Vega has more instructions than Polaris. People forget that GCN is ISA. Graphics implementation is just evolutionary implementation of graphics pipeline of VLIV4. ROP number, however, would not constitute whether it is Polaris or Vega architecture.
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.
15-Inch MacBook Pro AMD Radeon Pro Vega Graphics Options Now Available to Order
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
1. People always whine that Macs have crappy graphics performance.
2. Apple solves that (AND simultaneously FUTURE-PROOFS the GPU!), in a way that does NOT bust the packaging nor thermal or POWER SUPPLY budgets.
3. The above solution is applied universally across Apple's lineup.
4. People whine that it is "too expensive", conveniently ignoring the cost of the graphics cards and the requisite arc-welder-grade power supplies; both of which are anything BUT insignificant!
Seriously.
Now, ask yourself how any other solution would work for a Mac mini, Macbook (of any variant), or even an iMac. In fact, these GPUs are getting SO power-hungry, that even the Power Supply in the venerable Cheese Grater Mac Pro might be insufficient.
Then what??
Bad analogy. Selecting 1TB doesn't unlock performance improvements that would actually allow me to do my job. Right now my 560X can't perform properly when 2x4K screens are connected. Please don't lecture me about giving bad analogies when you can't even give a good one yourself. Absolutely mind boggling.
And if you're going to call me childish, I'm not even going to read your reply. If you can't keep the conversation civil, why should I bother what you have to say?
[doublepost=1542482910][/doublepost]
Agreed with this so much
To be fair, I had been pulling numbers from memory. I paid £2428 (with UK edu discount - 10% I think?) for the if I recall base-upper-end spec with 512GB, 16GB RAM and the 560. Given that the base-lower-end spec this time around cannot be configured with the Vega, I would be forced to spend £2700 ±20 after discount to get the option with the highest GPU as last time.
I get that the pricing model is more or less the same, my point was looking at the issue of getting a max-spec graphics model this time around compared to last year (where the 560 was max option and default in the right hand spec). I believe it should have been the Vega 16 as the base GPU in the right hand spec, with the Vega 20 being the upgrade options. But in the end people will still buy it, as I would have if I had been needing a computer this time around, and it's a sad fact of modern day pricing.
[doublepost=1542515580][/doublepost]
Yeah my bad on the 'hike'. I should have framed it better to convey what I intended; the previous iterations included the better line of GPU by default, I am disappointed that the Vega 16 at least isn't included in the upper spec model by default, and for me to upgrade to the max spec graphics it would cost a fair amount more. Got my iMac and MBP purchases muddled when remembering the pricing - MBP purchase was £2428, not £2100.
1 TB instead of 512 gigs in an iPhone doesn't unlock performance improvements but it unlocks double the storage capacity.. Which for someone who deems a 512 GB iPhone insufficient might be as crucial as for you the higher graphics power in the MBP.
Since you started out using iPhone for your (bad) analogy, I stuck with iPhone to come up with a better one, and since storage sizes are the only configuration options (colors aside) in an iPhone, that's the only iPhone-analogy to the MBP GPU situation that actually makes some sense.. If you think about it you'll probably agree that it's a better fit (new option at higher price vs. new model at same price, external storage for iPhone much less feasible than external graphics for MBP).
I didn't actually call you childish, at least not directly. I see that was likely to be misconstrued, a mod deleted that part anyway.
[doublepost=1542550275][/doublepost]
I get your reasoning, however I don't think that would be a reasonable option for Apple. HBM2 memory is expensive. And there's probably a reason for the delay of mobile Vega, who knows how bad the yields are!
Also, had Apple done that I could find at least some sympathy for the 560X MBP owners who are now acting as if they'd been robbed...
Last edited:
Nope. Vega Pro 20 is 10-15% slower than GTX 1060 Max-Q, and around 25-30% faster than GTX 1050 Ti. It is on the same level as Vega M GH.
Why do people post the same thing over and over?
Nope. The graphics card offers 20 CUs (1,280 shaders) and 4 GB HBM2 memory. The performance should be on a level with the Radeon RX Vega M GL (also 1,280 shaders) and therefore between a Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-Pro-Vega-20-GPU-Graphics-Card.361941.0.html
Let's wait for some benchmarks. It wouldn't surprise me if Vega Pro 20, being a 'true' Vega GPU, outperforms the Vega M GL, which is a Polaris / Vega hybrid.
<facepalm>
Vega M GL has 1011 MHz boost clock.
Vega Pro 20 has 1.3 GHz boost clock, so it will be around 25-28% faster than Vega M GL.
Also there are already leaked 3DMark11 benchamrks of Vega Pro 20 with 12405 GPU score which put it on the same level as Quadro P3000, and 25-30% faster than GTX 1050 Ti.
32 GiB RAM, at least 3TB storage, at least 6-core. What I was looking for around 2014.
I would have bought a Xeon 12-core laptop for around $4000, but it was not practical when not driving.
Last edited:
That is your idea of “acceptable”? The 2.6GHz Core i7, 32GB and 1TB will work for many, many Pros. You may have somewhat unique needs, but it reads more like you are looking for something to complain about with Apple because they are not meeting the price in your mind that you think they should and therefore it is “ridiculous”.
My Vega 20 MacBook Pro with 2tb/32gb/i9 Arrived !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Permorning Time Machine backup re-install now. 
You mean something like the Eurocom Panther 5SE? Which weighs 12.1lbs and 2.48" thick? Which looks like it is still being sold...for a start price of $4,416.00 USD? Seriously?
That is like comparing a boat anchor to a life preserver...but if that is what you consider "acceptable", go for it!
Just make sure you have a good chiropractic plan.
Yes, because I was looking for those specs four years ago.
An 8-core, 64GiB, Vega 56, 2TB NVMe, 2TB SSD laptop would cost 3400 euro.
[doublepost=1542746369][/doublepost]
That was the extreme plan. You could not get a 3.3kg laptop with more than 4 cores, but you could put 2.5TB storage in a compact laptop in 2013. 4TB in 2015. 6TB in 2016. More later but expensive. 32GiB RAM since 2012.
The hard drive vendors have been too lazy for ages.
Last edited:
Based on those specification, you were never in the market for a MacBook Pro anyways, correct?
I had a 2011 MBP until it died for the third time and Apple did not fix it for lack of parts (in Europe).
Never in the market for anything other than a cMBP.
My Vega 20 MacBook Pro with 2tb/32gb/i9 Arrived !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Permorning Time Machine backup re-install now.
Forget the Time Machine re-install, WHAT ARE THE BENCHMARKS??!!!
You could put spinning HDDs in your laptop, but the heat generated dictates how small the chassis can be...32GB presents the same challenges. Back in 2012, DDR3-1600, but you need 4x8GB, since 16GB SO-DIMM came on board closer to late 2015 or even early 2016, IIRC. Again, space for 2 to 4 DIMM sockets plus the heat generated by 4 SO-DIMMs dictates a larger chassis and more robust cooling system, so did most CPUs of that day and even now in the age of 6-core 45w CPUs, heat is an issue. You mentioned compact, which all of these desired features work against. Not to mention the battery and PSU for a laptop to meet your needs would last less than two hours on battery and require a 300w brick to power.
NAND is just now getting to an acceptable place with regard to speed, heat, capacity and cost. Intel has still not followed through and brought us to LPDDR4/x, making us wait until Cannon Lake, which is completely absurd and reeks of pre-planned obsolescence, but I digress. CPUs forge ahead, but only so much can be put inside a 45w-65w TDP.
Your path is unique and difficult and not one Apple will ever be able to fulfill. Good luck!
Already in 2011 the W520 weighed 2.6kg and it certainly did not need a 300W power supply. I never really wanted a crummy 3.3kg laptop.
[QUOTE="cube, post: 26827636, member: 33943"
An 8-core, 64GiB, Vega 56, 2TB NVMe, 2TB SSD laptop would cost 3400 euro.
[/QUOTE]
You have some very strange ideas about market economy. Or computers in general. Especially since there is no 8-core CPUs or Vega 56 for laptops and 64GB RAM alone costs around 600-700 euro...
An 8-core, 64GiB, Vega 56, 2TB NVMe, 2TB SSD laptop would cost 3400 euro.
[/QUOTE]
You have some very strange ideas about market economy. Or computers in general. Especially since there is no 8-core CPUs or Vega 56 for laptops and 64GB RAM alone costs around 600-700 euro...
There's an 8-core laptop with a desktop Ryzen and Vega 56 from Acer. But it weighs 4kg. I ran my numbers.
There are also 8-core i9 laptops which weigh 4 kg, but they cost over 3000 euro before upgrades.