Maintenance for the week of December 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
Apple Silicon
Atlan_daGonozal
✭✭✭
Hello,
I'll take it most of you know that Apple will be switching from Intel based CPU to ARM architecture for their desktop and laptop computer. There is a lot of talk how this will improved performance and give a better gaming experience. Most notably all iOS games will become available on the big screen.
The YouTube videos I have seen on the subject seem to very positive when it comes to gaming on the Mac. Apple is putting out a ton of new feature specific for game developers. I think the game future for Mac gaming looks prommising.
However, I am worried about the Elder Scrolls Online. The current client is not in a good state and get's only the most basic updates. Bugs like the spinning toon hasn't been fixed and fullscreen is far from perfect.
Will Bethesda use the opportunity to revamp the game with the new gaming features announced and make it truly great on the mac? Or will Bethesda just hope that the Rosetta 2 emulation will keep Elder Scrolls Online alive on the Mac for another 5 years?
Regards
I'll take it most of you know that Apple will be switching from Intel based CPU to ARM architecture for their desktop and laptop computer. There is a lot of talk how this will improved performance and give a better gaming experience. Most notably all iOS games will become available on the big screen.
The YouTube videos I have seen on the subject seem to very positive when it comes to gaming on the Mac. Apple is putting out a ton of new feature specific for game developers. I think the game future for Mac gaming looks prommising.
However, I am worried about the Elder Scrolls Online. The current client is not in a good state and get's only the most basic updates. Bugs like the spinning toon hasn't been fixed and fullscreen is far from perfect.
Will Bethesda use the opportunity to revamp the game with the new gaming features announced and make it truly great on the mac? Or will Bethesda just hope that the Rosetta 2 emulation will keep Elder Scrolls Online alive on the Mac for another 5 years?
Regards
2
-
BlueRaven✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I have grown very pessimistic about any attention Zos may give the Mac client. I am sure what ever they do, it will be fairly minimal effort.5 -
Atlan_daGonozal✭✭✭I am sure what ever they do, it will be fairly minimal effort.
I fear the same. And Zos will regret it. As often as Apple mentioned game performance and compatibility in their training videos.
And game controllers. And Apple TV. Doesn't need a genius to add two and two together here.2 -
Tivnael✭✭So if i would buy a 2021 iMac 32" with A14T i could run the game, but it will not get any significant improved graphics although i use this high end platform?0 -
Bashev✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Atlan_daGonozal wrote: »I am sure what ever they do, it will be fairly minimal effort.
I fear the same. And Zos will regret it. As often as Apple mentioned game performance and compatibility in their training videos.
And game controllers. And Apple TV. Doesn't need a genius to add two and two together here.
I guess that this is the problem that ZoS calculate 2 + 2. They see how small is the Apple share on the market and even less for those people who has Mac and play games.Because I can!1 -
Rasoma✭✭✭There are many people with Macs who will keep their current Intel Macs well beyond the official support for them ends from Apple due to the cost of their hardware. If I were to go out and buy a new Mac (which I will not at the moment as I do not want a laptop nor a Mac mini) then I'd also have to replace my older style Thunderbolt external devices. My Mac is now six years old and its still running great and I'm waiting to see what a difference Big Sur makes to it.
However, I'm going to make a wild assumption here and say that I doubt a native M1 (or whatever) client for ESO will see the light of day. The investment costs are simply too high based upon revenue. I'm guessing that ESO will ride out for as long as it can on the Mac platform via Rosetta and then it will be dropped - we are talking about 5 years time after all.@Rasoma - member since January 8th 20141 -
droz8881✭i've heard the raw cpu/gpu compute speed is much faster on Apple Silicon. i'm hoping that means i can run eso on higher graphic settings.
not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts. Apple developer doc seems to suggest developers will need to create new universal binaries and modify code. (src: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xcode/porting_your_macos_apps_to_apple_silicon)0 -
Rasoma✭✭✭In theory it should run on Apple Silicon without any need for changes due to Rosetta but it would not take advantage of any of the Apple Silicon features unless it was recompiled into a Universal app - ah it seems like the old days of the PowerPC to Intel migration all over again.@Rasoma - member since January 8th 20140
-
Actually in theory prepping ARM build should be effortless (unless in ZoS refers somewhere directly to hardware in their own code). For graphics at least this is already prepared for it as MoltenVK supports ApIn theory it should run on Apple Silicon without any need for changes due to Rosetta but it would not take advantage of any of the Apple Silicon features unless it was recompiled into a Universal app - ah it seems like the old days of the PowerPC to Intel migration all over again.
pole ARM CPUs.0 -
Calm_Fury✭✭✭✭✭We had a pretty good discussion about this in another topic a few days back. Can't find it easily now for some reason.
The truth here is that ZOS can barely support the game in their main platforms. Just look at the state of Markarth. The way it was launched and the way it still is, almost two weeks after going live.
ZOS wouldn't need to add a new server, but supportin ESO on ARM would basically mean adding support for yet another "coding platform". ARM would mean a new compile target with its own memory and GPU quirks that would cause its own bugs.
And if ZOS can't fix bugs on PC, which has the majority of the population, do you think they would fix anything for the 7 of us that would be playing ESO natively on ARM Macs? I don't think so.
The reality is that, if you want to play ESO on Macs, don't buy ARM ones, at least for the first few years.
Even if Rosetta 2 is awesome and runs the x86 ESO Mac client well, it will still be the buggy mess that is the ESO Mac client.
Since ARM Macs also won't support Windows via Bootcamp for the first years, you are out of options.
For me, I'll either buy one more Intel Mac or just buy a cheap gaming PC to keep playing ESO on the side.0 -
SirAndy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭... not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts ...
There's no way existing binaries will be compatible unless Apple provides a virtual machine layer to emulate the current CPU architecture. And if they do that, any possible performance gains go out the window and then some.
The only way to make apps work with the new CPUs is to update the code to make sure it is compatible and recompile your app. Any additional performance improvements will require extra dev hours and i just can't see ZOS spending any of those exclusively for the Mac player base.
Edited by SirAndy on November 11, 2020 4:50PM3 -
Calm_Fury✭✭✭✭✭... not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts ...
There's no way existing binaries will be compatible unless Apple provides a virtual machine layer to emulate the current CPU architecture. And if they do that, any possible performance gains go out the window and then some.
The only way to make apps work with the new CPUs is to update the code to make sure it is compatible and recompile your app. Any additional performance improvements will require extra dev hours and i just can't see ZOS spending any of those exclusively for the Mac player base.
There already is. Rosetta 2 is the system built in Big Sur that translated x86 binaries to ARM for the new Silicon.
Apple has actually showed a bunch of x86 apps and games running with that.
As I said, that is the only hope for ESO on ARM Macs since I doubt ZOS will have a specific build for that and Windows on Bootcamp is not an option for now.
Unfortunately the current Mac client for ESO is just bad. Even if Rosetta 2 runs it perfectly, it will still have all the bugs that makes me sacrifice 300 GB just to have a Windows partition in Bootcamp to run the Windows version of the game.0 -
Yes, we had: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/549464/theory-on-apple-silicon-eso#latest. Would be good idea to merge those as both are on the same topic discussing the same thing really.We had a pretty good discussion about this in another topic a few days back. Can't find it easily now for some reason.
The truth here is that ZOS can barely support the game in their main platforms. Just look at the state of Markarth. The way it was launched and the way it still is, almost two weeks after going live.
ZOS wouldn't need to add a new server, but supportin ESO on ARM would basically mean adding support for yet another "coding platform". ARM would mean a new compile target with its own memory and GPU quirks that would cause its own bugs.
And if ZOS can't fix bugs on PC, which has the majority of the population, do you think they would fix anything for the 7 of us that would be playing ESO natively on ARM Macs? I don't think so.
The reality is that, if you want to play ESO on Macs, don't buy ARM ones, at least for the first few years.
Even if Rosetta 2 is awesome and runs the x86 ESO Mac client well, it will still be the buggy mess that is the ESO Mac client.
Since ARM Macs also won't support Windows via Bootcamp for the first years, you are out of options.
For me, I'll either buy one more Intel Mac or just buy a cheap gaming PC to keep playing ESO on the side.
As I said already in this other topic: Perhaps, perhaps not. Before we see any products really it is too early to say. So far response from people is positive but tbh it is mostly based on the fact that it will be finally possible to bring all those iOS games to Macs in much easier way. But then keep in mind that those games in terms of hardware requirements demand more some GPU capable of rivaling Intel UHD and not really any desktop class GTX or hardware such as Vega 64/Radeon VII so hardware pretty much recommended these days when it comes to actual desktop gaming. Too many unknowns to tell really what it means for gaming using those upcoming Macs.Atlan_daGonozal wrote: »Hello,
I'll take it most of you know that Apple will be switching from Intel based CPU to ARM architecture for their desktop and laptop computer. There is a lot of talk how this will improved performance and give a better gaming experience. Most notably all iOS games will become available on the big screen.
The YouTube videos I have seen on the subject seem to very positive when it comes to gaming on the Mac. Apple is putting out a ton of new feature specific for game developers. I think the game future for Mac gaming looks prommising.
However, I am worried about the Elder Scrolls Online. The current client is not in a good state and get's only the most basic updates. Bugs like the spinning toon hasn't been fixed and fullscreen is far from perfect.
Will Bethesda use the opportunity to revamp the game with the new gaming features announced and make it truly great on the mac? Or will Bethesda just hope that the Rosetta 2 emulation will keep Elder Scrolls Online alive on the Mac for another 5 years?
Regards
0 -
Yes but then this is actually hardly any hope given Apple's history. Specifically most recent when they switched from PowerPC to x64. Took like 2 years after which both PowerPC Macs were removed from lineup completely as well as Rosetta also was removed from system shortly after. And 2 years is hardly enough for developers to adapt if we talk major apps (potentially lots of work to be done) such as TESO - even if there was a development team dedicated to specifically this task.... not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts ...
There's no way existing binaries will be compatible unless Apple provides a virtual machine layer to emulate the current CPU architecture. And if they do that, any possible performance gains go out the window and then some.
The only way to make apps work with the new CPUs is to update the code to make sure it is compatible and recompile your app. Any additional performance improvements will require extra dev hours and i just can't see ZOS spending any of those exclusively for the Mac player base.
There already is. Rosetta 2 is the system built in Big Sur that translated x86 binaries to ARM for the new Silicon.
Apple has actually showed a bunch of x86 apps and games running with that.
As I said, that is the only hope for ESO on ARM Macs since I doubt ZOS will have a specific build for that and Windows on Bootcamp is not an option for now.
Unfortunately the current Mac client for ESO is just bad. Even if Rosetta 2 runs it perfectly, it will still have all the bugs that makes me sacrifice 300 GB just to have a Windows partition in Bootcamp to run the Windows version of the game.1 -
Calm_Fury✭✭✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
Yes but then this is actually hardly any hope given Apple's history. Specifically most recent when they switched from PowerPC to x64. Took like 2 years after which both PowerPC Macs were removed from lineup completely as well as Rosetta also was removed from system shortly after. And 2 years is hardly enough for developers to adapt if we talk major apps (potentially lots of work to be done) such as TESO - even if there was a development team dedicated to specifically this task.... not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts ...
There's no way existing binaries will be compatible unless Apple provides a virtual machine layer to emulate the current CPU architecture. And if they do that, any possible performance gains go out the window and then some.
The only way to make apps work with the new CPUs is to update the code to make sure it is compatible and recompile your app. Any additional performance improvements will require extra dev hours and i just can't see ZOS spending any of those exclusively for the Mac player base.
There already is. Rosetta 2 is the system built in Big Sur that translated x86 binaries to ARM for the new Silicon.
Apple has actually showed a bunch of x86 apps and games running with that.
As I said, that is the only hope for ESO on ARM Macs since I doubt ZOS will have a specific build for that and Windows on Bootcamp is not an option for now.
Unfortunately the current Mac client for ESO is just bad. Even if Rosetta 2 runs it perfectly, it will still have all the bugs that makes me sacrifice 300 GB just to have a Windows partition in Bootcamp to run the Windows version of the game.
Apple is a very different company now. They were still almost bankrupt on that first transition, they are the biggest company in the world today.
I think they will still keep Rosetta 2 in Macs for several years. Too many professional programs are x86 only and will remain like that for more than just a couple of years. Even if Intel Macs go out, Rosetta will still be around.
As I said, though, I would not buy an ARM Mac thinking I would be abel to play ESO in it easily. That might happen, but it is far from a guarantee.0 -
Not exactly. When Rosetta came out and transition to x86 it was time when iPhone being announced, iPods dominated already handhelds market and iMacs were in fact most popular devices in certain areas - not just vide editing but also audio producing, DTP and a few others. Also argument that too many ads rely on x86 may not be accurate. This was also exactly the case back those 15 years ago and Apple just did not really care. They calculated that dropping support for all architecture is going to provide better earnings so they've done it leaving everyone who relied on PPC alone which caused many people just do either drop or at least stick with old computers for many years (I know of some who were still using about 10 yers old G5s). The only guaranteed support for x86 would be if they have done it the way Transmeta did 20 years ago so basically x86 emulation as part of hardware layer which made basically from CPU pov not difference if code received is dedicated for Transmeta CPU or some x86 of that era. Also no system update could remove it as this was part of the firmware (stuff that nobody really alters that much after it's released) so functionality was delivered with hardware and not with operating system.alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
Yes but then this is actually hardly any hope given Apple's history. Specifically most recent when they switched from PowerPC to x64. Took like 2 years after which both PowerPC Macs were removed from lineup completely as well as Rosetta also was removed from system shortly after. And 2 years is hardly enough for developers to adapt if we talk major apps (potentially lots of work to be done) such as TESO - even if there was a development team dedicated to specifically this task.... not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts ...
There's no way existing binaries will be compatible unless Apple provides a virtual machine layer to emulate the current CPU architecture. And if they do that, any possible performance gains go out the window and then some.
The only way to make apps work with the new CPUs is to update the code to make sure it is compatible and recompile your app. Any additional performance improvements will require extra dev hours and i just can't see ZOS spending any of those exclusively for the Mac player base.
There already is. Rosetta 2 is the system built in Big Sur that translated x86 binaries to ARM for the new Silicon.
Apple has actually showed a bunch of x86 apps and games running with that.
As I said, that is the only hope for ESO on ARM Macs since I doubt ZOS will have a specific build for that and Windows on Bootcamp is not an option for now.
Unfortunately the current Mac client for ESO is just bad. Even if Rosetta 2 runs it perfectly, it will still have all the bugs that makes me sacrifice 300 GB just to have a Windows partition in Bootcamp to run the Windows version of the game.
Apple is a very different company now. They were still almost bankrupt on that first transition, they are the biggest company in the world today.
I think they will still keep Rosetta 2 in Macs for several years. Too many professional programs are x86 only and will remain like that for more than just a couple of years. Even if Intel Macs go out, Rosetta will still be around.
As I said, though, I would not buy an ARM Mac thinking I would be abel to play ESO in it easily. That might happen, but it is far from a guarantee.
Bun then I guess that we shall see. Theoretically those new integrated graphics are supposed to be up to 6 time faster but then it is all in comparison to i.e. old Mac Mini which was Intel UHD - 5 -6 times faster is easy going to be anyway slower than any of GPU's I have already mentioned so basically no smooth TESO using that (question if AMDs will still be supported).
Also this whole unified RAM... I would understand this about MacBook Air i.e. but MacBook Pro or Mac mini too? I guess farewell to own RAM upgrades is confirmed finally and keep in mind that 8 GB for gaming is just meh. For the time being after new products were shown I have to say this just does not look optimistic.It will be good for iOS games being ported but if anyone would expect anything more than that it will not happen, at least not any time soon.
1 -
Calm_Fury✭✭✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
Not exactly. When Rosetta came out and transition to x86 it was time when iPhone being announced, iPods dominated already handhelds market and iMacs were in fact most popular devices in certain areas - not just vide editing but also audio producing, DTP and a few others. Also argument that too many ads rely on x86 may not be accurate. This was also exactly the case back those 15 years ago and Apple just did not really care. They calculated that dropping support for all architecture is going to provide better earnings so they've done it leaving everyone who relied on PPC alone which caused many people just do either drop or at least stick with old computers for many years (I know of some who were still using about 10 yers old G5s). The only guaranteed support for x86 would be if they have done it the way Transmeta did 20 years ago so basically x86 emulation as part of hardware layer which made basically from CPU pov not difference if code received is dedicated for Transmeta CPU or some x86 of that era. Also no system update could remove it as this was part of the firmware (stuff that nobody really alters that much after it's released) so functionality was delivered with hardware and not with operating system.alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
Yes but then this is actually hardly any hope given Apple's history. Specifically most recent when they switched from PowerPC to x64. Took like 2 years after which both PowerPC Macs were removed from lineup completely as well as Rosetta also was removed from system shortly after. And 2 years is hardly enough for developers to adapt if we talk major apps (potentially lots of work to be done) such as TESO - even if there was a development team dedicated to specifically this task.... not sure if eso binary will simply run on Apple Silicon without any dev efforts ...
There's no way existing binaries will be compatible unless Apple provides a virtual machine layer to emulate the current CPU architecture. And if they do that, any possible performance gains go out the window and then some.
The only way to make apps work with the new CPUs is to update the code to make sure it is compatible and recompile your app. Any additional performance improvements will require extra dev hours and i just can't see ZOS spending any of those exclusively for the Mac player base.
There already is. Rosetta 2 is the system built in Big Sur that translated x86 binaries to ARM for the new Silicon.
Apple has actually showed a bunch of x86 apps and games running with that.
As I said, that is the only hope for ESO on ARM Macs since I doubt ZOS will have a specific build for that and Windows on Bootcamp is not an option for now.
Unfortunately the current Mac client for ESO is just bad. Even if Rosetta 2 runs it perfectly, it will still have all the bugs that makes me sacrifice 300 GB just to have a Windows partition in Bootcamp to run the Windows version of the game.
Apple is a very different company now. They were still almost bankrupt on that first transition, they are the biggest company in the world today.
I think they will still keep Rosetta 2 in Macs for several years. Too many professional programs are x86 only and will remain like that for more than just a couple of years. Even if Intel Macs go out, Rosetta will still be around.
As I said, though, I would not buy an ARM Mac thinking I would be abel to play ESO in it easily. That might happen, but it is far from a guarantee.
Bun then I guess that we shall see. Theoretically those new integrated graphics are supposed to be up to 6 time faster but then it is all in comparison to i.e. old Mac Mini which was Intel UHD - 5 -6 times faster is easy going to be anyway slower than any of GPU's I have already mentioned so basically no smooth TESO using that (question if AMDs will still be supported).
Also this whole unified RAM... I would understand this about MacBook Air i.e. but MacBook Pro or Mac mini too? I guess farewell to own RAM upgrades is confirmed finally and keep in mind that 8 GB for gaming is just meh. For the time being after new products were shown I have to say this just does not look optimistic.It will be good for iOS games being ported but if anyone would expect anything more than that it will not happen, at least not any time soon.
I still thing 2005-2007 Apple is a different company from 2020-2022 Apple. We'll see anyway.
About the RAM, I think they just updated the lower-end stuff.
I do play ESO on my 16 GB RAM (which is an option for the newer models) and it runs mostly fine.
After reading more about the benchmarks today, I think ESO might run smoothly just with Rosetta. If only the Mac client wasn't so bad...0 -
Well MacBook Pro is by definition not a lower end. As for Mac mini this reminds of MY 2014. 16 GB is mostly fine however those Macs have 8 GB and the only way to get those 16 is to do it when buying them. Another thing is this small detail. New Mac mini can have up to 16 GB RAM while old one up to 64 GB. If it happens that for whatever reason you need more than that you are out of options - must buy new computer. And I can tell that games will soon enough need those 32 GB really considering how technologies such as NVMe provide and new GPUs such as GeForce 3xxx can do. CPU may change and may be just fine, graphics capabilities may also be ok but for any desktop gaming RAM upgrade is a must sadly. We are not talking about console gaming after all.
Also benchmarks are one thing and reality may be another. See how benchmarking of Macs vs PC works - different benchmarks may give different results depending on software used and also keep in mind that so far out of this benchmarking was done by Apple which means it is obvious it will be all positive. I suppose we will get some better into in upcoming weeks.0 -
TheBunny✭✭I predict ESO will run just fine under rosetta 2.
Also the unified memory arch is a big win for performance.
For those that don't know Xbox 360+ and PS4 etc all use unified memory arch to great effect.
One simple example being...no more need to up load any data to the GPU memory from main memory.
Once you load a texture from disk it is ready to go. This will cut down on frame rate stalls etc.
Another might be the GPU can use as much ram as needed. No hard limits like 1.5 GB(?) on my current 13" MBP.
Using to much V-Ram on 1 game Im currently working on crashes the 13" MBP gpu driver, causing both massive stalls or bringing down the whole machine. ( fun times )
0 -
Calm_Fury✭✭✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »Well MacBook Pro is by definition not a lower end. As for Mac mini this reminds of MY 2014. 16 GB is mostly fine however those Macs have 8 GB and the only way to get those 16 is to do it when buying them. Another thing is this small detail. New Mac mini can have up to 16 GB RAM while old one up to 64 GB. If it happens that for whatever reason you need more than that you are out of options - must buy new computer. And I can tell that games will soon enough need those 32 GB really considering how technologies such as NVMe provide and new GPUs such as GeForce 3xxx can do. CPU may change and may be just fine, graphics capabilities may also be ok but for any desktop gaming RAM upgrade is a must sadly. We are not talking about console gaming after all.
Also benchmarks are one thing and reality may be another. See how benchmarking of Macs vs PC works - different benchmarks may give different results depending on software used and also keep in mind that so far out of this benchmarking was done by Apple which means it is obvious it will be all positive. I suppose we will get some better into in upcoming weeks.
Since a couple of years ago Apple has 2 configurations of the Macbook Pro 13': one lower-end with slower processor, only 2 thunderbolt ports and another high-end with Intel.
They kept the same configuration. You can still buy the "higher end" Macbook Pro with Intel. Only the lower-end was changed.
So yes, they still haven't updated any of the actual higher end models, meaning the higher end MBP 13 and the MBP 16.
I expect those to have an M2 or something with more RAM as option.
About benchmarks, just see what iPads can do. Apple knows how to make very peformant chips, including graphics. I don't expect the new ones to be any different. They will be very good still.0 -
am not questioning that. We still have no iMacs as well however still point is 8 GB or 16 GB of RAM for gaming will not last long ans forcing anyone into buying more expensive computer just to have more RAM is not the way to go sadly. Also disallowing users to do such basic upgrade which is adding more RAM after computer is bought is not a good idea. This is exactly policy Apple had back those 20 years ago which caused it to never threaten PCs (even with those new shiny iMacs that were otherwise revolutionary for their time) despite the fact that those 20 years ago PPC was basically superior to x86 as well. One could really think that Apple learned their lesson but judging from what was shown so far they did not. I guess only time will tell if history repeats itself.alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »Well MacBook Pro is by definition not a lower end. As for Mac mini this reminds of MY 2014. 16 GB is mostly fine however those Macs have 8 GB and the only way to get those 16 is to do it when buying them. Another thing is this small detail. New Mac mini can have up to 16 GB RAM while old one up to 64 GB. If it happens that for whatever reason you need more than that you are out of options - must buy new computer. And I can tell that games will soon enough need those 32 GB really considering how technologies such as NVMe provide and new GPUs such as GeForce 3xxx can do. CPU may change and may be just fine, graphics capabilities may also be ok but for any desktop gaming RAM upgrade is a must sadly. We are not talking about console gaming after all.
Also benchmarks are one thing and reality may be another. See how benchmarking of Macs vs PC works - different benchmarks may give different results depending on software used and also keep in mind that so far out of this benchmarking was done by Apple which means it is obvious it will be all positive. I suppose we will get some better into in upcoming weeks.
Since a couple of years ago Apple has 2 configurations of the Macbook Pro 13': one lower-end with slower processor, only 2 thunderbolt ports and another high-end with Intel.
They kept the same configuration. You can still buy the "higher end" Macbook Pro with Intel. Only the lower-end was changed.
So yes, they still haven't updated any of the actual higher end models, meaning the higher end MBP 13 and the MBP 16.
I expect those to have an M2 or something with more RAM as option.
About benchmarks, just see what iPads can do. Apple knows how to make very peformant chips, including graphics. I don't expect the new ones to be any different. They will be very good still.
1 -
Calm_Fury✭✭✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
am not questioning that. We still have no iMacs as well however still point is 8 GB or 16 GB of RAM for gaming will not last long ans forcing anyone into buying more expensive computer just to have more RAM is not the way to go sadly. Also disallowing users to do such basic upgrade which is adding more RAM after computer is bought is not a good idea. This is exactly policy Apple had back those 20 years ago which caused it to never threaten PCs (even with those new shiny iMacs that were otherwise revolutionary for their time) despite the fact that those 20 years ago PPC was basically superior to x86 as well. One could really think that Apple learned their lesson but judging from what was shown so far they did not. I guess only time will tell if history repeats itself.alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »Well MacBook Pro is by definition not a lower end. As for Mac mini this reminds of MY 2014. 16 GB is mostly fine however those Macs have 8 GB and the only way to get those 16 is to do it when buying them. Another thing is this small detail. New Mac mini can have up to 16 GB RAM while old one up to 64 GB. If it happens that for whatever reason you need more than that you are out of options - must buy new computer. And I can tell that games will soon enough need those 32 GB really considering how technologies such as NVMe provide and new GPUs such as GeForce 3xxx can do. CPU may change and may be just fine, graphics capabilities may also be ok but for any desktop gaming RAM upgrade is a must sadly. We are not talking about console gaming after all.
Also benchmarks are one thing and reality may be another. See how benchmarking of Macs vs PC works - different benchmarks may give different results depending on software used and also keep in mind that so far out of this benchmarking was done by Apple which means it is obvious it will be all positive. I suppose we will get some better into in upcoming weeks.
Since a couple of years ago Apple has 2 configurations of the Macbook Pro 13': one lower-end with slower processor, only 2 thunderbolt ports and another high-end with Intel.
They kept the same configuration. You can still buy the "higher end" Macbook Pro with Intel. Only the lower-end was changed.
So yes, they still haven't updated any of the actual higher end models, meaning the higher end MBP 13 and the MBP 16.
I expect those to have an M2 or something with more RAM as option.
About benchmarks, just see what iPads can do. Apple knows how to make very peformant chips, including graphics. I don't expect the new ones to be any different. They will be very good still.
Yeah, I wouldn't buy a 16 GB RAM laptop today if I had plans to game on it, for sure.
We will likely see the beefier models with more RAM only mid-2021.
I do think ESO will run fine with 16 GB of RAM. As I said, I run it on my 2014 Macbook with 16 GB of RAM (via Bootcamp, since Mac client is not good) and it runs surprisingly well. As in people can't believe this macbook this old can run it this well at medium settings.0 -
Gattopardo✭✭https://elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/59187
"All of this puts a burden on software developers like ZOS to port their products to the new architecture. It is a huge undertaking to port a product as old, large, and complex as ESO to a new CPU, with no certain outcome of success. Because of these factors, we will not be porting ESO to run on the new ARM-based Macs."
Meanwhile WoW got native Silicon support today ...3 -
BlueRaven✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Great.
That report is fairly depressing. I can’t imagine that the porting is THAT difficult, it’s not like the system software is vastly different.Edited by BlueRaven on November 17, 2020 3:42PM4 -
Druachan✭✭✭Well there you go, sounds like it'll be stadia or whatever else comes along in the next few years. I have a MBP I bought last year so thats not being replaced for at least the next 3-4 years unless it really has to be (it blows up). To be honest the Mac support is pretty poor anyway.Say please, before you AAAAAaaaarrrgghhh at me.2 -
zergbase_ESO✭✭✭✭Gattopardo wrote: »https://elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/59187
"All of this puts a burden on software developers like ZOS to port their products to the new architecture. It is a huge undertaking to port a product as old, large, and complex as ESO to a new CPU, with no certain outcome of success. Because of these factors, we will not be porting ESO to run on the new ARM-based Macs."
Meanwhile WoW got native Silicon support today ...
[snip]Great.
That report is fairly depressing. I can’t imagine that the porting is THAT difficult, it’s not like the system software is vastly different.
Apple made it as easy as possbile to port. Hence why Blizzard went ahead and did it. Seems ZoS as a company refuses to and wants Stadia a dead platform to up hold them. Funny. Luckily I am in same boat intel based mac but if I ever upgrade from current reviews seem if 16 gets apple silicon with dedicated gpu I will be swapping to enjoy those benefits due to heavy travel battery life is bae.
[Edited to remove Bashing]Edited by ZOS_ConnorG on November 17, 2020 5:18PM0 -
aldriq✭✭✭Sad, but not surprising. Just maintaining the new ported version would probably require the devs to acquaint themselves with code that might not have been touched in 6 years. No one in the team would one to go down that rabbit hole.
Still, it'll be interesting to see how it runs under Rosetta 2 emulation. Also, how does it run on Stadia these days?0 -
System and software API not but hardware is. Again on Intel based Macs we can have any AMD GPU we want either as internal one or external. In case of ARM Macs this future is still kind of a mystery if Nvidia or AMD will have any drivers while Apple for sure will not deliver drivers capable of running TESO using any other settings than low.Great.
That report is fairly depressing. I can’t imagine that the porting is THAT difficult, it’s not like the system software is vastly different.
Example of WoW is also not a good one since it has much different requirements than TESO and it can run on Intel UHD just fine even with some better graphics settings while those new Macs as they are now already expected to be faster than UHD which made that decision simpler for sure. Sadly in case of TESO it is still a big unknown and just guessing if or when ARM-based Macs capable of running it well enough will be available (Macs other than Mac Pro or top tier iMacs as well that is). It can be next year, it can be year after it may never happen really.
Also one more thing to consider WoW - TESO does not use Metal natively which means it relies completely on MoltenVK in this matter. Perhaps not fault of ZoS to go another direction (we do not know all factors here) but still the fact is that WoW's engine could be more less prepared for it already for like those 2 years just because of that.
Other than that this was to be expected since June sadly.
They are not dumping Intel Macs. Announcement is only that there will be no ARM port. Also because of this gaming capabilities factor I suspect that most people that are playing on Macs will either switch to Windows ofc or they will wait at least til it is no longer an option to have new Intel Mac.Well there you go, sounds like it'll be stadia or whatever else comes along in the next few years. I have a MBP I bought last year so thats not being replaced for at least the next 3-4 years unless it really has to be (it blows up). To be honest the Mac support is pretty poor anyway.
Edited by alterfenixeb17_ESO on November 17, 2020 9:38PM1 -
vithurSoul ShrivenNew benchmarks show that the M1 should be very capable of running ESO even with Rosetta 2 with reasonable settings. If ESO runs in Rosetta 2
https://anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested/3
0 -
Druachan✭✭✭alterfenixeb17_ESO wrote: »
System and software API not but hardware is. Again on Intel based Macs we can have any AMD GPU we want either as internal one or external. In case of ARM Macs this future is still kind of a mystery if Nvidia or AMD will have any drivers while Apple for sure will not deliver drivers capable of running TESO using any other settings than low.Great.
That report is fairly depressing. I can’t imagine that the porting is THAT difficult, it’s not like the system software is vastly different.
Example of WoW is also not a good one since it has much different requirements than TESO and it can run on Intel UHD just fine even with some better graphics settings while those new Macs as they are now already expected to be faster than UHD which made that decision simpler for sure. Sadly in case of TESO it is still a big unknown and just guessing if or when ARM-based Macs capable of running it well enough will be available (Macs other than Mac Pro or top tier iMacs as well that is). It can be next year, it can be year after it may never happen really.
Also one more thing to consider WoW - TESO does not use Metal natively which means it relies completely on MoltenVK in this matter. Perhaps not fault of ZoS to go another direction (we do not know all factors here) but still the fact is that WoW's engine could be more less prepared for it already for like those 2 years just because of that.
Other than that this was to be expected since June sadly.
They are not dumping Intel Macs. Announcement is only that there will be no ARM port. Also because of this gaming capabilities factor I suspect that most people that are playing on Macs will either switch to Windows ofc or they will wait at least til it is no longer an option to have new Intel Mac.Well there you go, sounds like it'll be stadia or whatever else comes along in the next few years. I have a MBP I bought last year so thats not being replaced for at least the next 3-4 years unless it really has to be (it blows up). To be honest the Mac support is pretty poor anyway.
I never said they were, but they haven't really been supporting Macs for a while now, so they'll be looking for a way to drop the platform intel or not. give it a year.Say please, before you AAAAAaaaarrrgghhh at me.1
