Mac versus Windows SL performance

[filz Camino]

I thought Mac owners who spend a lot of time in SL might be interested in this comparison.

I have a Intel iMac 27", set up for dual boot so I can use MacOS or Windows 10, and I've done a few frame rate comparisons using Firestorm with the computer running both operating systems and the differences are huge. The iMac framerates are typical for all the Macs I've had, I have done quite a lot of tinkering to try and improve FPS to no avail, other than by turning down graphics settings and setting max avatars to around 5.

Tests

Firestorm graphics settings the same on both operating systems and set to 1 step back from Ultra (e.g. high quality but no shadows), resolution set 3200 x 1800 (reducing the resolution below this seems to improve the frame rate under Windows but not on MacOS).

MacOS frame rate:

• My skybox (simple scene and no other avatars): 22.6fps
• Peak nightclub sim (about 60 avatars on the sim): 5.5fps

 

Windows 10 frame rate:

• My skybox (simple scene and no other avatars): 63fps (2.8 times faster than MacOS)
• Peak nightclub sim (about 60 avatars on the sim): 24fps (4.4 times faster than MacOS)

 

Looking at CPU/GPU load, the frame rate in my skybox is GPU limited and the frame rate at Peak is CPU limited.

 

 

Hardware: 

CPU: Intel i9-990K

GPU: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, 8GB vRAM

RAM: 40GB

Storage: 1TB SSD

 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2023 by filz Camino
re-did tests making sure the screen resolution was the same in each case

[Henri Beauchamp]

Do not even think about trying Linux, or it will make you cry, so much faster, smoother and stabler it is compared with the other (lesser) OSes... 🤣

macOS always had a very lame/ancient/partial/bogus OpenGL implementation, so it is no surprise at all it is so much slower with SL viewers.

If you want good performances in SL out of Macintosh hardware, then install Linux on it !

Edited October 22, 2023 by Henri Beauchamp

[filz Camino]

23 minutes ago, Henri Beauchamp said:

Do not even think about trying Linux, or it will make you cry, so much faster, smoother and stabler it is compared with the other (lesser) OSes... 🤣

macOS always had a very lame/ancient/partial/bogus OpenGL implementation, so it is no surprise at all it is so much slower with SL viewers.

If you want good performances in SL out of Macintosh hardware, then install Linux on it !

If you happen to have a dual boot Windows/Linux machine, I'd be interested in seeing some actual numbers for frame rates on both platforms compared.

[Henri Beauchamp]

34 minutes ago, filz Camino said:

If you happen to have a dual boot Windows/Linux machine, I'd be interested in seeing some actual numbers for frame rates on both platforms compared.

I do, and I get at the very minimum +10% fps rates under Linux when compared with Windows 11, both optimized to the extreme, with same clocks on CPU and GPU, and for the bloated Windoze 11, every useless/superfluous ”service” turned off (or right out uninstalled/removed/destroyed), including Search, Defender, etc. The difference in fps rates can go up to +25% in favour of Linux, depending on the scene being rendered.

But what is the most impressive, is the difference in smoothness: under Windows, the same viewer (whatever the viewer, provided it got both native Linux and Windows builds) will experience way more ”hiccups” and unstable frame rates than under Linux. The difference there is massive. Not to mention stability, especially with some Windows drivers (I am in particular thinking about AMD's OpenGL drivers here)...

Have a look at this post for some OpenGL performances comparisons.

Edited October 22, 2023 by Henri Beauchamp

[Spiffy Voxel]

Those FPS rates under macOS don't match up with my experience here. I'm using a 2017 iMac 27-inch with these specs:

• CPU: 3.5 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
• Graphics: Radeon Pro 575 4 GB, native 2560x1440 resolution
• Memory: 48 GB 2400 MHz DDR4
• System Disk: external Samsung 2TB SSD connected via USB 3.1 USB-C

Until a few years ago, frame rates weren't great so I'd turn off Advanced Lighting and reduce draw distance in Firestorm, or use an alternative viewer like Alchemy. But the last few versions of Firestorm have changed all that, I can now run Second Life in Ultra graphics (minus shadows) and only struggle in huge events with lots of people and effects around me.

[Katherine Heartsong]

I'm an Apple user since an Apple II.

For years/decades if you were a print designer, Apple machines were your only choice for delivering quality work from a typographic and professional design perspective. Font management alone made Apple the choice for designers.

Anyway, I still professionally work on Macs, and have two here in my office, along with a 3070-powered PC gaming rig that I bought specifically to run games (SL, World of Tanks, Sims 4, Cyberpunk 2077 etc). I can see a noticeable gap between SL's Mac performance, and my PC. I have never quantified it, but it's night and day to me. The only reason I ever fire Firestorm or the Linden viewer up on my Mac is when my male alt gets his weekly stipend, and I want to send that to me (because, grr, we can't do that via our web account portal) and I'm already in world on the PC.

I'd never recommend the Mac for any type of "serious" gaming, especially when you're dealing with a somewhat graphically rickety and dated under-pinnings you find in SL, never mind AAA class games, and this coming from a hard cord Apple fan.

If I had the technical chops to not break my stable W10 PC rig and make it dual boot with whatever flavour of Ubuntu (or whatever Linux is good these days) per Henri's suggestion, I'd be happy to try and compare my Windows and that Linux setting because I enjoy any better performance I can get. But, on PC I am not the sharpest tool in the shed given my (hmm, 1978 to today is ...) 45 year history with Macs and their OSes/technology. It;s a wonder I don't break Windows every few weeks and need my kids to bail me out.

Edited October 22, 2023 by Katherine Heartsong

[filz Camino]

1 hour ago, Spiffy Voxel said:

Those FPS rates under macOS don't match up with my experience here. I'm using a 2017 iMac 27-inch with these specs:

• CPU: 3.5 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
• Graphics: Radeon Pro 575 4 GB, native 2560x1440 resolution
• Memory: 48 GB 2400 MHz DDR4
• System Disk: external Samsung 2TB SSD connected via USB 3.1 USB-C

Until a few years ago, frame rates weren't great so I'd turn off Advanced Lighting and reduce draw distance in Firestorm, or use an alternative viewer like Alchemy. But the last few versions of Firestorm have changed all that, I can now run Second Life in Ultra graphics (minus shadows) and only struggle in huge events with lots of people and effects around me.

 

That's interesting, can you put some numbers on that? Eg if you go to Peak nightclub when there's 60+ people there and stand somewhere you can see everyone on the dance floor, what frame rate do you get? 
 

[MarissaOrloff]

1 hour ago, Spiffy Voxel said:

Those FPS rates under macOS don't match up with my experience here. I'm using a 2017 iMac 27-inch with these specs:

• CPU: 3.5 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i5
• Graphics: Radeon Pro 575 4 GB, native 2560x1440 resolution
• Memory: 48 GB 2400 MHz DDR4
• System Disk: external Samsung 2TB SSD connected via USB 3.1 USB-C

Until a few years ago, frame rates weren't great so I'd turn off Advanced Lighting and reduce draw distance in Firestorm, or use an alternative viewer like Alchemy. But the last few versions of Firestorm have changed all that, I can now run Second Life in Ultra graphics (minus shadows) and only struggle in huge events with lots of people and effects around me.

FPS is always going to be different from one computer/user to another. There are just too many variables to take into consideration (region objects, your avatar, other avatars, cpu, gpu, atmosphere, graphics settings, ect). If those settings remain static from one machine to another for that user you can take the delta and apply it (sort of) as a loose guide in terms of a percentage. You may say you have fps of X and then someone else might say they have fps of 2X with lesser hardware with both statements being valid.

[Spiffy Voxel]

1 hour ago, filz Camino said:

 

That's interesting, can you put some numbers on that? Eg if you go to Peak nightclub when there's 60+ people there and stand somewhere you can see everyone on the dance floor, what frame rate do you get? 
 

The most taxing places I've been to performance-wise in Second Life have been BURN2 and Second Pride, it drops down to single-digit FPS. And with 60+ avatars my settings would render most of those as low-rez imposters or even jellydolls if their complexity is above 350k. I have a graphic preset for huge events where the draw distance is cut down to 64 metres, so less stuff (usually) to render.

[Spiffy Voxel]

58 minutes ago, MarissaOrloff said:

FPS is always going to be different from one computer/user to another. There are just too many variables to take into consideration (region objects, your avatar, other avatars, cpu, gpu, atmosphere, graphics settings, ect). If those settings remain static from one machine to another for that user you can take the delta and apply it (sort of) as a loose guide in terms of a percentage. You may say you have fps of X and then someone else might say they have fps of 2X with lesser hardware with both statements being valid.

This is true, I will note though that the recent graphics performance enhancements to both the Second Life Viewer and Firestorm & other third-party viewers have made (for me) Second Life much more enjoyable on my Mac.

[SLIM Barrowstone]

Device name    CAMPBELL
Processor    AMD Ryzen 3 4300U with Radeon Graphics            2.70 GHz
Installed RAM    8.00 GB (7.39 GB usable)
Device ID    D5DD92B4-DDA5-4D85-AC32-1189E76863B3
Product ID    00325-96725-29260-AAOEM
System type    64-bit operating system, x64-based processor
Pen and touch    Touch support with 10 touch points
 but my firestorm do this in some places https://gyazo.com/50a0aff34c4764bf55087a7c4c61a837

and then i crash 

[filz Camino]

12 hours ago, Spiffy Voxel said:

The most taxing places I've been to performance-wise in Second Life have been BURN2 and Second Pride, it drops down to single-digit FPS. And with 60+ avatars my settings would render most of those as low-rez imposters or even jellydolls if their complexity is above 350k. I have a graphic preset for huge events where the draw distance is cut down to 64 metres, so less stuff (usually) to render.

If at busy events you are getting single digit FPS and need to reduce your graphics settings, then I think your results are comparable to mine, when running MacOS.

Even at busy events, and with graphics settings 1 step back from Ultra, I haven't yet seen FPS drop below about 24 on Windows.

I've found this makes a big difference to user experience in busy places. SL starts to become unplayable when frame rates drop to single digits, whereas at 24FPS everything is still fast and smooth.

 

[JeromFranzic]

21 hours ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

If I had the technical chops to not break my stable W10 PC rig and make it dual boot with whatever flavour of Ubuntu (or whatever Linux is good these days) per Henri's suggestion, I'd be happy to try and compare my Windows and that Linux setting because I enjoy any better performance I can get. But, on PC I am not the sharpest tool in the shed given my (hmm, 1978 to today is ...) 45 year history with Macs and their OSes/technology. It;s a wonder I don't break Windows every few weeks and need my kids to bail me out.

Maybe your kids can help you with dual booting.

That's what I've done with my laptop +1... the +1 is I was able to add Android-x86 so I'm triple booting! Crazy but I got it all to work. My Windows is on 11. Linux distro of choice is Ubuntu Studio, a multimedia oriented distro.

Sadly secure boot doesn't work yet with Android-x86 so I have to turn that off before I boot there.

Edited October 23, 2023 by JeromFranzic
Added my preferred Linux distro.

[Rowan Amore]

22 hours ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

The only reason I ever fire Firestorm or the Linden viewer up on my Mac is when my male alt gets his weekly stipend, and I want to send that to me (because, grr, we can't do that via our web account portal) and I'm already in world on the PC.

You can log in your alt on the same computer as your main account.   In Preferences/Advanced/Allow Multiple Viewers: Allows you to run multiple instances of Firestorm 

[AmeliaJ08]

Have AMD's MacOS drivers been given a similar OpenGL performance uplift in recent times as their Windows drivers? I assume so given no good reason for it to not have happened but... well, your results suggest there is maybe a big difference.

 

[Spiffy Voxel]

3 hours ago, AmeliaJ08 said:

Have AMD's MacOS drivers been given a similar OpenGL performance uplift in recent times as their Windows drivers? I assume so given no good reason for it to not have happened but... well, your results suggest there is maybe a big difference.

 

AMD doesn't appear to have any input into the graphics drivers that Apple put into macOS, and given that Apple have declared OpenGL 'deprecated' I'd say that they very much carry the bag as far as performance goes.

[AmeliaJ08]

3 hours ago, Spiffy Voxel said:

AMD doesn't appear to have any input into the graphics drivers that Apple put into macOS, and given that Apple have declared OpenGL 'deprecated' I'd say that they very much carry the bag as far as performance goes.

Ah. There was me thinking AMD on macOS would be a similar story to AMD on Linux... silly me.

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

30 minutes ago, AmeliaJ08 said:

Ah. There was me thinking AMD on macOS would be a similar story to AMD on Linux... silly me.

I don't think there is a future for AMD/NVIDIA on macOS.

Apple Silicon does not support external GPUs.

[Anicha Heartsong]

If you're going to compare MacOS versus Windows in 2023/24, it would make sense to do it with an 'Apple Silicon' mac.

My M2 Mac Studio performs wonderfully, though the FPS may still come in lower than a well equipped Windows machine. I can get 30fps at home ground level (in full screen and with HiDPI enabled, both of which are hits on performance, but worth it). I live by the sea, so big hit there too. I can get 80+ fps at my skybox. I can also go to really busy clubs etc and get everything and everyone to rez, move around, do my thing.

All the this is anecdotal. There are so many variables it is insanely tricky to compare like with like.

[filz Camino]

19 hours ago, Anicha Heartsong said:

I can get 30fps at home ground level (in full screen and with HiDPI enabled, both of which are hits on performance, but worth it)

 

I get 165fps at ground level near the sea at 4K (e.g. Hi DPI) full screen resolution on my Windows gaming PC. Up in the sky, it can reach over 400fps. Obviously that is overkill, but more usefully in a busy club I can set Max Avatars to 40 and still get around 50fps.

I'm sure that Apple silicon Macs are a reasonable step up from Intel Macs, but I have a feeling even a M3 Mac Pro is still very significantly slower in SL than a Windows machine. I've used Macs for the last 10 years or so and only recently switched to Windows, obviously Macs are superior in some respects but when it comes to SL, I just can't quite believe what I've been missing out on.

Looking at the results of my original test, I think most of the problem is in the Apple software, either the drivers or perhaps the version of OpenGL that Apple uses, which I understand is rather old. But when it comes to gaming performance, I would say that even PC hardware tends to be superior in terms of absolute performance because Apple silicon is optimised for lower TDP - great for laptops, but for a desktop, a power-hungry gaming PC is likely to be significantly faster. Even when it finally arrives, I doubt an M3 Ultra GPU will be as fast as a 2022 RTX4090.

Edited January 30 by filz Camino