System Requirements

[HoogerTarp]

This had previously been discussed, however, the thread died before much discussion had been made.

Is there a reason that the Mac system requirements are significantly less intensive than the Windows or the Linux system requirements?

 

[moncky]

As you say this has been discussed many times, but here is an answer.

In what way are they less intensive? If you're referring to the processors, not all operating systems are created equal. Bear in mind that MacOS is designed to run on a specific handful of processors, and is optimized as such. The also only offer maybe two or 3 processors. When I bought my MBP I had a choice of an i7 @ 2.5GHz or a i7 @ 2.8Ghz. I stuck with the 2.5GHz model as I was using my Kidney at the time and didn't want to have to hand that over as well as the gazillion pounds I was already donating to the Tim Cook Chocolate fund.

Windows and Linux are designed to work on a generic family of processors, and as such their kernels don't use the cpu as optimally as they could. That being said I think that given the speeds that Intel and AMD are kicking out these days, OS optimization is probably less of an issue than it once was.

So you could try, I guess, recompiling a Linux kernel against your own processor, with specific optimization flags set of your specific processor model. Which will allow it to more efficiently use the CPU. Its not as difficult as it sounds. But does that mean you will then be able to run Stellaris on Linux on a processor similar to that on the Mac? I don't know. the answer to that.

Im not a windows user, so I don't know if there is any real low level optimization you can do.

But then again, maybe there is some other completely different reason than the one I postulated above. Mac is a BSD base, Linux is ... well Linux based, and Windows is Windows based. You have three very different, or at least 2 kind of similar but not really OS's and a completely different OS.

 

[Yenzen]

As you say this has been discussed many times, but here is an answer.

In what way are they less intensive? If you're referring to the processors, not all operating systems are created equal. Bear in mind that MacOS is designed to run on a specific handful of processors, and is optimized as such. The also only offer maybe two or 3 processors. When I bought my MBP I had a choice of an i7 @ 2.5GHz or a i7 @ 2.8Ghz. I stuck with the 2.5GHz model as I was using my Kidney at the time and didn't want to have to hand that over as well as the gazillion pounds I was already donating to the Tim Cook Chocolate fund.

Windows and Linux are designed to work on a generic family of processors, and as such their kernels don't use the cpu as optimally as they could. That being said I think that given the speeds that Intel and AMD are kicking out these days, OS optimization is probably less of an issue than it once was.

So you could try, I guess, recompiling a Linux kernel against your own processor, with specific optimization flags set of your specific processor model. Which will allow it to more efficiently use the CPU. Its not as difficult as it sounds. But does that mean you will then be able to run Stellaris on Linux on a processor similar to that on the Mac? I don't know. the answer to that.

Im not a windows user, so I don't know if there is any real low level optimization you can do.

But then again, maybe there is some other completely different reason than the one I postulated above. Mac is a BSD base, Linux is ... well Linux based, and Windows is Windows based. You have three very different, or at least 2 kind of similar but not really OS's and a completely different OS.

It's the GPU. Mac requirements are about 1/5th of the minimum Windows. It seems unlikely.

 

[moncky]

The cards on the spec are the only cards available on the Macs. So if you want to provide a product for them, then you have to make your game performant on them.

Is the game going to be nicer on a Win/Linux machine? I play CKII and EUIV on my mid 2015 MBP an don't notice any difference between that and my Linux pc. If anything its slightly better, my PC is old.

It would be interesting to see if PDX have benchmarked the specs and what the graphs look like. Don't think that gives away any big company secrets.

 

[Amightypie]

becayse macs rely on a specific type of GPU and as such games must be made to work on those specfic limitations - what you may find is that quality of appearance may either be lower by default or will need to manually mad elower in order to run as well

 

[Leonick]

The cards on the spec are the only cards available on the Macs. So if you want to provide a product for them, then you have to make your game performant on them.

That's the really odd part, the listed specs doesn't actually match any Mac. There is no Mac that used the GPUs listed as minimum requirements. Didn't check but I'm fairly certain no Mac uses the GPUs listed as recommended either. They've also left Intel GPUs out of both minimum and recommended specs which would have been quite useful as that's what you'll find in most modern Macs.

Since they aren't actually tailored to Macs they might as well list the same specs as for Linux (which besides OS happens to be the same as for Windows).

 

[Amightypie]

That's the really odd part, the listed specs doesn't actually match any Mac. There is no Mac that used the GPUs listed as minimum requirements. Didn't check but I'm fairly certain no Mac uses the GPUs listed as recommended either. They've also left Intel GPUs out of both minimum and recommended specs which would have been quite useful as that's what you'll find in most modern Macs.

Since they aren't actually tailored to Macs they might as well list the same specs as for Linux (which besides OS happens to be the same as for Windows).

macbook airs maybe ? linux are not limited to specs or specific models so thats why they are given the same specs as windows os

 

[Yenzen]

That's the really odd part, the listed specs doesn't actually match any Mac. There is no Mac that used the GPUs listed as minimum requirements. Didn't check but I'm fairly certain no Mac uses the GPUs listed as recommended either. They've also left Intel GPUs out of both minimum and recommended specs which would have been quite useful as that's what you'll find in most modern Macs.

Since they aren't actually tailored to Macs they might as well list the same specs as for Linux (which besides OS happens to be the same as for Windows).

It's the mobile version that were in a previous iteration of macbook pros (2010?). It's an obvious error that has been pointed out and they haven't responded to it.

 

[Leonick]

Nope, I actually checked. There's no Mac that used the the GPUs listed as minimum, mobile versions of both of them, yes, but they're significantly weaker (320M only has 252MB VRAM and the MacBook Air that used that GPU fails to meet CPU and RAM as well). As for the recommended ones, I'm fairly certain no Mac uses the as any Mac as new as those chips would be using integrated Intel graphics.

 

[Zaku]

macbook airs maybe ? linux are not limited to specs or specific models so thats why they are given the same specs as windows os

I think the macbook air uses intel HD video cards. I'm not sure though, I'm not a mac person.

 

[Leonick]

I think the macbook air uses intel HD video cards. I'm not sure though, I'm not a mac person.

Just about all Macs from the last few years do.

 

[Amightypie]

im sure out there is a strange old macbook air or something that uses the minimum specs, but id reckon the majority of macs use the recommended specs so not a huge deal

 

[Yenzen]

im sure out there is a strange old macbook air or something that uses the minimum specs, but id reckon the majority of macs use the recommended specs so not a huge deal

It kind of is a big deal. If the Mac version isn't five times as optimised as the other versions, Macs that just barely meet official requirements may be in for a rude surprise.

 

[Amightypie]

It kind of is a big deal. If the Mac version isn't five times as optimised as the other versions, Macs that just barely meet official requirements may be in for a rude surprise.

if they barely meet them their owners should be aware of it and not expect super performance

gpu isnt that different between version as both expect a usable 1GB of vram

 

[Zaku]

if they barely meet them their owners should be aware of it and not expect super performance

gpu isnt that different between version as both expect a usable 1GB of vram

There is a HUGE difference between a 320GT and a 460GTX.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=31&cmp[]=1413

The 460GTX is literally 4-5 times more powerful then the 320gt

 

[Amightypie]

There is a HUGE difference between a 320GT and a 460GTX.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=31&cmp[]=1413

well even i know this but so long as it has the 1GB of vram avaliable to it , it should be able to run it may not run particularly well but in theory will still run

 

[Yenzen]

There is a HUGE difference between a 320GT and a 460GTX.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=31&cmp[]=1413

The 460GTX is literally 4-5 times more powerful then the 320gt

Thank you. I keep trying to get clarification on this. If a GTX 460 chugs at 30 FPS with low settings, a GT320(m) will be a 7-8 FPS sideshow.

 

[Zaku]

well even i know this but so long as it has the 1GB of vram avaliable to it , it should be able to run it may not run particularly well but in theory will still run

The 460 runs it's memory on 3600mhz, and the 320 runs it on 1580. Besides vram is not the only thing that matters.

 

[Yenzen]

well even i know this but so long as it has the 1GB of vram avaliable to it , it should be able to run it may not run particularly well but in theory will still run

Fulfilling minimum requirements means that the developers guarantee tolerable performance at low settings. It does not simply mean the game will run.

 

[Amightypie]

ok i im not an expert on gpu clearly, but if its on the minimum then expect it to run okish with everything either off or on low i imagine that its because some macs have an outdated card such as this and thats why its there, but since most will use something better then its an issue for a very small minority of people, with very outdated systems