if the 5600M is clocked slower ( but more CU (streams ) units ) and the HBM2 consumes less power then may not be a huge jump in battery consumptions. slower clocked but wider computation and feed data at a more power efficient rate would offset some the increase in active cores.
The HBM2 5600M isn't there, but AMDs "normal" 5700M , 5600M , 5500M ...
Learn more about different types of desktop and notebook graphic cards and compare their specifications with their different models. Visit AMD for more details!
www.amd.com
The 5500M has a higher clock rate. The 5600M listed there isn't the same as what Apple is using (Apple is the "Pro" version which may mean it is custom. ). The power consumption is incrementally higher, but probably not anywhere near 75% higher. ( especially if this is a "re-optimzed" 7nm+ implementation. )
[automerge]1592244201[/automerge]
the "normal" 5600M runs with a lower memory bus width. 192-bits versus 256-bit witdh versus the 5700M .
Same number of units won't matter as much if can't feed them data fast enough.
With HBM2 though, it may be faster. ( depends upon the HBM2 implementation. Either about the same in overall bandwidth of regular 5600M or closer to that of the 5700M's with the wider bus). Lower power and less board space is probably the trade-off here.