Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I feel like they went for AMD because of cost (more profits), not performance.
That is part of the reason but also because they have been with AMD for a few years now so have deals in place.

If they went with Nvidia, Nvidia would have to create custom 14nm GPUs specifically for the MacBook Pro and they don't seem as willing to do that as AMD do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidkrocks
And 1060 and 1070 and 1080. I think gone are the days of Apple including an actually decent dGPU in their computers.


The 460 is like the bottom of the rung in those line of GPUs ... there is the 470, 480, and soon to come 490. Apple yet again is crapping on everyone for profit. These GPUs aren't even expensive either. 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.
Well they wouldn't be able to because of the TDP of them, but the 1050 would be most realistic. I think the 460 is a decent upgrade and now it is easier than ever to plug in an eGPU.

I am just grateful that they do offer a dGPU and didn't go down the path of the 21.5" iMac.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ener Ji
I'm sorry but this is truly pathetic. They only offer up to the 460 in even the top end MacBook Pro. Where's the 470 or even 480? You can spend nearly 5 grand after tax on the maxed out MacBook Pro and you're getting an AMD 460 and 16 GB of DDR3 RAM. Please tell me how Apple is not trying to rob everyone blind? Prices haven't been this absurd in a very long time.
Good luck burning your battery with a 120W monster radiator in your 15mm thin computer then.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry but this is truly pathetic. They only offer up to the 460 in even the top end MacBook Pro. Where's the 470 or even 480? You can spend nearly 5 grand after tax on the maxed out MacBook Pro and you're getting an AMD 460 and 16 GB of DDR3 RAM. Please tell me how Apple is not trying to rob everyone blind? Prices haven't been this absurd in a very long time.
Remember, this is the Pro series not the RX series. There is no 470, 480, or 490.

But Apple usually put lower end GPUs in the MacBook Pro.
Since they use mobile cards in their iMacs, they have to reserve the higher end chips for the iMacs otherwise you would end up with flagship notebooks that are as or more powerful than their flagship desktop. That's not usually something that they like.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tazinlwfl
Does anybody know if Radeon Pro series on the MBP supports FirePro drivers from AMD? I wonder if it is different from the RX product line.
 
Remember, this is the Pro series not the RX series. There is no 470, 480, or 490.

But Apple usually put lower end GPUs in the MacBook Pro.
Since they use mobile cards in their iMacs, they have to reserve the higher end chips for the iMacs otherwise you would end up with flagship notebooks that are as or more powerful than their flagship desktop. That's not usually something that they like.
Yes, I know ... but the TF performance clearly shows these are on the low end ... again. Also their highest end laptop costs 5 grand after tax. These SHOULD be as powerful if not more than the iMacs. Dunno where you got that mindset from. It's irrelevant if it's a laptop or a desktop ... for the price you should be getting desktop class performance. Please stop making excuses for Apple.
 
Last edited:
What if his replacement is even worse?

Although he wouldn't want to do it, we need Woz to run Apple. He would know how to meet the needs of professional customers and he has a unique passion for the Mac.

I kinda feel bad for Apple's professional customers. They are beholden to a single manufacturer who, more often than not lately, makes some questionable decisions.

In the Windows world... if you don't like what Dell is offering... you can jump over to HP. Or Lenovo.

But if you want to run MacOS... you're stuck with Apple. It must be frustrating to make a purchase request for Apple hardware.
 
Ok. Go ahead and squeeze the aforementioned RX 480 into this thing. Let's see if you are better than Apple engineers.
Didn't say stick an RX 480 in there ... but the flops performance shows these are again low end GPUs compared to literally every other laptop in existence at this price range. I'm not sure what you're defending exactly. And you're not complimenting Apple engineers with your statement. Putting a low end GPU in a 2500 dollar laptop is not a magical feat of engineering. It's penny pinching. Don't call it something it isn't.
 
Didn't say stick an RX 480 in there ... but the flops performance shows these are again low end GPUs compared to literally every other laptop in existence at this price range. I'm not sure what you're defending exactly. And you're not complimenting Apple engineers with your statement. Putting a low end GPU in a 2500 dollar laptop is not a magical feat of engineering. It's penny pinching. Don't call it something it isn't.
You mentioned RX 480 in your post though:)
Ok I digress, I do think these P11 chips are inferior comparing to something like a GP107 based 1050 or 1050Ti, and I have no idea why they down clocked the chip to only 35W. Crazy when a bit more TDP can boost performance by a large margin.
It would be a bummer if Apple didn't have FirePro support for these "Pro" graphics.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    120.9 KB · Views: 399
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.