Apple's doesn't want to support Nvidia in macOS

[MoonSpot]

52 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

To be perfectly honest... I'd be willing to bet the reason Apple moved away has nothing to do with being con'ed, and everything to do with not being able to dictate terms the same way they can with AMD. Including telling them when to take the fall, regardless of responsibility.

 

And yes, that is business reality. But it isn't the first time Apple has had that sort of relationship with a supplier.

I'd agree that its a little of column A and a little of column B.

Actually I could even see it being ALL of column A & B.

Dictating when to take a fall seems like a reach if you are suggesting its beyond the realm of what would be considered a 3rd party workmanship/product fault.  Few would agree to such terms.  AMD might've actually been desperate enough to take such terms at 1 point though, but I doubt they would've be that dumb.

[mr moose]

Another thread where the tovalds finger makes an illogical resurface.   Torvalds might be a legend at programing, but he is fucking moron when it comes to common decency and understanding how the world works.  

 

 

 

3 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

They do, but that also means that they feel that they should be more controlling and stubborn. AMD on the other hand is perfectly fine to let Apple order custom designs and accept Apples terms. 

So it's controlling and stubborn when nvidia do it, but progressive and proper business when apple do it?  Not how it works,  all companies will control their products as much as they can, if they need sales and market share then they are going to negotiate a lot more,  Nvidia don't need Apple to be successful, so they will maintain control of their products. This is what pissed of torvalds and it is what pissed of Apple,  why? because both of them are narcissists who like to be in control and nvidia basically said no dice sunshine. 

 

AMD on the other hand would have done anything not to go bankrupt back then.  I don't blame them for capitalising on the situation.  But I do blame Apple for not letting Nvidia customers have access to nvidia drivers.

 

By all means these two companies can keep having their pissing contests, but leave the fucking consumers alone.  

 

 

[CarlBar]

4 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

I wouldn't say it's exactly a scam, but you are paying into early adopter fees followed by bs pricing on the 2080 Ti.  The only reason that card costs as much as it does is due to 0 competition and people willing to pay that much.  I guess that is a scam to some people, but still...

 

Oh don;t get me wrong i have my own bone of contention with NVIDIA over pricing. But there's a huuuuge difference between price gouging and scamming.

[TempestCatto]

5 hours ago, DrMacintosh said:

I find that hard to believe. eGPUs have only been a thing since High Sierra and I don't believe that any appreciable amount of genuine Mac users (aka not Hackintoshers) depend on Nvidia GPU technologies in any way. 

I don't see how this is still good. What about people using their machine to make/render videos? Surely any nVidia card is gonna beat any eGPU, or do I not understand what Macs get used for?

 

Scratch what I said. It's 5am for me, I really should not be trying to read and respond to things. lol

[Ashleyyyy]

2 hours ago, mate_mate91 said:

It is the other way around! He told nvidia that AFTER years of trying to work with them and Nvidia refused to work with them and made shitty drivers! That's why he told this.

didn't they also block people from creating open-source drivers or something? 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Lol. Are you being serious right now? Between AMD and Nvidia, Nvidia historically put a ludicrously larger effort into linux support. Yes, their driver is closed, but for most of the Linux development period, AMD/ATI's official driver had been so unbelievably bad that you were legitimately better off using the random hacked efforts of a tiny subset of the already small linux development community in many respects. 

You can be pissed off at them not being 'open enough', but the rest is stupid (and yes Linus Torvald is a melodramatic crazy person. A more impressive list would be who he hasn't raged out at over the years.)

@mr moose Doesn't have e anything to do with that

 

The problem about Linux Nvidia drivers historically is the fact that every kernel changes required the module to be re-compiled (that's an abi issue common in linux) since NVIDIA supported and released drivers only for a limited versions of the kernel

 

This is today solved by using DKMS, developed by Dell

 

With AMD it's another story, they had the fglrx driver identical to the Nvidia one with all it's issues, but also contributed to the open source Radeon one, and now amdgpu.

Currently nouveau (open source Nvidia driver) has a very very crappy support from Nvidia itself

 

Still there are some issues on the Nvidia proprietary drivers never solved especially in the desktop segment, since they imo focus on server supports, which probably would be solved if the driver were open source.

They also support BSD and Solaris using roughly the same code probably the same applies to oSX

Edited January 20, 2019 by Guest

[imreloadin]

On 1/19/2019 at 1:51 AM, DrMacintosh said:

I personally fully support Apple in this case.

[Stefan Payne]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

So it's controlling and stubborn when nvidia do it, but progressive and proper business when apple do it?

You don't get it, do you?

Its the unwillingness to own their mistakes and reimburse the manufacturers of Components. Apple is powerful enough to give them the middlefinger for that.

 

Its their unwillingness to cooperate in some other areas like Drivers. You've seen an AMD Driver for MacOS? I haven't either. Because that's made by Apple.

 

Ever seen a good Open Source nVidia Driver? I haven't either.

 

And there are more reasons.

 

Ever knew that they pissed off M$ and Sony?!

I really don't get why you try to defend one of the worst companys in PC History, that only is where they is thanks to awful Journos...

[Kvores Daniel]

If there is no Nvidia drivers for MacOs it means that in the modular MacPro won't support it.

[Drak3]

Just now, Kvores Daniel said:

If there is no Nvidia drivers for MacOs it means that in the modular MacPro won't support it.

The modular MacPro probably wouldn't have been compatible with standardized PCIe cards anyways. There was an article last year going i to Apple's word choice. Modular =/= standardized upgradability.

[dalekphalm]

On 1/19/2019 at 3:22 AM, GoldenLag said:

Its mostly related to the fact that AMD is probably the most money hungry company of the three

There's no "probably". It's 100% certain.

 

NVIDIA made $1.66Bn Net Profit in 2017. AMD made $43m Net Profit in the same year.

 

I don't know if 2018 fiscal numbers are out yet, so while AMD has likely improved their net profit substantially (Probably 2-4 times as much, if not even more), they still make peanuts compared to NVIDIA.

 

And the interesting thing to note is that NVIDIA doesn't generate that much more money over a year than AMD. In 2017, for example, NVIDIA's gross unadjusted revenue was around $7Bn. AMD's was just a little over $5Bn. While a $2Bn difference is big, it's not that big.

 

The difference between them is that NVIDIA has massive margins, and they make way more money off of their gross revenue. AMD is still battling debt and is dumping as much money into R&D as they can manage.

 

All things considered, AMD's in a great position, but they still need as much money as they can possibly get.

[CharminUltraStrong]

Welp this would probably explain some of my macos Mojave vms slow performance... Might need to downgrade to high Sierra. Sigh. 

[GoldenLag]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

There's no "probably". It's 100% certain.

 

NVIDIA made $1.66Bn Net Profit in 2017. AMD made $43m Net Profit in the same year.

 

I don't know if 2018 fiscal numbers are out yet, so while AMD has likely improved their net profit substantially (Probably 2-4 times as much, if not even more), they still make peanuts compared to NVIDIA.

 

And the interesting thing to note is that NVIDIA doesn't generate that much more money over a year than AMD. In 2017, for example, NVIDIA's gross unadjusted revenue was around $7Bn. AMD's was just a little over $5Bn. While a $2Bn difference is big, it's not that big.

 

The difference between them is that NVIDIA has massive margins, and they make way more money off of their gross revenue. AMD is still battling debt and is dumping as much money into R&D as they can manage.

 

All things considered, AMD's in a great position, but they still need as much money as they can possibly get.

there is a reason they are around today. and its mostly from locking themselves as a console supplier. that pretty much guarantees money. 

 

they got that deal since they supply both CPU and GPUs while offer good pricing on both. 

 

their stance today is quite strong yes. mostly with Hype created from infinity fabric and a poor intel who hasnt had good responces to AMDs product releases nor great leaps during the recent years. 

 

any money AMD make is great for the regardless of how little it is. wouldnt be too surprised if their Net profit is low in the comming years due investments and paying back debt. 

 

AMDs wet dream atm is another delay in intel 10nm process. which wouldnt be all that great for consumer considering we will have a year of "monopolic" market (even though thats what we have had in the recent years). The true breakthrough AMD could have is Mobile APUs. it could be one of those things truly gives revenue to AMD

[cj09beira]

9 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Sounds like you haven't actually used them recently.

 

Freesync (1) is 100% a straight-up inferior product, with awful quality control (mainly because there is no quality control. That was one of the primary aims of Freesync 2).

 

Other than the fact that AMD doesn't make competitive products above the 2060's performance range, certainly there is no need. 

by that logic all chinese made products are shit because some are.

i have a freesync ultrawide for example, nothing special, 75 hz not a huge range, but more than enough as i don't want to see less than 50 fps anyway (48 is the minimum) i enable enhanced sync and get freesync always, would a g-sync module help me? not at all and would even prevent me from using hdmi as an option, and add 100 dollars on top of the 300 i spent. and i have had no problems what so ever, was even able to push the freesync range to 40-80Hz. 

some monitors have problems, so what, don't we watch reviews of products before we buy them, and it seems the amount of them was incredibly exaggerated by nvidia for their PR stunt 

btw vega exists, so they do compete up to the rx 2070 range

[Thaldor]

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

-sinp-

Its the unwillingness to own their mistakes and reimburse the manufacturers of Components. Apple is powerful enough to give them the middlefinger for that.

 

Its their unwillingness to cooperate in some other areas like Drivers. You've seen an AMD Driver for MacOS? I haven't either. Because that's made by Apple.

-snip-
I really don't get why you try to defend one of the worst companys in PC History, that only is where they is thanks to awful Journos...

This is kind of hard place to be, on the one hand Nvidia has been a dickhead quite many times and now that AMD is quite a lot no competition in gaming world (except consoles) Nvidia is even more dickhead, but on the other hand we have Apple... The unbeatable dickhead king of the whole computer and silicon world (no other company has shown as much middle finger to everyone else and no one else has ever done as uncompatible devices and softwares and not a single company ever has been as uncooperative than Apple). If you keep Nvidia as the enemy of open world, just take a look at Apples track record, "OS X and iOS are open source!" well, yeah they have open source roots BUT they are as far from open source as something that just uses open source to fix few problems and everything they make is still closed even more thighter than Fort Knox. Hell, Apple can't even use common ports because they have always resulted in decrease of dongle sales and god damn, world was surprised that Apple decided to use normal DDR-RAM in Mac Mini, it has been very difficult for them to use SATA or even M.2 just because with them they could not charge at least double price for storage space.

 

Also yes, Apple does release all of the drivers for MacOS, but no, they don't make them, they just closely overseer them. Mostly reason for this is that Apple doesn't like when someone tries to do something Apple haven't designed to be done and usually people have managed to do something when there has been unoverseered drivers that included stuff that Apple didn't want to be in macs. Apple also doesn't really like when you go around and make upgrades to their "perfect" designs, like when you stick 500GB M.2 drive with adapter to the MB air which had 128GB Apple-connector (it doesn't work, even pre-formated to APFS, nope doesn't like it, but if it has pre-installed Linux, no problem it boots; "Very interesting"/s). I don't know how deep Apple requires AMD to go to differentiate from Linux drivers, but as far as I have gone into one FirePro-GPU sold inside MacPro, it's far from "normal" even in firmware or then the one I had was broken which would be odd (worked in Mac Pro, didn't work in anything else). Just think about Apple making all of their common drivers even, they would need a ton of people who would understand the HW they have as deeply as the maker of that HW and then they would need more people to develope the drivers for those, not to even mention the level on knowledge needed for Apple grade optimisation.

[Stefan Payne]

1 hour ago, Thaldor said:

This is kind of hard place to be, on the one hand Nvidia has been a dickhead quite many times 

NO, its not.

If nVidia would be a decent partner, it wouldn't have escalate.

But nV were total awful partners to a number of partners.

Apple isn't the first. But the strongest to show them the consequences.

 

Its 100% nVidia's Fault. So stop defending them. They deserve everything Linus Tolvards and Apple throws at them - and more.

Or you've forgotten Geforce Partner Programme??

1 hour ago, Thaldor said:

and now that AMD is quite a lot no competition in gaming world

Yeah and who's fault was that?!

 

All the excuses to not buy nVidia.

All the people that still buy more expensive, shittier nVidia products that have less VRAM

All the people using AMD to drop prices for nVidia.

 

Just look at the GTX680 vs. Radeon HD7970. The Radeon was the better card. And what was bought?

The GTX680, wich lasted half as long as the 7970, wich can still be used today. I used my 7970 around 4 years or so. And the 680 had to be replaced after 2 years or so because driver optimization was not as good and in some games it competes with the Radeon HD7870...

[Curufinwe_wins]

4 hours ago, cj09beira said:

by that logic all chinese made products are shit because some are.

i have a freesync ultrawide for example, nothing special, 75 hz not a huge range, but more than enough as i don't want to see less than 50 fps anyway (48 is the minimum) i enable enhanced sync and get freesync always, would a g-sync module help me? not at all and would even prevent me from using hdmi as an option, and add 100 dollars on top of the 300 i spent. and i have had no problems what so ever, was even able to push the freesync range to 40-80Hz. 

some monitors have problems, so what, don't we watch reviews of products before we buy them, and it seems the amount of them was incredibly exaggerated by nvidia for their PR stunt 

btw vega exists, so they do compete up to the rx 2070 range

Sigh. 40-80 Hz would be an unacceptably narrow range for the G-sync variation. I have the same monitor with a G-sync range that is 30 (well... below 30 hz you have frame doubling, so effectively infinite range in reality)-100 Hz. No one wants low FPS, but dips DO OCCUR, so the farther the range can go, the fewer frame time issues you will experience even in dps). AMD had a feature equivalent (LFC), but did not require it on Freesync (1), and so almost no freesync monitor supported it. One of the goals of Freesync 2 was the standardization of a minimum quality control, including requiring LFC and a maximum acceptable latency.

 

But I'm not saying that good freesync monitors do not exist. But the person I quoted was claiming Freesync offered everything g-sync did and better at a lower price. Which simply wasn't true. Yes it is lower price, but the average quality is dramatically lower, and at BEST freesync monitors have been equivalent to their G-sync counterparts with the same panel.

 

Does it make freesync monitors a better value? Well buyer beware, but yes. Does it make it a patently superior product? Absolutely not. Freesync 2 panels, as they become more widespread (if they become more widespread) should be much more on par the G-sync HDR monitors.

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

NO, its not.

If nVidia would be a decent partner, it wouldn't have escalate.

But nV were total awful partners to a number of partners.

Apple isn't the first. But the strongest to show them the consequences.

 

Its 100% nVidia's Fault. So stop defending them. They deserve everything Linus Tolvards and Apple throws at them - and more.

Or you've forgotten Geforce Partner Programme??

Yeah and who's fault was that?!

 

All the excuses to not buy nVidia.

All the people that still buy more expensive, shittier nVidia products that have less VRAM

All the people using AMD to drop prices for nVidia.

 

Just look at the GTX680 vs. Radeon HD7970. The Radeon was the better card. And what was bought?

The GTX680, wich lasted half as long as the 7970, wich can still be used today. I used my 7970 around 4 years or so. And the 680 had to be replaced after 2 years or so because driver optimization was not as good and in some games it competes with the Radeon HD7870...

100% nVidia's fault huh? Which is why the exact same products were present on literally dozens of laptops by other manufacturers without the characteristic issue the Apple devices had? Pretty extreme analysis there.

 

Have you forgotten the 680 upgrade debacle (where Apple was, having done literally no work whatsoever, charging consumers double the price for the exact same validated GPU with the exact same firmware as you got from EVGA)? Have you forgotten charging 600 dollars to replace a cracked glass panel?

 

Have you forgotten Vega Frontier Edition? A 1200 dollar product when the nVidia performance equivalent was 600 dollars or less? Have you forgotten rebadging a 290 into a 390, and literally charging 100 dollars more at launch for the exact same product? Only to have to back down on it (their falsely locked software optimizations) 2 months later as pressure built up? Have you forgotten the '580 2048SP' a blatantly lie of a product designed to upsell the exact same product? I could go on for ages here.

 

I'm not making nVidia up as a saint. They are not a particularly good company... But Apple is one of the most anti-consumer companies in the world, and AMD isn't all sunshine and roses either. I find it a hilarious example of fanboy behavior to bash nVidia about being too proprietary in a thread about Apple.

[Arika]

2 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

NO, its not.

If nVidia would be a decent partner, it wouldn't have escalate.

But nV were total awful partners to a number of partners.

Apple isn't the first. But the strongest to show them the consequences.

so "fuck the consumer" is the right answer because of a grudge? this hurts consumers MUCH more than it does NVidia.

[Tech Enthusiast]

Just another nail in the Apple coffin later down the road.

At some point they will have blocked and ruined everything people use and about 5 years later some fanboys will start to notice how green the grass can be elsewhere.

[mr moose]

10 hours ago, Lukyp said:

@mr moose Doesn't have e anything to do with that

 

The problem about Linux Nvidia drivers historically is the fact that every kernel changes required the module to be re-compiled (that's an abi issue common in linux) since NVIDIA supported and released drivers only for a limited versions of the kernel

 

This is today solved by using DKMS, developed by Dell

 

With AMD it's another story, they had the fglrx driver identical to the Nvidia one with all it's issues, but also contributed to the open source Radeon one, and now amdgpu.

Currently nouveau (open source Nvidia driver) has a very very crappy support from Nvidia itself

 

Still there are some issues on the Nvidia proprietary drivers never solved especially in the desktop segment, since they imo focus on server supports, which probably would be solved if the driver were open source.

They also support BSD and Solaris using roughly the same code probably the same applies to oSX

Of course it does, Nvidia have always been willing to write drivers for linux, In fact I have read on many forums that many people consider nvidia drivers on linux to be generally better if you are choosing hardware.

 

7 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

You don't get it, do you?

 

Oh I get it, you just don't like what I have to say.

7 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Its the unwillingness to own their mistakes and reimburse the manufacturers of Components. Apple is powerful enough to give them the middlefinger for that.

It's a two way street, Nvidia aren't pushovers and I can guarantee you if AMD didn't need the money they wouldn't be either.  Don't fool yourself into thinking this is all Nvidias fault because you hate them.

7 hours ago, Stefan Payne said:

Its their unwillingness to cooperate in some other areas like Drivers. You've seen an AMD Driver for MacOS? I haven't either. Because that's made by Apple.

 

Ever seen a good Open Source nVidia Driver? I haven't either.

 

And there are more reasons.

 

Ever knew that they pissed off M$ and Sony?!

I really don't get why you try to defend one of the worst companys in PC History, that only is where they is thanks to awful Journos...

I really think you need to get some experience in all this before you go on forums pontificating your ideals.

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

There's no "probably". It's 100% certain.

 

NVIDIA made $1.66Bn Net Profit in 2017. AMD made $43m Net Profit in the same year.

 

I don't know if 2018 fiscal numbers are out yet, so while AMD has likely improved their net profit substantially (Probably 2-4 times as much, if not even more), they still make peanuts compared to NVIDIA.

 

And the interesting thing to note is that NVIDIA doesn't generate that much more money over a year than AMD. In 2017, for example, NVIDIA's gross unadjusted revenue was around $7Bn. AMD's was just a little over $5Bn. While a $2Bn difference is big, it's not that big.

 

The difference between them is that NVIDIA has massive margins, and they make way more money off of their gross revenue. AMD is still battling debt and is dumping as much money into R&D as they can manage.

 

All things considered, AMD's in a great position, but they still need as much money as they can possibly get.

Absolutely, AMD are still coming out of a horrible period of financial torment.  We can't just ignore that and pretend it has no bearing on their partnership decisions let alone decisions they made in the thick of it.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Of course it does, Nvidia have always been willing to write drivers for linux, In fact I have read on many forums that many people consider nvidia drivers on linux to be generally better if you are choosing hardware.

It is, but I said the problem was another, it's the same (roughly) that happens on MacOS as well which the driver just supports a specific kernel, Nvidia put some effort that time by developing the nouveau driver a bit (even though just has basic 2d functionality today, 3d performance suck a lot)

Today the problem as I said doesn't represent a thing anymore at all, after the Nvidia driver supported dkms, exception made for some bugs that no one understands why they are not fixing 

 

For MacOS Is still an issue apparently for different OS versions, there is apple not certifying their drivers as well too but that's another thing

 

Only windows has most of the times compatibility between different kernel versions for a specific driver, even if not signed so that problem doesn't represent a thing at all

[Curufinwe_wins]

15 minutes ago, Lukyp said:

It is, but I said the problem was another, it's the same (roughly) that happens on MacOS as well which the driver just supports a specific kernel, Nvidia put some effort that time by developing the nouveau driver a bit (even though just has basic 2d functionality today, 3d performance suck a lot)

Today the problem as I said doesn't represent a thing anymore at all, after the Nvidia driver supported dkms, exception made for some bugs that no one understands why they are not fixing 

 

For MacOS Is still an issue apparently for different OS versions, there is apple not certifying their drivers as well too but that's another thing

 

Only windows has most of the times compatibility between different kernel versions for a specific driver, even if not signed so that problem doesn't represent a thing at all

Which for all its other issues... is an extremely underrated aspect of using windows. It's legacy support for complex program systems is unmatched (even when it is buggy).

[cj09beira]

3 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Sigh. 40-80 Hz would be an unacceptably narrow range for the G-sync variation. I have the same monitor with a G-sync range that is 30 (well... below 30 hz you have frame doubling, so effectively infinite range in reality)-100 Hz. No one wants low FPS, but dips DO OCCUR, so the farther the range can go, the fewer frame time issues you will experience even in dps). AMD had a feature equivalent (LFC), but did not require it on Freesync (1), and so almost no freesync monitor supported it. One of the goals of Freesync 2 was the standardization of a minimum quality control, including requiring LFC and a maximum acceptable latency.

 

But I'm not saying that good freesync monitors do not exist. But the person I quoted was claiming Freesync offered everything g-sync did and better at a lower price. Which simply wasn't true. Yes it is lower price, but the average quality is dramatically lower, and at BEST freesync monitors have been equivalent to their G-sync counterparts with the same panel.

 

Does it make freesync monitors a better value? Well buyer beware, but yes. Does it make it a patently superior product? Absolutely not. Freesync 2 panels, as they become more widespread (if they become more widespread) should be much more on par the G-sync HDR monitors.

Comparing freesync vs g-sync is best done using individual cases, because of freesync representing such a bigger range of monitors.

 

depends on what you define as better, i certainly take price into consideration.

because most people have a budget, be it small or large and the best screen will have to fit in it.

(had quite a bit more but i will try not to derail the thread more :) )