Radeon RX 6950 XT

[SmackAttack]

it should still work but with no graphics exceleration.

What I was hoping the hear!

Or you pull paths from another OS.

There IS no other OS LOL

 

[SmackAttack]

@etorix

Would you mind helping/clarifying something? I'm installing an AMD 6950XT on an older z390 Designare system (OC 0.9.2, Mac OS 13.2.1, iMacPro1,1 SMBIOS), and I "think" I have it sorted out but MAN! I'm still so confused about the 'unnamed path labelling,' and whether or not I truly have done it correctly. My System Profiler sees it as it should, I have hardware acceleration, GB 6 reports +/- 215k on metal, however, System Profiler only says Metal Support is Supported, not Metal 3.

I've read/read/re-read everything from here:
https://github.com/TylerLyczak/Unsupported-6900XT-Hackintosh-Fix, here and on the big AMD RX6000 Series thread, but comparing the SSDT-BRG0.amls on this thread with the original one, I'm just a bit lost.

My gfutil dump showed:
/PCI0@0/PEG0@1/PEGP@0/pci-bridge@0/GFX0@0, so I took a look at the original SSDT-BRG0, and changed \SB_.PCI0.PEG1.PEGP to _SB_.PCI0.PEG0.PEGP for both "External" and "Scope." (see attached). I then added the spoof in config.plist for BF730000 in DP. But what confused me was if I needed to do more to "name" this ACPI path (per your comments from here:

Radeon RX 6950 XT

I disguised the 6950xt as a 6900xt.And run in masos 11.6 Thanks gs7yme! This was the missing piece I needed to spoof my 6950xt to a 6900xt. I also had to add a couple of lines to get to the correct PCI path, which I discovered wasn't quite correct using Hackintool on the Mac. IO Reg Path...

www.tonymacx86.com

Specifically, I now notice that my gfxutil dump now doesn't have "GFX0@0" at the end of the path the the device, and I don't understand if this is okay or not. (see screenshot of gfxutil dump)

Sorry to ask for the education... I'm trying!!

One last question: on my Asus z690/790 builds (both using a 6900XT), I now notice the bridge is 'unnamed.' Meaning, the path has "pci-bridge" in it. No issues with these systems at all, but, ultimately, is this also incorrect, and SHOULD I employ the BR0 ssdt on these as well?

 

[etorix]

My gfutil dump showed:
/PCI0@0/PEG0@1/PEGP@0/pci-bridge@0/GFX0@0, so I took a look at the original SSDT-BRG0, and changed \SB_.PCI0.PEG1.PEGP to _SB_.PCI0.PEG0.PEGP for both "External" and "Scope." (see attached). I then added the spoof in config.plist for BF730000 in DP. But what confused me was if I needed to do more to "name" this ACPI path (per your comments from here:

Radeon RX 6950 XT

I disguised the 6950xt as a 6900xt.And run in masos 11.6 Thanks gs7yme! This was the missing piece I needed to spoof my 6950xt to a 6900xt. I also had to add a couple of lines to get to the correct PCI path, which I discovered wasn't quite correct using Hackintool on the Mac. IO Reg Path...

www.tonymacx86.com

You have named 'pci-bridge' as 'BRG0'. If OpenCore applies the spoof to your 6950XT, all is fine!

One last question: on my Asus z690/790 builds (both using a 6900XT), I now notice the bridge is 'unnamed.' Meaning, the path has "pci-bridge" in it. No issues with these systems at all, but, ultimately, is this also incorrect, and SHOULD I employ the BR0 ssdt on these as well?

A regular 6900XT works out of the box, possibly even without WhateverGreen and/or without naming the PCI bridge. This being the case, you do not need to name the bridge. But it is probably better to create the corresponding SSDT-BRG0 anyway and name the bridge, so that WhateverGreen finds a proper ACPI path and can perform all of its silent optimisations. There's no adverse effect from having SSDT-BRG0, and this is one more opportunity to practice your skills at reading ACPI paths.

 

[SmackAttack]

You have named 'pci-bridge' as 'BRG0'. If OpenCore applies the spoof to your 6950XT, all is fine!


A regular 6900XT works out of the box, possibly even without WhateverGreen and/or without naming the PCI bridge. This being the case, you do not need to name the bridge. But it is probably better to create the corresponding SSDT-BR0 anyway and name the bridge, so that WhateverGreen finds a proper ACPI path and can perform all of its silent optimisations. There's no adverse effect from having SSDT-BR0, and this is one more opportunity to practice your skills at reading ACPI paths.

SHOULD System Profiler report “Metal 3” or “Supported?”

I've noticed that with an Opencore/DP defiinition, it will always say "Supported" vs "Metal 3" in System Profiler. That's on this new 6950xt (with my new BR0 SSDT) and on my z690/z790s (6900xt) with the definition. As soon as I comment out the definition (on the 6900Xts), System Profiler shows "Metal 3" but Hackintool then shows "?" under Device name.... just don't know which way is best.

Thanks so much!

 

[etorix]

If I correctly understand the mangled question…
The naming/bridging is for objects which fail to get a proper ACPI name. "GFX0" at the end of the path is the actual GPU chip, which was detected and named already: There's nothing more to do for it.

 

[SmackAttack]

If I correctly understand the mangled question…
The naming/bridging is for objects which fail to get a proper ACPI name. "GFX0" at the end of the path is the actual GPU chip, which was detected and named already: There's nothing more to do for it.

Ha! Sorry, I DID question that, but then edited/deleted that question because it made sense before you answered so perhaps it all got even more mangled as you read it (how's that for a mangled statement!)

Anyway, yes, I understand now, thanks!

The final thing I don't quite get, however, is how System Profiler reports "Metal Support." It seems that when one defines (or spoofs) the GPU in OC config, System Profiler then lists "Metal Support" as "Supported" vs "Metal 3." GB also reports "AMD Radeon Unknown Prototype Compute Engine" when defined this way. I noticed on my other systems with ACTUAL 6900XTs if I DO NOT define the GPU in OC DP (because it's natively supported by Mac), then System Profiler reports "Metal 3," whereas if I DO define (on those systems) or on this new one with a 6950xt, then System Profiler reports only "Supported."

I know that's a convoluted question, and I see on other threads others have asked the same thing, but I've yet to discover clarity. I'm assuming this is just cosmetic, as GB results are the same either way, but I'm just trying to be thorough.

I'll leave you alone after this I promise!
J

 

[etorix]

I'll leave you alone after this I promise!

No problem, but I'll leave the question of Metal support, or report of Metal support, to graphics experts.

 

[greenemk]

I disguised the 6950xt as a 6900xt.And run in masos 11.6

Can you provide some details on how you got this working? I have MacBook Pro (2019), Razer Core X Chroma and a XFX Speedster MERC319 RX 6950XT GPU. I downloaded the the file you attached, but I don't know how to use.

Regards

 

[etorix]

Can you provide some details on how you got this working?

See here.

 

[hkuser]

Aloha all. If someone would be of an assistance with the correct SDDT usage of a 6950 XT. I tried using Dortania's guide on spoofing the gpu as well as @etorix's various posts. But no matter what implementation I use the spoof does not take. Attached is the information of the 6950 XT. Mahalo in advance.