Mac native question

Content Update 3.27.0

Added native Apple Silicon support for macOS

Playing on a mac with an M-chip, currently installed through stream, was wondering is there something that needs to be done manually or will the installation type automatically switch?

Just patched the game to 3.27. The .app file still showing Universal.



Compare it to Hades 2 which is fully Apple silicon native (and much much more smooth FPS compared to Hades 1 on M1 mac).



I too am wondering if the Apple silicon native is automatically patched or there should be steps for us to upgrade to native. I'm still queueing now so I still don't know whether the native version silently applied or not.

EDIT:
Played for a few hours. The performance doesn't seem that the game is running on native Apple silicon.

Checked and mine is the same - Universal. Performance feels a bit worse than last league but that just might be cause its the start and servers are full.

Anyone has a fresh download/install on a Mac through steam to check?

Yes, I did a fresh install on Apple M1 Max, since my PC is not available.
"Kind" column reflect the type of process as I understand. You can see "Apple" type in activity monitor.

I guess if poe wasn't native, it would be "Intel"


But 3.27 is not playable, stack with infinite loading on first city after killing Hillock.

"

Reakleaseas#1570 wrote:

Yes, I did a fresh install on Apple M1 Max, since my PC is not available.
"Kind" column reflect the type of process as I understand. You can see "Apple" type in activity monitor.

I guess if poe wasn't native, it would be "Intel"


But 3.27 is not playable, stack with infinite loading on first city after killing Hillock.

It was already shown as "Apple" in Activity Monitor even before 3.27 (I know this because I checked Activity Monitor when the patchnotes came out). If it showed "Intel" there it means that the app is a Intel legacy app that still needs Rosetta to run. However most Mac apps nowadays built as Universal apps that can run both on Intel and Apple silicon, which is different than native Apple silicon that can only run and very optimized on M-series chips.

"

Reakleaseas#1570 wrote:

Yes, I did a fresh install on Apple M1 Max, since my PC is not available.
"Kind" column reflect the type of process as I understand. You can see "Apple" type in activity monitor.

I guess if poe wasn't native, it would be "Intel"


But 3.27 is not playable, stack with infinite loading on first city after killing Hillock.

Can you check in the install folder app info, if its "Universal" or "Apple silicon"?

Btw I was able to get pass the loading screen into town, but because of the wait, 3-4 minutes for me I kind of loaded the item filter and noped out for now.

"

SideKarakterGendut#6189 wrote:

It was already shown as "Apple" in Activity Monitor even before 3.27 (I know this because I checked Activity Monitor when the patchnotes came out). If it showed "Intel" there it means that the app is a Intel legacy app that still needs Rosetta to run. However most Mac apps nowadays built as Universal apps that can run both on Intel and Apple silicon, which is different than native Apple silicon that can only run and very optimized on M-series chips.

Good to know, thanks.

"

GoldenJoker#4945 wrote:

Can you check in the install folder app info, if its "Universal" or "Apple silicon"?

Kind: "Application (Universal)"

"

SideKarakterGendut#6189 wrote:

However most Mac apps nowadays built as Universal apps that can run both on Intel and Apple silicon, which is different than native Apple silicon that can only run and very optimized on M-series chips.

This is incorrect.

"Native" binaries built for Apple's ARM-based SoCs will outperform applications built for x86_64 CPUs à la Intel & AMD which are reliant on the Rosetta 2 translation software to run. But an app being released as a "universal" app that also supports the latter has no bearing on how well it will run on ARM-based Macs. The code that is running is what matters; the existence of other code that's also stored on your SSD but isn't utilised will not in any way effect CPU or RAM usage.

"

Reakleaseas#1570 wrote:

Good to know, thanks.

They're talking nonsense.

A "universal" app doesn't in any way utilise x86-specific code on ARM-based devices. The code won't have different levels of performance based on whether other code also happens to be stored on your SSD. They don't have a clue what they're talking about.

A universal app is, essentially, three pieces of software;

• The native build, compiled for ARM-based devices
• The Intel-friendly build, compiled for x86-based devices
• A loader, which decides which of the two above should run

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

"

SideKarakterGendut#6189 wrote:

However most Mac apps nowadays built as Universal apps that can run both on Intel and Apple silicon, which is different than native Apple silicon that can only run and very optimized on M-series chips.

This is incorrect.

"Native" binaries built for Apple's ARM-based SoCs will outperform applications built for x86_64 CPUs à la Intel & AMD which are reliant on the Rosetta 2 translation software to run. But an app being released as a "universal" app that also supports the latter has no bearing on how well it will run on ARM-based Macs. The code that is running is what matters; the existence of other code that's also stored on your SSD but isn't utilised will not in any way effect CPU or RAM usage.

"

Reakleaseas#1570 wrote:

Good to know, thanks.

They're talking nonsense.

A "universal" app doesn't in any way utilise x86-specific code on ARM-based devices. The code won't have different levels of performance based on whether other code also happens to be stored on your SSD. They don't have a clue what they're talking about.

A universal app is, essentially, three pieces of software;

• The native build, compiled for ARM-based devices
• The Intel-friendly build, compiled for x86-based devices
• A loader, which decides which of the two above should run

I said that because generally most optimized games won't compile as Universal since newer Metal API only support Apple silicon chips, which is why newer game ports like Hades 2 and Cyberpunk is dropping Intel altogether.

Also, we're here to help each other as Mac users which historically had very few technical support compared to other users. If we said something wrong just point that out there's no need arrogantly dismissing it as nonsense.

"

SideKarakterGendut#6189 wrote:

I said that because generally most optimized games won't compile as Universal since newer Metal API only support Apple silicon chips, which is why newer game ports like Hades 2 and Cyberpunk is dropping Intel altogether.

Your earlier post didn't mention games at all.

Particularly tech-savvy people don't need to have universal apps explained to them half a decade after their emergence. Regular folks who have better things to do with their time than ponder the minutiae of computer components are just going to see you saying that "However most Mac apps nowadays built as Universal apps that can run both on Intel and Apple silicon, which is different than native Apple silicon that can only run and very optimized on M-series chips." and think you mean that universal apps are somehow not native ARM code.

At the time, I thought you didn't know any better and were posting assumptions as fact - misleading people in the process. I'll be blunt and say I still lean toward that being what you had thought at the time. If you're saying one thing because of something completely different, then your post being that indecipherable isn't markedly better. It would have been trivial to instead say "the most well-optimised of games won't be released as universal apps because they take advantage of newer versions of Apple's graphics API" instead of talking about whether something is "native Apple silicon". Nobody in the thread is being arrogant - but please understand that people will attempt to shut down what is perceived as misinformation, and posting in a way that is unclear and confusing will cause that.