Jump to content

GIGABYTE RX 460 2g "Partial" support in Sierra

Gigamaxx

By Gigamaxx,
in ATi

 Share
68 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Matthew82
Matthew82
Posted
Posted

Bueller, Bueller, Bueller!

 

This one does work if you have a modern board with IGFX. Apple cut off a few models with antiquated hardware. I opened the box installed it set a couple bios settings and now I have a supported card. Can anyone do this with a 1070 or 1080 card? No and there lies the anger.

 

Before I left for work today I did change my bios to pcie only and I got the clover screen and halfway through the boot before it went black screen. I could here the card whoosh at the end so I know the system booted but there are. O ports working. I need to get an adapter for the Devi port so I can check that port out to be sure.

No reason to looking for adapter :) It will not work

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ciro82
Ciro82
Posted
Posted

Any of those built in the last century?

 

7950 - 7970 - R9 280X and even the old 5770 they are doubtless more powerful than the RX460.

Aside from power efficiency, ofc the RX460 wins. 

 

You think i'm not hoping for a future support for my RX 480? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mork vom Ork
Mork vom Ork
Posted
Posted

I just made a few more tests:

 

installed SwitchResX here under SIERRA DP8. My thoughts where, you just loose screensignal on a reboot w/o IGPU, cause macOS will choose the wrong refreshrate for my Monitor. Standard resolution choosen from system for my Monitor is 3440x1440 60Hz. but my monitor doesn't get a signal when using these settings. I have to switch it to 3440x1440 50Hz. (living in germany here).

 

So i tested SwitchResX to get the boot settings fixed to 3440x1440 50 Hz. Rebooted and gues what: right, still no signal.

So i just played a litte bit around with SwitchResX and found a config-setting where i can boot with IGPU enabled and primary, then set a key-combo to turn off the primary IGPU. Guess what happens? Right: as soon as primary IGPU gets disabled, the AMD RX460/Rx480 also gets disabled or better say: Monitor was loosing signal again. But: Screensharing connection is still working... so i "screenshared" to SIERRA machine with my EL CAPITAN MacBook and connected to it. As soon as the screensharing connection was established, RX460/RX480 came back into the game, Monitor shows picture of actual session! As soon as i drop the screensharing session, Monitor again lost its signal.

 

So i guess: right now it is NOT possible to get the RX460/RX480 to run as primary GFX card without using the IGPU as primary. But i will not give up searching for a solution. So stay tuned...

 

 

Part II:

also when using IGPU as primary, a RX460/RX480 is running quite smooth and well. But when ever i make tests with UNIGINE Benchmarks, it allways show CPU GFX and a temperature of around 24 degrees, which i think is the IGPU temp (cause i use corsair watercooling for my CPU). So i think, UNIGINE is using some of the power of 460/480 to make the benchmark, but not the fuul power of this card - i might think it will be a mix of IGPU and AMD card. Under WINDOWS when i use UNIGINE it allways shows that it is running the RX460/RX480 by displaying the name in the upper right corner, while under macOS it allwys shows CPU.

Anyway: running this setup, i will get up to 90 frames/sec. whithin UNIGINE HEAVEN or UNIGINE VALLEY.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ciro82
Ciro82
Posted
Posted

I juste made a few more tests:

 

installed SwitchResX here under SIERRA DP8. My thoughts where, you just loose screensignal on a reboot w/o IGPU, cause macOS will choose the wrong refreshrate for my Monitor. Standard resolution choosen from system for my Monitor is 3440x1440 60Hz. but my monitor doesn't get a signal when using these settings. I have to switch it to 3440x1440 50Hz. (living in germany here).

 

So i tested SwitchResX to get the boot settings fixed to 3440x1440 50 Hz. Rebooted and gues what: right, still no signal.

So i just played a litte bit around with SwitchResX and found a config-setting where i can boot with IGPU enabled and primary, then set a key-combo to turn off the primary IGPU. Guess what happens? Right: as soon as primary IGPU gets disabled, the AMD RX460/Rx480 also gets disabled. But: Screensharing connection is still working... so i connected to SIERRA machine with my EL CAPITAN MacBook and connected to it. As soon as the connection was established, RX460/RX480 where back into the game, Monitor shows picture of actual session!

 

So i guess: right now it is NOT possible to get the RX460/RX480 to run as primary GFX card without using the IGPU as primary. But i will not give up searching for a solution. So stay tuned...

 

Mork, sorry but you guys drive me mad... RX480 does not work!

 

Ellesmere is not supported yet, is it too hard to understand?

But i will not give up searching for a solution. So stay tuned...

 

The only solution is to code the AMD driver bundle kexts for a full Polaris support, are you able to do that?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mork vom Ork
Mork vom Ork
Posted
Posted

Mork, sorry but you guys drive me mad... RX480 does not work!

 

Ellesmere is not supported yet, is it too hard to understand?

 

I am sorry, but this is not correct: i got the 460 and the 480 running here. YES, Ellesmere is not FULLY implemented yet in AMDRadeonX4000.kext - but partially. And: if you patch this kext to use 480's device-id (or force the RX480 to use device-id of RX460), it still WILL run in conjuction with IGPU so far. And YES, you are partially right: it may NOT use its full potential (as it should) - but it still runs partial by using BAFFIN in parts.

 

Maybe one day we get Ellesmere fully implemented and therefor th RX480 fully supported (w/o using IGPU as primary or modifying any kind of kext). That make this card completely working OUT OF THE BOX.

Right now, you are right - it is NOT working out of the box. But some can use it - if he got the supported hardware and knowledge how to get it "running".

 

Running, but without its FULL potential.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pavo
Pavo
Posted
Posted

I would just like to go back to the original title of this thread 

 

Sierra Native Graphics Support with GIGABYTE RX 460 2g

 

Simply put this is completely wrong, OOB/Native support means nothing needs to be done for the gfx card to work, no edits of kext, no injection of device ids, and no using iGPU as primary gfx, so its plain and simple the RX 460/480 are not natively supported.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew82
Matthew82
Posted
Posted

Mork, sorry but you guys drive me mad... RX480 does not work!

 

Ellesmere is not supported yet, is it too hard to understand?

 

The only solution is to code the AMD driver bundle kexts for a full Polaris support, are you able to do that?

You are right, but the same symptoms are in 290/290x/390... And they are supported from Yosemite 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ciro82
Ciro82
Posted
Posted

I am sorry, but this is not correct: i got the 460 and the 480 running here. YES, Ellesmere is not FULLY implemented yet in AMDRadeonX4000.kext - but partially. And: if you patch this kext to use 480's device-id, it still WILL work in conjuction with IGPU so far. And YES: it may NOT use its fully potential - but it still works partial by using BAFFIN in parts.

 

Maybe one day we get Ellesmere fully implemented and therefor th RX480 fully supported (w/o using IGPU as primary). That make this card completely working OUT OF THE BOX.

Right now, you are right - it is NOT working out of the box. But some can use it - if he got the supported hardware and knowledge how to get it "working".

 

Working, but without its FULL potential.

 

Sorry but we have a different idea about the word "working"... i give up. 

Good night 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gigamaxx
Gigamaxx
Posted
  • Author
Posted

@Gigamaxx:

 

would you please be so kind and upload a dump of your Gigabyte RX460 VBIOS?

You can do so by using DPCIManager and press the "EYE"-button next to the cards left side in main screen.

Would like to make a few tests here, to see if i can get my sapphire NITRO work with it.

Would be much appreciated. Thx. in advance...

1002_67ef_22d61458.rom.zip  GIG 460 2gb

1002_67df_94801682.rom.zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gigamaxx
Gigamaxx
Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would just like to go back to the original title of this thread 

 

 

Sierra Native Graphics Support with GIGABYTE RX 460 2g

 

Simply put this is completely wrong, OOB/Native support means nothing needs to be done for the gfx card to work, no edits of kext, no injection of device ids, and no using iGPU as primary gfx, so its plain and simple the RX 460/480 are not natively supported.

OK, however it has support and all the other cards out there need need special injections and manipulation to operate. This is plug and play with a simple bios setting similar to what you would do in Windows 10 to maximize your graphics output (integrated graphics). It's not set on enable it's set to "auto" which allows the computer to determine how to distribute the graphics output. If this was an Nvidia 1060 I'm sure there would be elation amongst the no Natives crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gengik84
gengik84
Posted
Posted

OK, however it has support and all the other cards out there need need special injections and manipulation to operate. This is plug and play with a simple bios setting similar to what you would do in Windows 10 to maximize your graphics output (integrated graphics). It's not set on enable it's set to "auto" which allows the computer to determine how to distribute the graphics output. If this was an Nvidia 1060 I'm sure there would be elation amongst the no Natives crowd.

Your graphics card will not need a lot of manipulations ... as can often happen with other models.
However, the setting on your bios to make it work, means that it can not be defined as "native"
This generally without prejudices concerning nvidia or amd.
No one says, that your graphics card does not work, but it is only emphasized the right word ... "native concept" ...
This is not correct ... at least at this time

 

Perhaps, by changing the title to read more info about your work, you could convey a more correct thinking and at the same time not having misunderstandings ...
In addition to this in hackintosh the method you're using, it's not bad, but better than other solutions ....
I hope to be able to explain what I mean... ^_^
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gigamaxx
Gigamaxx
Posted
  • Author
Posted

Your graphics card will not need a lot of manipulations ... as can often happen with other models.

However, the setting on your bios to make it work, means that it can not be defined as "native"

This generally without prejudices concerning nvidia or amd.

No one says, that your graphics card does not work, but it is only emphasized the right word ... "native concept" ...

This is not correct ... at least at this time

 

Perhaps, by changing the title to read more info about your work, you could convey a more correct thinking and at the same time not having misunderstandings ...

 

In addition to this in hackintosh the method you're using, it's not bad, but better than other solutions ....

I hope to be able to explain what I mean... ^_^

 

Sorry for the Nvidia jab, shall I retitle it to say " near native support", or "almost out of box" plug and play? Because it's the closest thing out there to native or oob in the Polaris cards.

Of course RX 460 is supported because Baffin is fully implemented.

But you can't tell me that the RX480 will be "covered" by Baffin, it's not right... 

Forcing the RX480 ID in the X4000 Baffin section is totally wrong and useless. 

Again, we have to wait Apple and eventually the future support for Polaris 10.

Baffin contains 67df1002 which is the RX 480 code.

 

9500 has it as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ciro82
Ciro82
Posted
Posted

Baffin contains 67df1002 which is the RX 480 code.

 

9500 has it as well.

 

Wrong, Baffin does not contain the RX480 ID.

Man are you kidding me? Tell me what you want to do. 

 

RX480 is ELLESMERE 

Why are you posting wrong information? 

Have you even read my thread about Polaris and Sierra?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew82
Matthew82
Posted
Posted

I think it is important subject, but admin should move this to AMD>Graphics section and change name for "290x/390x/RX 460, 470, 480 Native Sierra support"

 

Yesterday I make experiment and put to the first slot HD 5770 to run from secend 290X. 

This is results:

post-916820-0-97338800-1472890590_thumb.pngpost-916820-0-35637800-1472890606_thumb.pngpost-916820-0-37806100-1472890622_thumb.pngpost-916820-0-98149500-1472890639_thumb.png

Heaven benchmark is 5 fps lower then El Capitan 

post-916820-0-70224100-1472890662_thumb.png

 

nice surprise is that USB 3.1 from ASUS is workingpost-916820-0-27172000-1472890680_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gigamaxx
Gigamaxx
Posted
  • Author
Posted

Wrong, Baffin does not contain the RX480 ID.

Man are you kidding me? Tell me what you want to do. 

 

RX480 is ELLESMERE 

Why are you posting wrong information? 

Have you even read my thread about Polaris and Sierra?

Wrong, Baffin does not contain the RX480 ID.

Man are you kidding me? Tell me what you want to do. 

 

RX480 is ELLESMERE 

Why are you posting wrong information? 

Have you even read my thread about Polaris and Sierra?

You're right and I can put it in there by changing 2 letters. EO to DF.

 

And get my XFX RX 480 to get support status. It's wickedly unstable but it works.

post-1753549-0-26342500-1473023250_thumb.jpeg

post-1753549-0-27209100-1473023405_thumb.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pavo
Pavo
Posted
Posted

'Baffin' is GPU name, not framebuffer.  ^_^

 

And yes, for some users, using RX 460 FakeID worked fine but it still seems to be an unstable trick but we already knew that.  ;)

When you inject a framebuffer that is not a framebuffer in any Controller, Apple will default to RadeonFramebuffer which does work for some cards but not all and there is no reason to be using a fakeid anymore since the AMD9500Controller has the 470/480 device in it now, the issue is there is not an acceleration for the 470/480 yet in the AMDRadeonX4000 kext. The device ids that are currently in that kext are the 67EF is RX 460 and 67E0, 67FF are Polaris 11 as you can see below:

n7WrWVE.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantomas
fantomas
Posted
Posted

When you inject a framebuffer that is not a framebuffer in any Controller, Apple will default to RadeonFramebuffer which does work for some cards but not all and there is no reason to be using a fakeid anymore since the AMD9500Controller has the 470/480 device in it now, the issue is there is not an acceleration for the 470/480 yet in the AMDRadeonX4000 kext. The device ids that are currently in that kext are the 67EF is RX 460 and 67E0, 67FF are Polaris 11 as you can see below:

n7WrWVE.png

 

Hey, don't know if you misunderstood me or maybe I misspoke  ^_^

 

When you inject a framebuffer that is not a framebuffer in any Controller, Apple will default to RadeonFramebuffer which does work for some cards but not all

 

Yes, already knew that but thank you anyway.  ;)

 

there is no reason to be using a fakeid anymore since the AMD9500Controller has the 470/480 device in it now, the issue is there is not an acceleration for the 470/480 yet in the AMDRadeonX4000 kext.

 

And that's the real purpose of using a FakeID    ^_^

 

An example with an old HD4850 - Device-ID (0x94421002) is in ATIRadeonX2000.kext but not in AMD4800Controller.kext. And yes, the card will work fine if you inject device in AMD4800Controller.kext but you can also use FakeID with Apple HD 4850 model (0x944A1002).  :yes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fantomas
fantomas
Posted
Posted

@ Pavo

 

Yes, I already reported it here: http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/312582-amd-polaris-ids-on-1012-sierra/?p=2273853

 

You can find AMDBaffinGraphicsAccelerator but there's no AMDEllesmereGraphicsAccelerator - It is why I strongly believe that Ellesmere full support will pass through Baffin - OTOH, don't know how Apple will deal with that.   :P

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gigamaxx
Gigamaxx
Posted
  • Author
Posted

@ Pavo

 

Yes, I already reported it here: http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/312582-amd-polaris-ids-on-1012-sierra/?p=2273853

 

You can find AMDBaffinGraphicsAccelerator but there's no AMDEllesmereGraphicsAccelerator - It is why I strongly believe that Ellesmere full support will pass through Baffin - OTOH, don't know how Apple will deal with that.   :P

Just a Guess, but the other 2 IDs in Baffin EO and FF could be future card definitions or assigned to P 10.     The RX 470 runs much more stable than the 480 in Baffin.    

 

post-1753549-0-05299200-1473102198_thumb.jpg  RX 470 4gb Gaming, in Sierra.  Its right up there with a windows benchmark of an 8gb model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ciro82
Ciro82
Posted
Posted

+ /* Polaris11 */

+ {0x1002, 0x67E0, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS11},
+ {0x1002, 0x67E1, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS11},
+ {0x1002, 0x67E8, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS11},
+ {0x1002, 0x67E9, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS11},
+ {0x1002, 0x67EB, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS11},
+ {0x1002, 0x67FF, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS11},
+ /* Polaris10 */
+ {0x1002, 0x67C0, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},
+ {0x1002, 0x67DF, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, 0, 0, CHIP_POLARIS10},

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...