Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dual RX 480s in Mac Pro 5,1 running MacOS (w/ How-to)
- Thread starter theitsage
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
May be it's just a downclocked RX460 with 2GB VRAM, and Apple don't even care to change the Device ID.
There are two designs...
14 CU and 16 CU design. RX 460 desktop has 14 CU design. The Baffin kext, on which the Polaris GPUs are working has 16 CU information.
So its fairly logical that all of those GPUs are low clocked/higher clocked/higher core count versions of the same GPU.
14 CU and 16 CU design. RX 460 desktop has 14 CU design. The Baffin kext, on which the Polaris GPUs are working has 16 CU information.
So its fairly logical that all of those GPUs are low clocked/higher clocked/higher core count versions of the same GPU.
Apple's definition of Pro = high prices with cheap components. An RX 460 is a $100 entry level GPU. My Mac Pro tower happily booted up with RX 470 and RX 480 but refused to work when I tried an RX 460. Should have seen it coming!
67FF = Radeon Pro 450, 67EF = Radeon Pro 455, 67E0 = Radeon Pro 460
67FF = Radeon Pro 450, 67EF = Radeon Pro 455, 67E0 = Radeon Pro 460
Last edited:
My cards are the black edition. They are factory overclocked to 1338 MHz
Whatever it is...it's about as Pro as a desperate ho with nowhere to go.
If only one option, that most likely is the iMac upgrade option, not the Mac Pro GPU.
Have you made any headway with the HDMI audio issue? I just got an RX480 because my Nvidia GeForce 650 Ti Boost was choking on Civ 6. The setup with the 650, besides its **** performance, was great. HDMI audio worked brilliantly with that card (so much so that I began adding DVD Audio lossless into iTunes en masse). My thought is that the HDMIAudio.kext may not include the PCI Express ID and Vendor for the new card, though I'm no device driver writer. Any thoughts?
Are you comparing against the same resolution? Lot's of posts publish the HD preset, in 1920x1080.
You see the problem that I have now?? Im really sad that I got this limited performance from RX 480. I have no idea why. I exactly followed all instructions.
Attachments
We told you the problem. You just ignore it and keep believeing that you suffer from an exceptional bad RX480.
Your card looks 100% normal to me. Your score is low because you didn't use the preset but make up your own test. Your test result is not comparable to the others. If you want high score, set the resolution to 640x480 without any AA.
The problem is that YOU ARE NOT USING THE SAME SETTINGS.
Now, please run the Valley benchmak again, but choose the Extreme HD preset (NOT 2560x1440). And then the result is much easier to compare to the others.
If you only want high score. I already told you that you can set the resolution to 640x480 without any AA, then you can now enjoy the super high score.
[doublepost=1478476814][/doublepost]
By considering the RX480 only perform a little bit better than the Hd7950 in Luxmark (macOS) at this moment. I will say your score is completely normal.
Again, its result is very close to what the 7950 can do. I will say your result is within normal range.
Last edited:
I'll freely admit to having ignored AMD's offerings for the past year or so, but tell me if I'm misunderstanding something here.
Are they really positioning the RX480 as being VR ready when it's got the same performance as a 7950 / 7970 / d700 from 2012???
Are they really positioning the RX480 as being VR ready when it's got the same performance as a 7950 / 7970 / d700 from 2012???