Radeon Compatibility Guide - ATI/AMD Graphics Cards

[UtterDisbelief]

I bought a Gigabyte single slot GT 730 2GB DDR5.
It means that H264/H265 files are encoded by the CPU and not GPU in any video app. It also means that all app that can rely on GPU for rendering will have to use the CPU instead...that includes Pixelmator, Photoshop, Chrome...and many other apps.

Hi there.

The problem is that only the GDDR3 version of the GT730 was supported natively. The GDDR5 version needed the NVidia web-drivers BUT unfortunately these only support up to High Sierra and nothing newer. So yes, for Mojave, Catalina and Big Sur, if you do get graphics output it will be without acceleration, unfortunately.

 

[P1LGRIM]

The problem is that only the GDDR3 version of the GT730 was supported natively. The GDDR5 version needed the NVidia web-drivers

I was under that impression too but while helping a different user he posted this :

#12

 

[zzmadd]

Hi there.

The problem is that only the GDDR3 version of the GT730 was supported natively. The GDDR5 version needed the NVidia web-drivers BUT unfortunately these only support up to High Sierra and nothing newer. So yes, for Mojave, Catalina and Big Sur, if you do get graphics output it will be without acceleration, unfortunately.

Hi, thanks for your reply.

So if I get a GT730 2GB DDR3 version then I will get some for oh hardware acceleration?
Thanks.

 

[UtterDisbelief]

I was under that impression too but while helping a different user he posted this :

#12

Okay. Interesting. They say there is always an exception to the rule ...

I have only personally tested a Gigabyte pair of GT730's. It was a few years ago now. The details are all recorded in my build history here for posterity, and in the next build here.

Back then, I was young and innocent and don't think I fully understood what was happening. With hindsight and the passing of years, I do now and it confirms what we believe.

 

[wstrohm]

Has anyone noticed that "Heaven" and "Valley" Unigine benchmarks when run under Big Sur are slightly lower (and somewhat jumpy when panned) than under Catalina? (Run on system at left, anyway)

 

[izo1]

Has anyone noticed that "Heaven" and "Valley" Unigine benchmarks when run under Big Sur are slightly lower (and somewhat jumpy when panned) than under Catalina? (Run on system at left, anyway)

They are going to be useless soon because they still use OpenGL.

Try using GeekBench 5+ with Metal

 

[Gigamaxx]

Has anyone noticed that "Heaven" and "Valley" Unigine benchmarks when run under Big Sur are slightly lower (and somewhat jumpy when panned) than under Catalina? (Run on system at left, anyway)

Yes, they are getting outdated. Their latest release doesn’t support Macs.
They are DX11 and DX12 apps which Apple is moving away from.

 

[wstrohm]

They are going to be useless soon because they still use OpenGL. Try using GeekBench 5+ with Metal

Thing is, Heaven and Valley are not just benchmarks, although they are usually used just for that. Those "worlds" can be explored if "walking" and "free" modes are chosen. MacOS High Sierra works fine on them with no weirdnesses.

Yes, they are getting outdated. Their latest release doesn’t support Macs. They are DX11 and DX12 apps which Apple is moving away from.

It seems that Apple has little problem "helping" to outdate things. nVidia graphics drivers, 32-bit apps, OpenGL, etc. I find that I do not really like Big Sur as well as Catalina, which I do not like as well as Mojave, which I do not like as well as High Sierra. In fact I'm thinking about downgrading my computer at left to High Sierra, which would then "match" my "Mini-ITX 1" and "Mini-ITX 3" computers below. (I'm pretty much obsolete, so maybe my MacOS should be, too.)

 

[izo1]

Thing is, Heaven and Valley are not just benchmarks, although they are usually used just for that. Those "worlds" can be explored if "walking" and "free" modes are chosen. MacOS High Sierra works fine on them with no weirdnesses.


It seems that Apple has little problem "helping" to outdate things. nVidia graphics drivers, 32-bit apps, OpenGL, etc. I find that I do not really like Big Sur as well as Catalina, which I do not like as well as Mojave, which I do not like as well as High Sierra. In fact I'm thinking about downgrading my computer at left to High Sierra, which would then "match" my "Mini-ITX 1" and "Mini-ITX 3" computers below. (I'm pretty much obsolete, so maybe my MacOS should be, too.)

I know, but it is an OpenGL test that is used to test cross platform performance, ie between Windows and macOS.

Now that OpenGL is deprecated, most likely it will be gone after Big Sur and Metal will be required 100% or it just won't work.

So the only other "Benchmark" type of tool we have that is cross platform is Geekbench. At least you can compare numbers between macOS and Windows.

 

[wstrohm]

Thank you, izo1, I do understand. It's not the loss of a cross-platform benchmark that bothers me, it's the (gradual) loss of good virtual "worlds" for the Mac. Another case is (because of the loss of 32-bit apps) the loss of Myst IV, Myst V, and Uru video games. To play those on a Mac OS now, one has to stay on, or revert to, High Sierra, unless Cyan updates them to 64-bit (which they did for Myst, Riven, and Myst III).