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

[cube]

This is getting disturbing, we are talking about the Macbook Pro, one of the most expensive laptops on the market, and the GTX 1050 TI is in the discussion?? A $100 video card. This is very very very sad.

OK lets compare the GTX 1050 Ti, a $100 video card, to the Radeon Pro 460, OEM cost UNKNOWN??, but the Radeon Pro 460 in inside a $5000 laptop, and that is just plain depressing... But why don't we wait until the Macbook Pro with the "Radeon Pro 460" is released and really see how slow it is before we do any more comparisons.

RX 460 card costs $100, so we are talking about similar products.

How much better a chip can you put in the rMBP if it is so thin? If you think it should be thicker, I agree.
[doublepost=1477943505][/doublepost]

RX 460, with 2.2 TFLOPs has exactly the same compute performance level as GTX 960. And in compute applications that is reflected directly. So how will perform GPUs with similar compute performance?

I can tell you I did not see much difference in general between GTX960 laptop and the same with RX460 eGPU (TB2), although I think in some GFXBench there was quite a bit.

 

[koyoot]

I can tell you I did not see much difference in general between GTX960 laptop and the same with RX460 eGPU (TB2), although I think in some GFXBench there was quite a bit.

Laptop GTX 960M is based on GM107 chip, the same that is in GTX 750 Ti. So your GPU may be bottlenecked by software, and Thunderbolt performance.

 

[cube]

Laptop GTX 960M is based on GM107 chip, the same that is in GTX 750 Ti. So your GPU may be bottlenecked by software, and Thunderbolt performance.

Yes, I thought TB2 might have been throttling the eGPU.

But GTX960M was the usual gaming semi-ultrabook (thicker than rMBP) GPU so far. How much better could NVIDIA really be in the rMBP?

 

[koyoot]

Yes, I thought TB2 might have been throttling the eGPU.

But GTX960M was the usual gaming semi-ultrabook (thicker than rMBP) GPU so far. How much better could NVIDIA really be in the rMBP?

Considering it has 65W TDP, because of higher core clocks, than GTX 750 Ti(desktop), it would not fit thermal, and energy envelope.

 

[dallas112678]

Koyoot,

I think why people (myself included) are disappointed is the fact that Apple decided to design a "professional" computer that limits it to a 35W part. No one is disappointed at the energy efficiency, they are disappointed that apple decided to make an already very thin laptop even thinner which puts an obvious limit of how much performance you'll get out of it in the end.

Also everyone keeps going on about software-hardware integration, yes that may work well for Apples apps, but what about 3rd party apps such as lightroom and photoshop? Will they be as optimized compared to an apple made app? Doubtful.

 

[koyoot]

Koyoot,

I think why people (myself included) are disappointed is the fact that Apple decided to design a "professional" computer that limits it to a 35W part. No one is disappointed at the energy efficiency, they are disappointed that apple decided to make an already very thin laptop even thinner which puts an obvious limit of how much performance you'll get out of it in the end.

Also everyone keeps going on about software-hardware integration, yes that may work well for Apples apps, but what about 3rd party apps such as lightroom and photoshop? Will they be as optimized compared to an apple made app? Doubtful.

Metal is very easy to work with. There is not that much need of optimization, because it is ALREADY optimized for Apple hardware. You still think that Hardware in Apple ecosystem is detached from the software. It isn't. Everybody will optimize for Metal, if they will want to be on Mac hardware.

 

[djcgeez2189]

just sad on all levels from apple... this is the full embodiment of a rip off scam.. lets look at the numbers and let the specs speak for themselves

Apple Macbook pro 15
2.7 ghz i7 6700hq
16gb 2133 mhz LPDDR3 ram
4gb amd redeon pro 460
1tb flash storage
RETINA 2800x1880 221 ppi non touch HDR screen
1" 2170x60 resolution OLED 10 point multi touch touchbar (replaces function keys)
4x thunderbolt/usb-c connections
76watt-hour battery
.61 inches thick 4.02 ilbs weight
**no free software**
...........................................$$4,099 +tax/shipping

RAZER BLADE PRO
2.7 ghz i7 6700hq
32 gb 2133mhz DDR4 ram
8gb GDDR5x gtx 1080 desktop
2x 512gb samsung m.2 ssd in raid 0
4K IGZO 10 point multi touch screen with nvidia G-Sync tech
3x usb 3.0
card reader
2x thunderbolt/usb-c connections
99watt-hour battery (highest watt battery legally allowed on airplanes)
.88inches thick 8ilbs weight
** offers office 15 and FL studio free**
.........................................$$4,000 +tax (free shipping)


yea apple hasn't lost their god damned minds ......

 

[cube]

Metal is very easy to work with. There is not that much need of optimization, because it is ALREADY optimized for Apple hardware. You still think that Hardware in Apple ecosystem is detached from the software. It isn't. Everybody will optimize for Metal, if they will want to be on Mac hardware.

OpenGL is portable and inexpensive.

Vulkan is portable and expensive.

Metal is nonportable and expensive.

 

[djcgeez2189]

OpenGL is portable and inexpensive.

Vulkan is portable and expensive.

Metal is nonportable and expensive.

not to mention Nvidia has better open GL performance right now than AMD

the problem lies with apple. they didnt want to pay for better performance and AMD will make anything for anyone willing to pay them so ofcourse their bid was significantly lower to make custom low power chips for apple.

hard to believe just 3 years ago mac had Nvidias top end gpus in their machines... now they want to go with cheap components and premium prices....

 

[koyoot]

OpenGL is portable and inexpensive.

Vulkan is portable and expensive.

Metal is nonportable and expensive.

And why would Apple care about it? You see, you are trying to turn everything upside down. I also love open initiatives, however this is Apple we are talking about. Apple creates their own rules to which others have to adapt.

not to mention Nvidia has better open GL performance right now than AMD

the problem lies with apple. they didnt want to pay for better performance and AMD will make anything for anyone willing to pay them so ofcourse their bid was significantly lower to make custom low power chips for apple.

hard to believe just 3 years ago mac had Nvidias top end gpus in their machines... now they want to go with cheap components and premium prices....

Have you seen the PSU for the Razer Blade computer? Have you seen that the GPU in question in that laptop has 125W power consumption, 38W higher than WHOLE MacBook Pro? And that it has 87W PSU?

Apple has co-engineered the GPUs with AMD, also.

 

[Feenician]

Have you seen the PSu for the Razer Blade computer? Have you seen that the GPU in question in that laptop has 125W power consumption, 38W higher than WHOLE MacBook Pro? And that it has 87W PSU?

Pfft! Leave facts out of this. That 8lb 17" gaming computer totally fits into the Macbook line and would surely have sold like hotcakes to Apple's target market /s

 

[djcgeez2189]

And why would Apple care about it? You see, you are trying to turn everything upside down. I also love open initiatives, however this is Apple we are talking about. Apple creates their own rules to which others have to adapt.

Have you seen the PSU for the Razer Blade computer? Have you seen that the GPU in question in that laptop has 125W power consumption, 38W higher than WHOLE MacBook Pro? And that it has 87W PSU?

Apple has co-engineered the GPUs with AMD, also.

and your point is... yea the brick is a little bigger but we are talking a significant knight and day difference in performance and its not even close and its LESS THAN THE MACBOOK.. why would you even buy this ??? i do photo, video, and music production and editing and its about performance per $ not about the size of the power brick
[doublepost=1477956185][/doublepost]

Pfft! Leave facts out of this. That 8lb 17" gaming computer totally fits into the Macbook line and would surely have sold like hotcakes to Apple's target market /s

and what target market is that? the ones that like to spend $4000 on a $1500 laptop???? yea great market
[doublepost=1477956445][/doublepost]to back my previous point about specs apple doesnt have to include a gtx 1080 because thats no their style and we are all well aware of that.. but you cant charge top dollar for a machine that is significantly weaker in ever aspect you can think of. its not about razer being a gaming laptop its about charging more for so so much less.

 

[koyoot]

and your point is... yea the brick is a little bigger but we are talking a significant knight and day difference in performance and its not even close and its LESS THAN THE MACBOOK.. why would you even buy this ??? i do photo, video, and music production and editing and its about performance per $ not about the size of the power brick

Because If I would be photographer that goes anywhere, I would take as low-power laptop as possible, with lowest possible weight, and highest possible performance. MacBook Pro serves that perfectly.

Secondly, If I would be photographer that earns money, I would definitely pick MacBook Pro for the image of the brand.

If Razer Blade in GTX 1080 version still uses the 165W PSU - then the GPU is heavily under clocked to fit thermally and energetically in that envelope. Otherwise the computer will not be able to be stable at load.

That Razer Blade weights 8 pounds.

 

[cube]

just sad on all levels from apple... this is the full embodiment of a rip off scam.. lets look at the numbers and let the specs speak for themselves

Apple Macbook pro 15
2.7 ghz i7 6700hq
16gb 2133 mhz LPDDR3 ram
4gb amd redeon pro 460
1tb flash storage
RETINA 2800x1880 221 ppi non touch HDR screen
1" 2170x60 resolution OLED 10 point multi touch touchbar (replaces function keys)
4x thunderbolt/usb-c connections
76watt-hour battery
.61 inches thick 4.02 ilbs weight
**no free software**
...........................................$$4,099 +tax/shipping

RAZER BLADE PRO
2.7 ghz i7 6700hq
32 gb 2133mhz DDR4 ram
8gb GDDR5x gtx 1080 desktop
2x 512gb samsung m.2 ssd in raid 0
4K IGZO 10 point multi touch screen with nvidia G-Sync tech
3x usb 3.0
card reader
2x thunderbolt/usb-c connections
99watt-hour battery (highest watt battery legally allowed on airplanes)
.88inches thick 8ilbs weight
** offers office 15 and FL studio free**
.........................................$$4,000 +tax (free shipping)


yea apple hasn't lost their god damned minds ......

Samsung 850 EVO 2TB: $650
64GiB DDR4 SODIMM RAM: $400

Lenovo ThinkPad P50: $3000
2.9 GHz Xeon E3-1535M v5 (quad core)
16GiB DDR4 SODIMM RAM (sell it)
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
512GB m.2 NVME SSD
4K 15" antiglare IPS LED display
3x USB 3.0
card reader
1x Thunderbolt 3
1x mini DisplayPort
1x HDMI
1x RJ45
dock connector
TPM
fingerprint sensor
Kengsington slot
Windows 10 Pro
90Wh battery
2.94cm thick, 2.67kg weight
.........................................$4,050

 

[djcgeez2189]

Because If I would be photographer that goes anywhere, I would take as low-power laptop as possible, with lowest possible weight, and highest possible performance. MacBook Pro serves that perfectly.

Secondly, If I would be photographer that earns money, I would definitely pick MacBook Pro for the image of the brand.

If Razer Blade in GTX 1080 version still uses the 165W PSU - then the GPU is heavily under clocked to fit thermally and energetically in that envelope. Otherwise the computer will not be able to be stable at load.

That Razer Blade weights 8 pounds.

you're missing the point too this is why apple gets away with their theivery because you accept their ridiculous marketing and pay there incredibly over prices junk....

i hate to use the same brand but look at the 14" razer blade as than less than 4ilb 3200x1800 multi touch gtx 1060 16gb 2133 mhz ddr4 ram 1tb ssd $2,699 + tax

.70 inches thick 4.3 ilbs significantly more powerful and its not even close and $400 cheaper

its about performance and what you get for what you spend.. and these macs are the absolute worst price to perfromance gaps i have ever seen them make.. and i was really excited for this release.

 

[koyoot]

Quadro M2000M is GM107 chip. The same that is in 120$ GPU: GTX 750 Ti.

you're missing the point too this is why apple gets away with their theivery because you accept their ridiculous marketing and pay there incredibly over prices junk....

i hate to use the same brand but look at the 14" razer blade as than less than 4ilb 3200x1800 multi touch gtx 1060 16gb 2133 mhz ddr4 ram 1tb ssd $2,699 + tax

.70 inches thick 4.3 ilbs significantly more powerful and its not even close and $400 cheaper

its about performance and what you get for what you spend.. and these macs are the absolute worst price to perfromance gaps i have ever seen them make.. and i was really excited for this release.

I love this. When you give arguments about some things, for people who appear to not care about image and earning money, only pure horsepower, you are being accused of...

If you like so much the Razer Blade go buy it. You will be happier with it. I do not understand why do you come to forums and cry how awful the MacBook Pro is.

 

[djcgeez2189]

Samsung 850 EVO 2TB: $650
64GiB DDR4 SODIMM RAM: $400

Lenovo ThinkPad P50: $3000
2.9 GHz Xeon E3-1535M v5 (quad core)
16GiB DDR4 SODIMM RAM (sell it)
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
512GB m.2 NVME SSD
4K 15" antiglare IPS LED display
3x USB 3.0
card reader
1x Thunderbolt 3
1x mini DisplayPort
1x HDMI
1x RJ45
dock connector
TPM
fingerprint sensor
Kengsington slot
Windows 10 Pro
90Wh battery
2.94cm thick, 2.67kg weight
.........................................$4,050

exactly my point and as a production laptop this is what i would say more than justified that price point... althought i dont know much about quadro graphics

 

[cube]

Quadro M2000M is GM107 chip. The same that is in 120$ GPU: GTX 750 Ti.

I don't care about that, but about ThinkPad, 64GiB, being able to put in a 4TB SSD beside the NVME, and eventually Xeon. This laptop came out over a year ago.

 

[dallas112678]

Quadro M2000M is GM107 chip. The same that is in 120$ GPU: GTX 750 Ti.

I love this. When you give arguments about some things, for people who appear to not care about image and earning money, only pure horsepower, you are being accused of...

If you like so much the Razer Blade go buy it. You will be happier with it. I do not understand why do you come to forums and cry how awful the MacBook Pro is.

Oh god, this brand image stuff is nonsense and is exactly why Apple is starting to lose out on the creative market. The people who brand image matters to the most is college students showing off their shiny new computer to their roommate. As a professional photographer, never have I lost a customer based off the computer I use, in fact they don't even know what I use or do they care.

What the customer cares about is the end product, and when they choose me, they do so because of what they see on my website (unikaphotography.com, in case you're interested).

If you take your laptops on shoots with you thats great, but the brand doesn't matter as you've already been hired. Trust me when I say if you lose a customer it's not because of the computer you use. So let's just throw away the whole "brand image" nonsense away, as it truly is nonsense.

I've always enjoyed Apple computers, however having 2x the graphics performance and 5-7 hours of battery life is more important than half the performance and 10 hours of battery life in a "pro" machine. You only realize the battery life increase in those cases where you're going somewhere for an extended period of time and can't plug in. You notice the lack of power ALL of the time whether you are plugged in or not.

 

[cube]

And why would Apple care about it? You see, you are trying to turn everything upside down. I also love open initiatives, however this is Apple we are talking about. Apple creates their own rules to which others have to adapt.

They should care because then some businesses will just not buy Macs.

 

[thornslack]

If you really love hardware and performance, you're probably on a PC.

 

[Maxx Power]

If you really love hardware and performance, you're probably on a PC.

I agree. PCs are more like sports cars or muscle cars - you can tinker with them as you desire and change parts on them. These Macbook Pros are more like German luxury cars - not focused around pure performance but other aspects of overall experience.

 

[dallas112678]

I agree. PCs are more like sports cars or muscle cars - you can tinker with them as you desire and change parts on them. These Macbook Pros are more like German luxury cars - not focused around pure performance but other aspects of overall experience.

I'm pretty sure German luxury brands also create and market very high performance cars that actually have that very high performance unlike the new MBP. Maybe a different analogy is required.

 

[Maxx Power]

I'm pretty sure German luxury brands also create and market very high performance cars that actually have that very high performance unlike the new MBP. Maybe a different analogy is required.

I don't feel that way. Apple is not obligated to do what German luxury car makers do (and a few of them, not all) - Apple does not have to create products for every niche. If Apple feels like designing luxury computers that are not sports cars, so be it. The other way around is nice too, but not up to me. Why do you feel that Apple MUST make your definition of "high performance" computers ?

 

[WolfSnap]

**no free software**

Wtf? No free software? Buy a Mac, and you don't need to buy software. Pcs require hundreds of dollars in software to make them useful.

Pages, numbers, keynote, garage band, photos, imovie, etc.. all free..

Office 2015 is in the form of a trial. It's $99/year for it. Plus antivirus, antimalware, winzip, etc.. all costs money...