AMD Details Radeon Pro Graphics in New 15-inch MacBook Pro Models

[Maxx Power]

I think that what a lot of people miss is that "Pros" want (nay, NEED) performance. "Pro" hardware with low performance is not really aimed at "Pros".

The "Pro" in "MacBook Pro" has become more and more just a branding buzzword, rather than an accurate description of the hardware's capabilities and target audience.

Professional users are being driven out of the Apple ecosystem, because Apple refuses to make hardware for them. There's nothing wrong with making an overpriced and underpowered laptop. Just don't market it as a machine for video editing, music production and 3D modelling, because it will struggle in any of those tasks.

A true Pro laptop would go for performance rather than thinness. If they kept the thickness on the current rMBP, coupled with the new design, new advancements in heat dissipation, new keyboard, etc, they could easily fit a GTX 1060 or a Radeon RX/Pro 470 in there. The volume would also allow for a bigger battery to offset the GPU's increased power usage.

That would be a Pro machine.

As I said before, I'm lucky that my 2011 MBP is still functional and, as much as I'd like to upgrade, I don't need a new machine. If I did, though, I wouldn't even consider spending 3400€ on an MBP, when that money buys me a Windows laptop with almost 4x the performance (and a bunch of drawbacks, sure, but it would allow me to work up to four times as fast and that makes a big difference in productivity and efficiency).

I guess the word "Pro" gets tossed around a lot these days. It can mean professional gaming devices, professional image/video editing, professional research machines, etc. I use my MBP (2013) as a professional research machine, it tackles anything from data processing to algebraic calculations and simulations. In that usage scenario, I consider my MBP to live up to its name (the "Pro" suffix). I never felt the need for more 3D-capability. All that I need to model are rendered with my own routines and 3D rendering performance is hardly ever the constraining factor in 3D modelling (for fields I am familiar with, like fluid dynamics and geophysics).

Putting my feet in your shoes, I can easily see that, for what you are asking for, the "Pro" suffix isn't deserved.

As for the "true professional" machine not being thin and light - if I wanted to do very compute-heavy applications, I would use a cluster, supercomputer or sheer GPU compute on a desktop. I would not expect my work machine to fulfill all those demands. Clusters are easily built and many universities offer time on those, supercomputers are quite common to source as well, GPU compute is even cheaper. For the machine I code, theorize and debug with, the Macbook Pro is sufficiently "Pro" for me.

You must agree that to some extent, what we ask for in a professional machine is subjective. I think Apple's focus waned from your concept of "Pro" a while ago, but it still caters to people like me very well.

 

[Anim]

Should have been a GTX 1050 or better in the new MacBook Pro.

That's what i was hoping for. Anything Nvidia tbh.

 

[lowendlinux]

Does anyone know how this GPU will perform when it's set up as Apple suggested in their presentation?
Powering it's own Retina Display, PLUS Two separately connected 5K LG displays all at the same time.

That would make a high end desktop with a proper full spec GPU sweat a bit, so isn't this suggestion by Apple going to kill the MacBook trying to do this at any speed?

It'll probably be OK for anything 2d but it's a lot of pixels to push for a low spec GPU. I think this'll be a just because you doesn't mean you should type of thing.

 

[gnipgnop]

My point remains: professional creatives need powerful CPUs and GPUs for their tasks. If the MBP doesn't have a powerful GPU, it's not really meant for professional creatives.

I'll put it this way: the MBP is great for the hobbyist filmmaker that shoots short films with his friends on his DSLR, not for the video professional that works for a major production house.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Computer software ALWAYS lags behind the power of the hardware. That's just the reality of development and legacy software for professionals. You're talking about it as if the software is created so that's it's difficult to run on anything but the newest, most powerful hardware. In reality, it's exactly the opposite. The latest hardware is usually way beyond the optimization of the software. Developers want the software to run on a wide variety of machines. Businesses want to save money and buy machines that are a year or two old and have been refurbished. The business isn't really set up the way you're talking about it.

 

[MacBH928]

$2300 for 256GB storage and joke GPU. Any one know if eGPU is a possibility?

----------

I have finally figured this Tim guy out, he is a gimmick guy. TouchBars , bands, keywords flipping into emojis. He should work for Nintendo.

 

[Wahlstrm]

I literally do not understand their logic. They keep talking about driving 5k content and displays and offer completely under-powered dGPUs. It boggles the mind.

But their main focus is always on the machine being thin as a pice of paper and run for 10h w/o over heating..

 

[fokmik]

Integrated graphics on a 1800+ laptop
Can't plug in my iPhone without a dongle on a laptop of the same brand
3200 euros for their top of the line Mbp

Apple apple you've outdone yourself in stupidity.

this is for little period of time until iphone 8...you can now for 2 years to sync the iphone through wifi to the mac...and from next year you will have wireless charging
[doublepost=1477651496][/doublepost]

But their main focus is always on the machine being thin as a pice of paper and run for 10h w/o over heating..

nvidia 1060 does overheat a lot into some thicker machines. and if you dont carry your laptop to take advantage of the overall dimensions and weight than by all means buy a desktop

 

[gnipgnop]

But the 1060/1070, the 480/470 are consumer gaming graphics cards. Not professional cards.

You've hit the nail on the head. The people that are criticizing the 2016 MBP are basically PC gamers who don't really know what they're talking about when it comes to real-world professional use for a laptop.

 

[kk1ro]

I guess the word "Pro" gets tossed around a lot these days. It can mean professional gaming devices, professional image/video editing, professional research machines, etc. I use my MBP (2013) as a professional research machine, it tackles anything from data processing to algebraic calculations and simulations. In that usage scenario, I consider my MBP to live up to its name (the "Pro" suffix). I never felt the need for more 3D-capability. All that I need to model are rendered with my own routines and 3D rendering performance is hardly ever the constraining factor in 3D modelling (for fields I am familiar with, like fluid dynamics and geophysics).

Putting my feet in your shoes, I can easily see that, for what you are asking for, the "Pro" suffix isn't deserved.

As for the "true professional" machine not being thin and light - if I wanted to do very compute-heavy applications, I would use a cluster, supercomputer or sheer GPU compute on a desktop. I would not expect my work machine to fulfill all those demands. Clusters are easily built and many universities offer time on those, supercomputers are quite common to source as well, GPU compute is even cheaper. For the machine I code, theorize and debug with, the Macbook Pro is sufficiently "Pro" for me.

You must agree that to some extent, what we ask for a professional machine is subjective. I think Apple's focus waned from your concept of "Pro" a while ago, but it still caters to people like me very well.

I completely agree that the term "Pro" is totally subjective.

I'm talking from the PoV of Apple's supposed target audience - the professional creative. That is the audience that the MBP is being marketed too (regardless of whether it also performs adequately in other fields).

I've seen entire production houses, independent video editors, independent game developers and independent music producers (who all make a living out of their work) transition from macOS to Windows in the past few years. Apple software in those fields has become outdated when compared to the competition and their hardware (both in laptop and desktop computers) is severely lacking in the performance department.

I'm happy that you're still capable of doing your work on an Apple machine. Fortunately, I can also still do mine (albeit with a few limitations) on my 2011 MBP. But when the time comes to upgrade, I won't go for an Apple laptop if their price-to-performance ratio remains this messed up!
[doublepost=1477651990][/doublepost]

You've hit the nail on the head. The people that are criticizing the 2016 MBP are basically PC gamers who don't really know what they're talking about when it comes to real-world professional use for a laptop.

Or, you know, professional game developers, professional 3D animators and artists, or professional video editors that actually need powerful hardware to do the work that allows them to be paid at the end of the month.

But I guess it's easier to dismiss criticism than to consider that not all Mac owners just browse the web and use Photos.

 

[gnipgnop]

I've seen entire production houses, independent video editors, independent game developers and independent music producers (who all make a living out of their work) transition from macOS to Windows in the past few years. Apple software in those fields has become outdated when compared to the competition and their hardware (both in laptop and desktop computers) is severely lacking in the performance department.

Name some of the software that is outdated and can't be run effectively on an MBP.

 

[Maxx Power]

I completely agree that the term "Pro" is totally subjective.

I'm talking from the PoV of Apple's supposed target audience - the professional creative. That is the audience that the MBP is being marketed too (regardless of whether it also performs adequately in other fields).

I've seen entire production houses, independent video editors, independent game developers and independent music producers (who all make a living out of their work) transition from macOS to Windows in the past few years. Apple software in those fields has become outdated when compared to the competition and their hardware (both in laptop and desktop computers) is severely lacking in the performance department.

I'm happy that you're still capable of doing your work on an Apple machine. Fortunately, I can also still do mine (albeit with a few limitations) on my 2011 MBP. But when the time comes to upgrade, I won't go for an Apple laptop if their price-to-performance ratio remains this messed up!

I hear you. I unfortunately am not too familiar with the "creative" professionals crowd, although what I do is testing new ideas all the time and I consider myself to be highly creative, just that my created products are not easily understood by the people who appreciate modern "art".

Who knows, may be now that the entire Apple product stack is getting a slim-down, there is room at the top for something more substantial, kind of like the way car companies iterate their cars.

 

[kk1ro]

You have no idea what you're talking about. Computer software ALWAYS lags behind the power of the hardware. That's just the reality of development and legacy software for professionals. You're talking about it as if the software is created so that's it's difficult to run on anything but the newest, most powerful hardware. In reality, it's exactly the opposite. The latest hardware is usually way beyond the optimization of the software. Developers want the software to run on a wide variety of machines. Businesses want to save money and buy machines that are a year or two old and have been refurbished. The business isn't really set up the way you're talking about it.

What the hell are you talking about...? Ugh, I love Apple and I'm a huge fan of their products, but there's a subset of the userbase that will do and say anything to occlude criticism.

I don't care if software is behind in optimization. I care about having optimal performance when I'm working. Thicker rMBP with GTX 1060 beats thinner rMBP with Radeon Pro 460. That's it. That's my point. They could've kept the current thickness and make a more powerful laptop, but they chose to go for thinness and make a mid-range performer. And they're charging a high-end workstation price for it.

I love Apple, but this is the most stupid decision they've made in a while. But I'll guess we'll see how it performs, sales-wise. Can't wait for those numbers to be shared!

 

[gnipgnop]

Or, you know, professional game developers, professional 3D animators and artists, or professional video editors that actually need powerful hardware to do the work that allows them to be paid at the end of the month.

If you're a professional, then you know that the software development is always much slower than hardware development, not the other way around. They don't release ground-up new versions of software every year. They add some features, tweak some performance, but most of the time is basically a new polishing of the legacy software. You're talking about pro software as if it's constantly at the bleeding edge of hardware capability, which is definitely not true. Waaaaay behind, usually.

 

[dantroline]

You've hit the nail on the head. The people that are criticizing the 2016 MBP are basically PC gamers who don't really know what they're talking about when it comes to real-world professional use for a laptop.

Actually many of us own and use MBP's for years already and we are professionals. I personally budgeted for a new MBP for 2017 as a scheduled upgrade, but this new laptop is 30% over budget for what it provides to me. The current MBP I have is ideal because of the retina screen, the HDMI, USB and Thunderbolt ports. It's powerful but it is noticeably slow with running VM's at good speeds compared to new hardware. Still, it means I can rock up to any lecture hall and give my presentation without issues, or join a team of developers on a trip and connect to their monitors, hard drives etc, all without dongles and adaptors. The new MBP is faster but battery life is no better, it's thinner but that's a thing I'd be noticing for at most 30 minutes. The OLED strip is total BS - a touch screen would have sufficed, provided the surface wasn't so flaky like my MBP screen is - I dare not touch it at all!

 

[kk1ro]

Name some of the software that is outdated and can't be run effectively on an MBP.

"Apple software in those fields has become outdated when compared to the competition"

FCPX lags behind Premiere Pro;
Motion lags behind After Effects;
Logic lags behind Ableton;
I can go on.

Nowhere did I say that it wouldn't run. I said that it was outdated when compared to the competition. I meant feature-wise, but maybe I wasn't clear enough.

Apple software used to be industry-standard and it's being phased-out, with many professionals and studios going for Adobe, BlackMagic, etc. Apple hardware used to be tuned for creative work, but many professionals and studios are switching to Windows PCs that aren't three years old (like the Mac Pro) or severely underpowered when compared to the competition (like the MBP).

 

[jpcesar]

But if you want to run MacOS... you're stuck with Apple. It must be frustrating to make a purchase request for Apple hardware.

I run a quadcore i7 with GTX660ti, 16gb ram, ssd 512gb hackintosh, running 100% fine. Just go to tonymac and save some money.

 

[FelixDerKater]

Didn't nVidia win the graphics card wars a few years ago?

 

[gnipgnop]

"Apple software in those fields has become outdated when compared to the competition"

FCPX lags behind Premiere Pro;
Motion lags behind After Effects;
Logic lags behind Ableton;
I can go on.

And? There's nothing preventing you from using those other software packages.

 

[kk1ro]

And? There's nothing preventing you from using those other software packages.

No, but it speaks volumes about Apple's diminishing position and relevance in the creative industries, both in terms of software and hardware!

 

[gnipgnop]

hardware used to be tuned for creative work, but many professionals and studios are switching to Windows PCs that aren't three years old (like the Mac Pro) or severely underpowered when compared to the competition (like the MBP).

Well, if you're working for a company where a 2016 MBP is considered severely underpowered, then you're in a tiny, tiny minority. Most professionals would be doing cartwheels if their employer gave them a laptop with a quad-core Skylake with 16GB RAM and a Polaris video card. Businesses tend to like to keep the hardware around for a long time, as well as use the oldest possible software versions that they can get away with.

 

[cswelin]

NVIDIA hardware is much better for DX12 Vulkan compared to AMD. They just haven't released the drivers for it yet. Also, def not better for computing lol.

Hmmm, drivers won't be able to get over a hardware limitation. Nvidia doesn't support true async compute.

async is where these SDK/APIs shine.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Oh I am in no way defending the choice, simply stating the probable reasons. Apple could, and should, write CUDA support into Final Cut.

Sorry, it reads like I was responding directly to you when, in fact, I was just responding to everyone.

 

[cube]

The thread is too long already, so I will ask:

Is this just an RX 460 ?

 

[Freida]

It's honestly ridiculous. If I'm going to be charged exorbitant amounts of money for a product I expect more from it. Their laptops were already expensive. This is just a slap in the face to all their customers. And I was truly hoping Apple would put more powerful GPUs in their laptops this time since the AMD rumor started. I was genuinely excited. But not only did they put the bottom tier comparable 460 in their laptops, they have a custom even-lower-than-bottom-tier GPU in the 450 offering, which aren't even available as desktop counterparts. They're exclusively underpowered just for the MBP line. Unbelievable. And you can't even get the 450 until you spend 2400 on the base 15". It's actually become hysterical.
[doublepost=1477620122][/doublepost]
I did. You don't like the answer.

No, you did not answer his question! Either be constructive and answer so he (and others) can take you more seriously or leave the topic alone. Stop being so generic and start being on case and constructive! Heat is one major factor in such a slim device (along with other things).
So, we are waiting for your "knowledge" to show. Answer his question

 

[shadowmatt]

I wonder how long before they go bad and Apple needs another replacement program