Jump to content

R9 290X Help for mavericks


TechGuru
 Share

473 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

In the end, Rampage was wrong. It almost never happens. It was just a driver issue after all. That's great: considering buying a 290x as soon as some non-reference design solve its noise/thermal issues. The card has a great value, and growing, specially now that it became less interesting to cryptocoin miners and the prices are skyfalling. But the noise is still a deal breaker for me.

P.S.: Apple seems to have gone future-proof with AMD, since I don't know about any 9000 series AMD card yet. That surely indicates Cupertino is going all-in with AMD and OpenCL, just like I said in the MacPro 6,1 topic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S.: Apple seems to have gone future-proof with AMD, since I don't know about any 9000 series AMD card yet. That surely indicates Cupertino is going all-in with AMD and OpenCL, just like I said in the MacPro 6,1 topic.

 

Most interesting one in 9000Controller is R9 295X.

Of course I mean M295X.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okey, i got more reports here, i managed to get the syncproblem i had fixed by forcing the correct resolution. I still have no working multimonitoring working though, if i try to plug in more then 1 monitor they all go "black" and i have to reboot with 1 monitor to get 1 screen working again. i will try some injectsettings later today when i get home from work, but so far it seems the OS is working pretty stable.

 

My system is as following:

 

GIGABYTE GA-G1.Sniper M5 LGA 1150 Intel Z87 SATA 6Gb/s Micro ATX Intel Motherboard

 

2400MHz 4x8GB KIT CL11 HyperX Beast

 

LGA1150, Quad Core, 3.5GHz, 8MB, 84W, HD4600, Haswell (clocked to 4.2 Ghz with watercooling)

 

Sapphire Radeon R9 290X 4GB GDDR5

 

This setup is working with:

Clover bootloader.

kextedit on network

rest is working without any modifications that means all usb 2.0 and 3.0 ports,

oob support for R9 290X except multimonitoring ( I suspect this is a early release of the drivers from apple's part and will probably get fixed ).

Except the soundcard is not supported, and i've not been able to fint any kext getting it to work either, but i run my sound though a Numark digital mixer,

so i get sound through that (i've allways done that anyways so it's no problem for me).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally got time to install Yosemite. 10.10 immediately recognized my GPU's (I have one MSI 280x and one Asus 290x DirectCU II). Acceleration seems to work fine, as does OpenCL (about 2900 score on the 290X in LuxMark). I only have a MiniDP-cable to my second screen and the Asus card has regular DP ports so I've only been able to try the DVI port, but that works great at least.

 

Just got it working so still a lot of testing to do, but I just wanted to chip in. Looks very promising so far!

 

EDIT: By the way, what's the best way to check for QE/CI in Yosemite? I'm not getting the "ripple" effect in the dashboard, but I'm not sure the effect is still there in 10.10. Other indicators I've heard about is that screensaver previews show up under Screensavers, and that you can move prices in the Chess game. At least the latter two works. OpenGL performance in games is very good on my 280x, but getting lower (but usable) fps on the 290x - probably because of beta drivers I assume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To those of you that have used the 10.10 290x kexts in 10.9.3, how well is it working for you?

 

I've tried both 10.10 and 10.9.3 (with the 10.10 kexts). I have a pair of 290x cards in the computer and they are both immediately recognized in 10.10. I'm using a 29" (2560x1080) monitor and the monitor and resolution are both recognized.

 

When I first install 10.9.3 (without 10.10 kexts), Mavericks defaults to the correct resolution (2560x1080) but the monitor model isn't shown and cards are listed as generic AMD with 10mb vram. Graphics are a bit jittery and flash video doesn't work.

 

After I install the 10.10 kexts in 10.9.3, both 290x cards are shown correctly with 4096mb vram. The exact model of my monitor now correctly appears as well (as it did in 10.10). This appears to be purely cosmetic though because I'm getting the same jittery performance / no video playback that I got prior to installing the kexts.

 

If anybody has had more success, I'd love to know what you did.

 

Also, has anybody gotten flash video to work in 10.10? If I could get a few bugs worked out in 10.10 I'd probably just upgrade to it permanently (it actually isn't too bad for a beta release).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have everything working in 10.10 , and 10.9.3,
Only one tittle issu maybe the problem is with the 290x driver (beta(working out of the box in 10.10)).

Once os x started compleet i need to unplug my monitor, because i'm getting a trusthing, limping image.
When i re insert the monitor the problem is gone, .

Quote 13/6 :  i connect my 42inch TV throuth HDMI and no problems i think that it has to do with Freq. that my tv seems to solve and my monitor doesend unless i re insert the Kabel.

Greeting PeeWee
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait for 10.9.4, froglegs: there's a distinct chance the new drivers will show up there also.

so far 10.9.4 has no new drivers for the 290x i will keep ripping apart the beta's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so far 10.9.4 has no new drivers for the 290x i will keep ripping apart the beta's

 

Seems that the BIOS issue still exists with the 10.9.x drivers but seems Apple addressed this conflict in 10.10. Just focus on 10.10 as trying to correct the BIOS issue for 10.9 may undo support in 10.10.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you

Thank you

@froglegs I have flash working go install the newest flash beta it seems to work great and Java installs great now without changing the product number of the os from 10.10 to 10.9.3 which is great and as pjalm told me 10.10 290x drivers are only half done and more drivers are coming and framebuffers so it will get better I guess we should be happy it was never a bios issue with our cards lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's lovely, i've got my setup working quite good now, i was able to get rid of the syncproblem i had by forsing a resolution during boot. i have not yet been able to get multimonitors working though. but as i suspect this is most likely just a early driver from apple's part, so i'm guessing this will be better supported next update :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Thank you @froglegs I have flash working go install the newest flash beta it seems to work great and Java installs great now without changing the product number of the os from 10.10 to 10.9.3 which is great and as pjalm told me 10.10 290x drivers are only half done and more drivers are coming and framebuffers so it will get better I guess we should be happy it was never a bios issue with our cards lol

There is a bios issue with the 10.9.x drivers.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here it works fine, but I might have forgot to include something important into package, that's why I'm asking for tests.

maybe so i installed 10.9.3 updated to 10.9.4 newest beta to test it for you and if you release another i shall test it also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm keeping track of this forum and wanted to say that you've done great work so far, really!

 

I'm currently in the position for buying a new GPU and if the R9 290X is working OOB in 10.9.4 or 10.10 I think I know what to do. Still considering switching to the green camp as my HD69xx wasn't working (but I knew that). It's the 780 Ti or the R9 290X for me (I only do single GPU, maybe dual in the future).

 

I do have one question (it's offtopic and I don't want to start any 'wars').

 

People are saying that CUDA is sort of OpenCL. If you install CUDA drivers in OS X, will it perform the same as with OpenCL (I read that OS X utilizes a lot of OpenCL). Is this true or have I been misinformed? I tried to read it all, but I couldn't find the information which I needed to understand it. I do know (if that's correct) that both are APIs that can speak more or less directly to the video card.

 

In short I would like to know if the CUDA drivers are installed in OS X , whether the CUDA cores can handle OpenCL just as fast as an AMD card can (think of it like a conversion). I know this question could sound stupid, but I just can't seem to understand it :(

 

Keep it up guys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm keeping track of this forum and wanted to say that you've done great work so far, really!

 

I'm currently in the position for buying a new GPU and if the R9 290X is working OOB in 10.9.4 or 10.10 I think I know what to do. Still considering switching to the green camp as my HD69xx wasn't working (but I knew that). It's the 780 Ti or the R9 290X for me (I only do single GPU, maybe dual in the future).

 

I do have one question (it's offtopic and I don't want to start any 'wars').

 

People are saying that CUDA is sort of OpenCL. If you install CUDA drivers in OS X, will it perform the same as with OpenCL (I read that OS X utilizes a lot of OpenCL). Is this true or have I been misinformed? I tried to read it all, but I couldn't find the information which I needed to understand it. I do know (if that's correct) that both are APIs that can speak more or less directly to the video card.

 

In short I would like to know if the CUDA drivers are installed in OS X , whether the CUDA cores can handle OpenCL just as fast as an AMD card can (think of it like a conversion). I know this question could sound stupid, but I just can't seem to understand it :(

 

Keep it up guys!

yes os x uses opencl more in the entire os and opencl is like cuda but more advanced some people wont admit it and nvidia is not very good at opencl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some might disagree with me but just get what ever suits you more you won't see a difference in real world performance lol they are both almost the same that being said the r9 290x is a whole lot cheaper and thats what would make my mind up personally.....it also has more vram if you run at higher resolutions  that's always a plus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...