reality of the past 2 years.
  • There's a reason why M1 based Mac's didn't have a scalper or mining shortage.
  • There's a reason why everyone says that Apple products are overpriced.
Laptops weren't as affected (not effected) as desktop GPUs, true, but you're also the one who made the poor comparison to desktop GPU prices during the crypto boom. And yeah, gaming laptops can be good values in the right circumstances... but you're still making tradeoffs, even with well-done models like the Zephyrus 14. They're noisier, don't last as long on battery (even when using the integrated GPU; ARM Macs don't throttle as much) and sometimes have curious omissions. It's rather funny that you suggested the Zephyrus 14, as it didn't even have a webcam until this year's model. Try telling a remote worker that they should give up participating in company Zoom meetings so they can play Apex Legends.

I know consoles have been and still are affected by scalping. But if I'd had to spend hundreds of dollars above the MSRP for my PS5, I'd have at least gotten an entire gaming machine; do that for a GPU and you're still stuck buying other parts if you need more than just a graphics upgrade.

M1 Macs have been supply-constrained for virtually their entire existence. Apple has routinely grown ahead of the industry curve since then; most of the top five PC makers are shrinking where Apple is still increasing shipments and growing share. There's no problems with demand. And while Apple makes some occasionally baffling price decisions (the Pro Display XDR stand's $999 price is still strange, even if economies of scale help explain it), M1 Macs have generally been considered good values; it's only really now that they're starting to lose their luster.


Excuse me but do you speak for all Mac users?
I don't, but unlike you I know what Boot Camp is actually like and can point to evidence and logic. When Apple made clear that ARM Macs wouldn't support Boot Camp, there wasn't a tremendous uproar; some understandably complained, of course, but there were no significant worries among analysts or the community that Apple was shooting itself in the foot. Why? As I said, it's not 2006 anymore; concerns about native Windows apps aren't as significant as they were back then, and Apple now has a knack for custom silicon (see: outperforming all Android devices) where it was leaning on unreliable partners in the PowerPC days.


If you need more hardware to do what a single Windows PC does then that's fiscally irresponsible.
It's a bit odd to claim fiscal responsibility in the PC gaming world, the land of $700 GPUs and RGB lighting, but I'll bite. There will be some cases where a single do-it-all computer makes sense, but there are also plenty where it doesn't. If you want a long-lasting ultraportable laptop, you're not going to have just one device if you still care about AAA gaming; you either need a desktop, an eGPU or a console, and those first two will make the console seem like a bargain. And simply speaking, there are consequences to insisting on a single machine that does it all well. I want to spend time with my wife in the evenings, for example, rather than hiding away in my office; I'd much rather game in the living room, where we can be together and I can enforce a work/play split.


Just about everyone has made a custom ARM chip. Apple has made the best but Apple is taking advantage of the fact that Intel hasn't done much to compete while AMD's Ryzen CPU's were catching up to Intel and are now beating Intel, because before that the Bulldozer CPU's weren't competitive. Basically the whole x86 market is dysfunctional. Also Intel stopped giving AMD their designs after 1984, which broke the agreement. Apple and ARM is not the same as AMD and Intel. Once Intel gets their act together and AMD stops delaying the release of their technology they made 2 years ago, then things will get better.
I agree that Intel made it easier for Apple, but that's the point, isn't it? Apple is switching because the very creator of the x86 architecture has been floundering for years, and switching to AMD risked creating the same problem. Remember how AMD embarrassed Intel with early Athlons, only to lose the plot for years afterward? Yeah. You've even demonstrated the issue with your last statement. Apple could stick with x86, hope AMD/Intel turn things around and still find itself dependent on someone else... or it could make its own silicon, break the cycle and control its own destiny. There are risks involved, but the dangers of a bad x86 batch are arguably worse.


I get what you're saying but you're also missing my point. The most popular games on iOS are not games that will push a developers to make AAA games like you see on PC and console. There are a few notable games like Diablo Immortal :spitoutdummy: Apex Legends and Call of Duty. The majority of games on iOS are games like Subway Surfers, Candy Crush, Roblox, Fill the Fridge :bored: and Among Us. These are not games that will force developers to learn Metal API the same as Red Dead Redemption 2 will. Keep in mind it's not like these games don't already exist on Android using Vulkan or OpenGL, so I don't see how this benefits Apple by making developers lives harder with Metal. Even going so far to remove apps using MoltenVK. This is not a company that will go far with gaming.
I'm not under illusions that Metal's popularity on mobile will push a huge wave of Mac releases, although Metal 3's additions definitely make it more compelling (you can even use Metal in C++ games, so that'll help with porting some Windows titles). I also don't think Apple is about to become synonymous with computer gaming; that's not its style.

Instead, I see Metal 3, MetalFX and other developments more as a promising sign that Apple will be friendlier to computer gaming, and that it'll be easier to justify buying a Mac if you do want to play more than a handful of games. Any significant changes will likely take years to unfold, and I don't think Windows gaming is in serious danger unless AMD and Intel (and to a lesser extent, NVIDIA) really drop the ball. But Apple's success certainly isn't riding on whether or not you can play Elden Ring on a MacBook.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a huge fan of Apple for many of the reasons listed here, especially with regards to gaming. The hostility to open standards and APIs like Vulkan is frustrating and Apple's continual necessity to do it their own way or re-invent the wheel is no help. There has been more convergence than ever on APIs, engine support and much more that has enabled gaming to be more easily developed and even ported , but because of The Apple Way (tm) it is now easier for many developers to bring a title to work on Linux at full parity either native, or even via Proton, then it is the additional work they'd need to do to support Apple.

This seems yet another "also-ran", especially given that at least 2 of the other 3 upscaling tech are to be open API , license, FOSS (AMD FSR 2.0 and Intel XeSS), platform and hardware independent, is there a reason Apple couldn't have contributed towards improving these and using them for their systems instead? There are many reasons to have distaste for Apple policy from walled gardens to pricing to other "innovations", but it seems like working at cross purposes to talk about your new powerful CPU/GPUs on expensive hardware yet design it in an obtuse way, making it more difficult for those who want to game on it with such decisions?
 
And then they ignore you because you believe the world revolves around PC gaming, and that your personal preferences should be forced on everyone else. They get a Mac if it makes sense for their overall needs, and are likely to be very content.
I've heard this before, but now Apple is specifically introducing features that cater to gaming. MetalFX isn't for productivity. Get off your high horse, because gaming has been a major factor in PCs since Doom was introduced.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxfqDlhOf4JO7g1TWSkHsf2q64P8E7aXFW
Eh, when the M1 arrived it was stomping comparable Ryzen-based laptops in at least some respects. There's no doubt that Apple kicked Intel's ass, at least until 12th-gen Core showed up. And remember, the first M1 Macs went on sale in fall 2020... yeah, I'd hope that x86 laptop chips from 2022 would fare better. If the M1 was still as competitive now as it was two years ago, AMD and Intel would be in deep trouble. I just hope it doesn't take too long for M2 to filter across the lineup. As it stands, I still get a kick out of knowing that a fanless ARM laptop was outperforming noisier, shorter-lived x86 laptops at similar prices.
Like I said before in that x86 market was and still is dysfunctional. Intel was like 10nm+++ super advanced almost like 5nm, and nobody believed them. AMD introduced RDNA2 which was exclusive to consoles and high end desktop GPU's. Zen3 was also introduced with it being exclusive to desktop PCs. The Steam Deck is still using Zen2, which is stupid. Apple knew how dysfunctional the x86 market was at the time and released their M1 products at the most opportunistic moment. Apple of all companies knows who was doing what at all times because everyone was probably approaching Apple with their current and future roadmaps. The M1 Pro and Max models aren't cool running and fanless now. Easily going past 90C often because they kept adding more GPU cores. Apple made a good first impression so that people like you can reference the original M1 for it's low temp fanless design, while also referencing their M1 Max full throttle hot running design.

Laptops weren't as affected (not effected) as desktop GPUs, true, but you're also the one who made the poor comparison to desktop GPU prices during the crypto boom. And yeah, gaming laptops can be good values in the right circumstances... but you're still making tradeoffs, even with well-done models like the Zephyrus 14. They're noisier, don't last as long on battery (even when using the integrated GPU; ARM Macs don't throttle as much) and sometimes have curious omissions. It's rather funny that you suggested the Zephyrus 14, as it didn't even have a webcam until this year's model. Try telling a remote worker that they should give up participating in company Zoom meetings so they can play Apex Legends.
Lets talk about battery life then, because it is important. Most people who test the M1 Macs are just playing YouTube videos endlessly, which is great if you need to watch a lot of videos. BTW, most people buying laptops are probably watching videos, so it makes sense. Linus Tech Tips showed their test here.


So what about if the CPU+GPU are under constant load like playing Fortnite? About 1 hour and 36 minutes. That's not particularly great compared to most gaming laptops which perform the same when gaming. It's about the same as the Asus Zephyrus when gaming. The thing about the Apple M1 is that it utilizes a lot of stuff outside of the CPU and GPU to do tasks, like the media engine which not only sips power when playing videos but also when video editing. When using the CPU+GPU the story turns around.


BTW I've seen people with an M1 play World of Warcraft with special settings to maximize their battery life to 10 hours while getting 25fps.


But you can also do the same thing on the Asus Zephyrus.

I know consoles have been and still are affected by scalping. But if I'd had to spend hundreds of dollars above the MSRP for my PS5, I'd have at least gotten an entire gaming machine; do that for a GPU and you're still stuck buying other parts if you need more than just a graphics upgrade.
You need a console to play games while owning a M1 Mac, while a gaming PC does all that while also doing it better. Yes and Yes.
I don't, but unlike you I know what Boot Camp is actually like and can point to evidence and logic. When Apple made clear that ARM Macs wouldn't support Boot Camp, there wasn't a tremendous uproar; some understandably complained, of course, but there were no significant worries among analysts or the community that Apple was shooting itself in the foot. Why? As I said, it's not 2006 anymore; concerns about native Windows apps aren't as significant as they were back then, and Apple now has a knack for custom silicon (see: outperforming all Android devices) where it was leaning on unreliable partners in the PowerPC days.
So losing a feature is Apple being brave and nobody complained? Apple is expanding Rosetta2 not ignoring it as everyone moves towards ARM.
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=macOS-13-Rosetta-Linux-Binaries
It's a bit odd to claim fiscal responsibility in the PC gaming world, the land of $700 GPUs and RGB lighting, but I'll bite.
Something that happened during COVID for 2 years is not a permanent thing of the PC industry.
There will be some cases where a single do-it-all computer makes sense, but there are also plenty where it doesn't. If you want a long-lasting ultraportable laptop, you're not going to have just one device if you still care about AAA gaming; you either need a desktop, an eGPU or a console, and those first two will make the console seem like a bargain. And simply speaking, there are consequences to insisting on a single machine that does it all well. I want to spend time with my wife in the evenings, for example, rather than hiding away in my office; I'd much rather game in the living room, where we can be together and I can enforce a work/play split.
You say this while the iPhone had literally became the all in one device. It took away GPS, MP3 players, PDA's, and so much more. You also say you'd rather play games in your living room, knowing that PC's can be plugged into a HDMI port and using just about any gamepad that exists in the market, including consoles. I'd doubt you'd have an issue using a Mac Mini M1 to play games on your TV. You're using tire old excuses that were never relevant even when they were new.
Apple could stick with x86, hope AMD/Intel turn things around and still find itself dependent on someone else... or it could make its own silicon, break the cycle and control its own destiny. There are risks involved, but the dangers of a bad x86 batch are arguably worse.
Or more likely pretend to be the best as they're doing now and had done back during PowerPC. Apple fans will eat their products up despite their experience, and they know that.
Instead, I see Metal 3, MetalFX and other developments more as a promising sign that Apple will be friendlier to computer gaming, and that it'll be easier to justify buying a Mac if you do want to play more than a handful of games. Any significant changes will likely take years to unfold, and I don't think Windows gaming is in serious danger unless AMD and Intel (and to a lesser extent, NVIDIA) really drop the ball. But Apple's success certainly isn't riding on whether or not you can play Elden Ring on a MacBook.
Apple could easily bring Vulkan and Metal3 to their Apple products and let the industry decide. They don't because it's not a hard decision, and Apple knows it.
 
I've heard this before, but now Apple is specifically introducing features that cater to gaming. MetalFX isn't for productivity. Get off your high horse, because gaming has been a major factor in PCs since Doom was introduced.
Looking at this and some recent Apple patents this could play into their AR work. Their AR/VR displays which will be supposedly operating at 2532x1170 per eye are expected soon and this could be how they make it work across their lineup easier.
Depending on how Apple has implemented the tech they could use it not only for games but for all visual workloads.
It would be interesting to see upscaling not used only for games but all display rendering.
 
Apple could easily bring Vulkan and Metal3 to their Apple products and let the industry decide. They don't because it's not a hard decision, and Apple knows it.
Not super easily, Metal is worked into the very core of Apples OS, it’s a Metal call to open a window, a metal call to drag and resize the window. You can’t even do basic UI tasks for Apple with out involving Metal. Vulkan isn’t equipped for that, Apple would have to put a lot of development work into Vulkan to do that. Which would then be giving a 3’rd party dominant control over a core part of the OS. It would be like Microsoft turning over control of WDDM to Kronos, which would complicate things for sure.
 
Last edited:
Not super easily, Metal is worked into the very core of Apples OS, it’s a Metal call to open a window, a metal call to drag and resize the window. You can’t even do basic UI tasks for Apple with out involving Metal. Vulkan isn’t equipped for that, Apple would have to put a lot of development work into Vulkan to do that. Which would then be giving a 3’rd party dominant control over a core part of the OS. It would be like Microsoft turning over control of WDDM to Kronos, which would complicate things for sure.
Kronos isn't a competitor to Apple or Microsoft. It's all open standards. If the Raspberry Pi can get Vulkan than so could Apple's GPU's. If MoltenVK can translate Vulkan to Metal than a native Vulkan API is possible. Eventually Linux will be ported to M1 and that means OpenGL and Vulkan support, with no help from Apple.
 
Kronos isn't a competitor to Apple or Microsoft. It's all open standards. If the Raspberry Pi can get Vulkan than so could Apple's GPU's. If MoltenVK can translate Vulkan to Metal than a native Vulkan API is possible. Eventually Linux will be ported to M1 and that means OpenGL and Vulkan support, with no help from Apple.
An open standard designed by committee, they could decide to make a large fundamental change that could then require huge reworks of the OS. Raspberry PI, Microsoft, Linux, none of them use Vulkan to do core functionality. You click start in Windows it’s not a DX12 call, but clicking that Apple in the top left does make a Metal call. Metal is involved with every aspect of anything that puts a pixel on a display for a Mac. It’s not just used for applications it’s cooked into the very core of MacOS.
 
An open standard designed by committee, they could decide to make a large fundamental change that could then require huge reworks of the OS. Raspberry PI, Microsoft, Linux, none of them use Vulkan to do core functionality. You click start in Windows it’s not a DX12 call, but clicking that Apple in the top left does make a Metal call. Metal is involved with every aspect of anything that puts a pixel on a display for a Mac. It’s not just used for applications it’s cooked into the very core of MacOS.
You act like Apple doesn't have money to spend on major changes to their OS. If Apple went so far to integrate Metal into their UI, then that's a mistake they made on purpose. It's not like MacOSX is exceptional or anything. This is to Apple's benefit in terms of adoption, but Apple wants developers to learn an API that would only work on their hardware, so that they'd be forced to only work on their hardware. When people aren't using Metal then people like you will talk about the potential that could be unlocked with using Metal. If only it was native to ARM. If only it used Metal and not MoltenVK. Potential is wasted energy.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxF47b7jzffunOm1UZG3VT-uVDkeMVSmM_
 
Not super easily, Metal is worked into the very core of Apples OS, it’s a Metal call to open a window, a metal call to drag and resize the window. You can’t even do basic UI tasks for Apple with out involving Metal. Vulkan isn’t equipped for that, Apple would have to put a lot of development work into Vulkan to do that. Which would then be giving a 3’rd party dominant control over a core part of the OS. It would be like Microsoft turning over control of WDDM to Kronos, which would complicate things for sure.
Most of those window management features don't really apply for fullscreen games. If Apple wanted to do an translation layer between Vulkan and Metal, while not trivial, it would not be that difficult. As a result of vulkan being open there's tons of translation layers out there for it.
 
Most of those window management features don't really apply for fullscreen games. If Apple wanted to do an translation layer between Vulkan and Metal, while not trivial, it would not be that difficult. As a result of vulkan being open there's tons of translation layers out there for it.
There already is a translation layer that being MoltenVK and it works well. A less than 2% overhead, Metal may not be that great for big games in its current form, but it is very well documented, the very fact Valve could create and Maintain MoltenVK to the extent they do is proof of that. The reality is Apple really doesn’t need to do anything because somebody already did.

There is a lot of stuff that Metal does that Vulkan doesn’t and really I don’t want to see that functionality added to bloat up Vulkan.
 
You act like Apple doesn't have money to spend on major changes to their OS. If Apple went so far to integrate Metal into their UI, then that's a mistake they made on purpose. It's not like MacOSX is exceptional or anything. This is to Apple's benefit in terms of adoption, but Apple wants developers to learn an API that would only work on their hardware, so that they'd be forced to only work on their hardware. When people aren't using Metal then people like you will talk about the potential that could be unlocked with using Metal. If only it was native to ARM. If only it used Metal and not MoltenVK. Potential is wasted energy.

https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxF47b7jzffunOm1UZG3VT-uVDkeMVSmM_
You forget that Apple developed, integrated, and launched Metal before Vulkan was even at the concept stage.

MoltenVK is a great solution to filling in the stop gaps, it adds less than 2% overhead and is a more than acceptable solution to the issue.

There are tangible user benefits to integration of GPU acceleration in day to day tasks, almost all of which lead to a smoother user experience especially if working with visual media. Just resizing photos in pages or putting together flyers has noticeable improvements that Microsoft and Linux could take note of.
You ask Mac users about why they like the is and you get answers like “it feels snappier”, “it looks more responsive”. Because GPU acceleration at a core level for window resizing or other common tasks adds polish and a nicer finish regardless of the negligible performance benefits.
Metal does things different than Vulkan and has very different use cases and much of what Metal does I don’t want to see added to Vulkan because it wouldn’t be needed or even usable by any non Mac platform. You can’t guarantee a Vulkan 1.3 compatible GPU in every Linux or Windows box sold, they can’t cook that feature set into the core aspects of an OS, nor would you want them too.

I would rather see Apple add better gaming functionality to Metal than I would see Kronos add office productivity and OS flow improvements to Vulkan.
 
You forget that Apple developed, integrated, and launched Metal before Vulkan was even at the concept stage.
That matters now why? Hardly anyone uses Metal, and if they are it's through MoltenVK.
MoltenVK is a great solution to filling in the stop gaps, it adds less than 2% overhead and is a more than acceptable solution to the issue.
2% is a lot in my opinion for an API that Apple is foolishly pursuing over Vulkan. As a Linux user I don't like DXVK or VKD3D over using a native API like Vulkan, for the same reasons.
There are tangible user benefits to integration of GPU acceleration in day to day tasks, almost all of which lead to a smoother user experience especially if working with visual media. Just resizing photos in pages or putting together flyers has noticeable improvements that Microsoft and Linux could take note of.
Wait, you think Windows and Linux doesn't do this already? Pretty sure Windows has done this since Vista, and Linux did it long time ago as well. Try using Cinnamon UI without working OpenGL, it's a terrible experience.
Metal does things different than Vulkan and has very different use cases and much of what Metal does I don’t want to see added to Vulkan because it wouldn’t be needed or even usable by any non Mac platform.
Like what?
You can’t guarantee a Vulkan 1.3 compatible GPU in every Linux or Windows box sold, they can’t cook that feature set into the core aspects of an OS, nor would you want them too.
You think every modern day Windows PC sold isn't using Nvidia or AMD GPU's? Pretty sure even Intel supports every Vulkan feature with the exception of Ray-Tracing. Keep in mind that Apple is now at Metal3, which means at some point even the M1 won't get support for future Metal versions. Apple is not special in this regard.
I would rather see Apple add better gaming functionality to Metal than I would see Kronos add office productivity and OS flow improvements to Vulkan.
You're making things up. Point to me a function that Metal does that Vulkan doesn't.
 
I've heard this before, but now Apple is specifically introducing features that cater to gaming. MetalFX isn't for productivity. Get off your high horse, because gaming has been a major factor in PCs since Doom was introduced.
Those features are for gaming, but that doesn't mean Apple is suddenly acknowledging some vital truth about the computer industry.

And nah, I'll stay on my horse. It's well-established that you have an overinflated view of PC gaming; while it has clearly played a role in shaping computers, you treat it like the center of the technology universe. Sorry, but that's not how real life works. From the analyst data I've seen, Intel integrated graphics represent 62 percent of GPU market share; AMD's 18 percent slice also includes APUs. Gaming has a role in the market, but the vast majority of people are buying PCs without even considering 'serious' gaming as a possibility — whether because they can't afford it or just don't care.

Also, before I continue... feel free to not include arbitrary images and videos in your posts. We're adults, we don't need pictures to understand concepts.


Lets talk about battery life then, because it is important. Most people who test the M1 Macs are just playing YouTube videos endlessly, which is great if you need to watch a lot of videos. BTW, most people buying laptops are probably watching videos, so it makes sense. Linus Tech Tips showed their test here.


So what about if the CPU+GPU are under constant load like playing Fortnite? About 1 hour and 36 minutes. That's not particularly great compared to most gaming laptops which perform the same when gaming. It's about the same as the Asus Zephyrus when gaming. The thing about the Apple M1 is that it utilizes a lot of stuff outside of the CPU and GPU to do tasks, like the media engine which not only sips power when playing videos but also when video editing. When using the CPU+GPU the story turns around.


BTW I've seen people with an M1 play World of Warcraft with special settings to maximize their battery life to 10 hours while getting 25fps.


But you can also do the same thing on the Asus Zephyrus.
I'm well aware that gaming and other workloads can drastically affect battery life. Apple isn't immune to the laws of physics. But the AI and media engine processing does make a big difference for the target audience — I've seen many reports of MacBook users completing several hours of extensive audiovisual editing (usually video, as you might guess) while on battery power, all without giving up performance. That's difficult to achieve with any laptop. Now, it'd be great if Apple could figure out how to do that with 3D rendering, but that's something no one has solved yet, as you just pointed out.


So losing a feature is Apple being brave and nobody complained? Apple is expanding Rosetta2 not ignoring it as everyone moves towards ARM.
I didn't make either of those claims. I'm saying that Apple could cut Boot Camp without sparking the full-on revolt you think it should have ushered in. There were always going to be some people who understandably didn't like the move, but it didn't hurt Apple's sales — in fact, they've climbed sharply ever since.


Something that happened during COVID for 2 years is not a permanent thing of the PC industry.
There are $700 GPUs at MSRP, you know that, right? And they're not even the highest-end 'mainstream' ones. I'm not talking about shortage- or crypto-related spikes; I'm talking about a market where some enthusiasts won't flinch at buying a GPU that costs more than a 4K TV.


You say this while the iPhone had literally became the all in one device. It took away GPS, MP3 players, PDA's, and so much more. You also say you'd rather play games in your living room, knowing that PC's can be plugged into a HDMI port and using just about any gamepad that exists in the market, including consoles. I'd doubt you'd have an issue using a Mac Mini M1 to play games on your TV. You're using tire old excuses that were never relevant even when they were new.
A phone is not a laptop, and an ultraportable isn't the same as a desktop replacement with a beefy dedicated GPU. Of course you can plug a computer into your TV for living room gaming, but that's still a compromise; a keyboard and mouse are awkward on the couch. And no, I don't think a Mac mini is a good solution for living room gaming, either.


Apple could easily bring Vulkan and Metal3 to their Apple products and let the industry decide. They don't because it's not a hard decision, and Apple knows it.
I wouldn't say that Apple could "easily" implement Vulkan (see other posts since your reply), and it's not a magic bullet. Metal 3 is almost certainly going to spread across Apple's platforms. And Metal 3 may do more to get games on Macs, since it scraps some of the key barriers to porting games written for other platforms.
 
Those features are for gaming, but that doesn't mean Apple is suddenly acknowledging some vital truth about the computer industry.
No of course, they just add gaming features for the shits and giggles.
And nah, I'll stay on my horse. It's well-established that you have an overinflated view of PC gaming; while it has clearly played a role in shaping computers, you treat it like the center of the technology universe.
When Gabe Newell worked for Microsoft they did a study to see what people did with their computers and porn and gaming was the top two. At the time Doom was installed in more PC's than Windows.
Sorry, but that's not how real life works. From the analyst data I've seen, Intel integrated graphics represent 62 percent of GPU market share; AMD's 18 percent slice also includes APUs. Gaming has a role in the market, but the vast majority of people are buying PCs without even considering 'serious' gaming as a possibility — whether because they can't afford it or just don't care.
So you're saying that because most people have Intel GPU's that nobody games on them? I game on my Intel GPU laptop all the time. Valve even made the Vulkan driver for Intel GPU's for Linux because they knew how many people are on laptops with Intel GPU's. Most esports games are built to run well on Intel GPU's for this reason. 9% of gamers on Steam are on Intel GPU's. Lets not forgot that Intel is making new fast GPU's.

Also keep in mind that the power included with modern computers is far beyond what anyone needs for their use case. Which is probably why a lot of people bought Chrome, but also why Chrome sales dropped recently since they're only good for video watching and creating documents. Steam is now on ChromeOS.
Also, before I continue... feel free to not include arbitrary images and videos in your posts. We're adults, we don't need pictures to understand concepts.
They're arbitrary if you don't watch them. They are my confirmation bias.
z50xp-1619719725-16226-list_items-no.jpg

There are $700 GPUs at MSRP, you know that, right? And they're not even the highest-end 'mainstream' ones. I'm not talking about shortage- or crypto-related spikes; I'm talking about a market where some enthusiasts won't flinch at buying a GPU that costs more than a 4K TV.
People who buy $700 GPU's are not mainstream. You wanna know what's mainstream?
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
  1. GTX 1060
  2. GTX 1650
  3. GTX 1050 Ti
  4. RTX 2060
  5. GTX 1050
  6. GTX 1660 Ti
  7. RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
You'll notice there's a lack of $700 GPU's in that list. RTX 3070's are less than 2% and the more expensive the GPU the worse the representation. I don't see you having a problem with the 16 inch MacBook Pro for $3,500. The sad thing is that $3.5k is not even the highest-end MacBook Pro. With all the bells and whistles it comes to $6.5k. RTX 3090's are far cheap than that. It's pointless for me to compare a Laptop to a GPU because they're not the same thing but I'm doing a monkey see monkey do thing. But yea, past 2 years of crypto is done and we'll see GPU's fall in prices.
https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/16-inch-space-gray-10-core-cpu-32-core-gpu-1tb
A phone is not a laptop, and an ultraportable isn't the same as a desktop replacement with a beefy dedicated GPU. Of course you can plug a computer into your TV for living room gaming, but that's still a compromise; a keyboard and mouse are awkward on the couch. And no, I don't think a Mac mini is a good solution for living room gaming, either.
You're bringing back some nostalgia here. I thought you were an Apple fan not a console peasant. You gonna tell me that you can't use a gamepad on a computer hooked up to a TV? Not just any gamepad but you could use Playstation and Xbox gamepads on TV, but you obviously already knew that, right? Is 24fps enough for you? Is a PC too complicated for you to game on?
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxxuePBf2xqxVbzXVS1Pp54J-EZHRxOOSn

I wouldn't say that Apple could "easily" implement Vulkan (see other posts since your reply), and it's not a magic bullet. Metal 3 is almost certainly going to spread across Apple's platforms. And Metal 3 may do more to get games on Macs, since it scraps some of the key barriers to porting games written for other platforms.
If Valve had access to Apple's hardware documentation, then they would port Vulkan onto the Mac. They did it for Intel on Linux. Intel HD 3000 and 4000 series owners actually have Vulkan on Linux, but not on Windows for this reason. Valve did create MoltenVK for Apple. Vulkan isn't a magic bullet but developers are complaining the need to learn the Metal API for the very little market share Apple has in the AAA gaming market. Apple can make the Metal3 API as accessible as they want, but someone had to sit down, learn it, and work with it. As opposed to working on Vulkan where you learn it once and work with it once and now your code works on every platform in existence. Games are getting cancelled because of the M1 hardware.

Gotta remember that developers have it harder now with the Apple M1 because...
  • Metal API is just another API to learn with no reason beyond Apple wanting market control.
  • ARM Mac's introduced while Intel Mac's are still dominant in the market and therefore developers would have to work with both.
  • Low AAA market share. Apple may dominant on mobile but hardly have representation in AAA games.
  • The new M1 hardware is buggy sometimes and does need more work. It is brand new hardware so bugs and performance issues are going to be there.
Vulkan would be one less issue developers would have to deal with on the M based hardware. Apple clearly has other issues that need attention, if you want to see AAA games ported to M hardware.

 
Last edited:
When Gabe Newell worked for Microsoft they did a study to see what people did with their computers and porn and gaming was the top two. At the time Doom was installed in more PC's than Windows.
Newell stopped working for Microsoft in 1996. Before smartphones, before tablets, before social media and a host of other technologies and services. You're gonna need stronger evidence than an observation from 26 years ago.


So you're saying that because most people have Intel GPU's that nobody games on them? I game on my Intel GPU laptop all the time. Valve even made the Vulkan driver for Intel GPU's for Linux because they knew how many people are on laptops with Intel GPU's. Most esports games are built to run well on Intel GPU's for this reason. 9% of gamers on Steam are on Intel GPU's. Lets not forgot that Intel is making new fast GPU's.
Also keep in mind that the power included with modern computers is far beyond what anyone needs for their use case. Which is probably why a lot of people bought Chrome, but also why Chrome sales dropped recently since they're only good for video watching and creating documents. Steam is now on ChromeOS.
I didn't say "nobody;" I'm saying that those people generally didn't buy their PCs with gaming as a major concern. As you even pointed out, less than a tenth of Steam users are relying on Intel graphics. In other words, most of the people using the world's largest PC gaming platform are part of that minority (a significant minority, but still) that buys PCs with dedicated GPUs. And yes, Intel is finally diving into dGPUs with Arc, but that's still brand new technology and represents a very small share of the market.

Chromebook sales have dropped because the need for remote school and work has declined alongside the severity of the pandemic. There's no evidence it has much to do performance demands, including gaming.


They're arbitrary if you don't watch them. They are my confirmation bias.
No, they're arbitrary because they don't meaningfully add to your discussion. A meme pic does absolutely nothing; a video that either tells me something I (and most people here) already knew, or is more of an opinion piece than a substantive argument, doesn't help your case. I haven't ever heard someone say "I was staunchly opposed to this person's argument, but this YouTube clip that merely echoed their views swayed me to their side." If you can't get your point across without lame memes or video embeds, your point wasn't very strong to start with.


People who buy $700 GPU's are not mainstream. You wanna know what's mainstream?
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
  1. GTX 1060
  2. GTX 1650
  3. GTX 1050 Ti
  4. RTX 2060
  5. GTX 1050
  6. GTX 1660 Ti
  7. RTX 3060 Laptop GPU
You'll notice there's a lack of $700 GPU's in that list. RTX 3070's are less than 2% and the more expensive the GPU the worse the representation. I don't see you having a problem with the 16 inch MacBook Pro for $3,500. The sad thing is that $3.5k is not even the highest-end MacBook Pro. With all the bells and whistles it comes to $6.5k. RTX 3090's are far cheap than that. It's pointless for me to compare a Laptop to a GPU because they're not the same thing but I'm doing a monkey see monkey do thing. But yea, past 2 years of crypto is done and we'll see GPU's fall in prices.
I meant mainstream as in "aimed at general consumers" (i.e. before you get to the 3090 class and pro cards), and I'm well aware that many people use less expensive GPUs. The point is that expensive GPUs have been a staple of the landscape before the pandemic, and continue to be now. A mid-tier RTX 3060 easily costs $400 or more; that's a PS5 right there. So you either pay significantly more than the price of a modern console to get a sufficiently capable PC, or you accept that you likely won't get performance comparable to that console.

The 16-inch MacBook Pro is a complete computer, and it's aimed at creative professionals (you know, the whole "pro" part of the name). I wouldn't buy one primarily for gaming even if the entire Steam catalog were available on Macs. But despite your assumptions, I do think Apple needs to democratize its laptop lineup. There's no way to get a large-screen laptop from Apple without spending at least $2,499 at regular prices. That puts them out of touch for most people, and doesn't reflect the way many of us use computers. There are some credible rumors from Bloomberg about Apple releasing a 15-inch MacBook Air next year, though, and that would be much more reasonable even if it's $1,499.


You're bringing back some nostalgia here. I thought you were an Apple fan not a console peasant. You gonna tell me that you can't use a gamepad on a computer hooked up to a TV? Not just any gamepad but you could use Playstation and Xbox gamepads on TV, but you obviously already knew that, right? Is 24fps enough for you? Is a PC too complicated for you to game on?
You still need a mouse and keyboard to control a living room PC at some point, unless you think you're going to browse the web and change OS settings with nothing but thumbsticks. And if you've gone to the trouble of buying a gamepad (especially a PlayStation or Xbox model) and playing only those games that are gamepad-friendly... why didn't you just buy a console that already offers those things in a cheaper and more elegant package?


If Valve had access to Apple's hardware documentation, then they would port Vulkan onto the Mac. They did it for Intel on Linux. Intel HD 3000 and 4000 series owners actually have Vulkan on Linux, but not on Windows for this reason. Valve did create MoltenVK for Apple. Vulkan isn't a magic bullet but developers are complaining the need to learn the Metal API for the very little market share Apple has in the AAA gaming market. Apple can make the Metal3 API as accessible as they want, but someone had to sit down, learn it, and work with it. As opposed to working on Vulkan where you learn it once and work with it once and now your code works on every platform in existence. Games are getting cancelled because of the M1 hardware.

Gotta remember that developers have it harder now with the Apple M1 because...
  • Metal API is just another API to learn with no reason beyond Apple wanting market control.
  • ARM Mac's introduced while Intel Mac's are still dominant in the market and therefore developers would have to work with both.
  • Low AAA market share. Apple may dominant on mobile but hardly have representation in AAA games.
  • The new M1 hardware is buggy sometimes and does need more work. It is brand new hardware so bugs and performance issues are going to be there.
Vulkan would be one less issue developers would have to deal with on the M based hardware. Apple clearly has other issues that need attention, if you want to see AAA games ported to M hardware.
Again, I see Metal 3 as a start — not a cure-all. It's recognition that Metal hasn't been attractive to game developers outside of those porting to iOS, and that the company might benefit from a holistic approach to gaming that devotes more attention to the Mac. It may be harder at the moment, but it's about to get somewhat easier even if Vulkan doesn't arrive any time soon.
 
Back
Top