It depends on what the MacBook will be used for. If you don't need the better gnu, there's no need to spend money on it.
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.
Are they any Radeon Pro 460 benchmarks out yet?
- Thread starter drvelocity
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It depends on what the MacBook will be used for. If you don't need the better gnu, there's no need to spend money on it.
What if you do not need that extra GPU Power? Or plug eGPU in if you are going to need it?
For me the best 15" MBP would have had an Intel Iris 550 or 580 if possible. I really do not need that dGPU.
So I guess it depends pretty much of the usage if you should upgrade to the 460.
Anyways, I guess you are right. Its the most affordable BTO upgrade.
Yep, you're right. But I guess if you don't need GPU power, the 2015 MacBook Pro could be a better deal, specially if you don't value the Touch Bar and don't want to struggle with dongles.
Just my two cents of course.
I went with the 2015 refurb. I like GPU power but the difference isn't worth $1000.
This is the thing. More than anything else, graphics, in general, is what separates this model from previous iterations. Better screen and much, much better GPU, and a touchbar that's only particuarly useful as an image editing tool. The smallness and design is nice of course, but the real reason to buy this machine is if your work involves creating visual art.
Ars wrote that between a 455 and the 370, there is a 30% gap in performance in favor of the 455 in OpenCL. We can except at last a 50% increase performance with the 460 in OpenCL.
From what I've seen shared by people, in OpenCL it looks like
460: ~59000
370x: ~37800
So I think it's like 65% faster or something like that. Don't quote me tho !
True, and you can add faster ram (30%) and faster SSD. Final Cut Pro X users that needs/wants a laptop should love this upgrade, methinks.
True, and you can add faster ram (30%) and faster SSD. Final Cut Pro X users that needs/wants a laptop should love this upgrade, methinks.
Yes – now I can have one machine for everything and dock it at home on my desk, rather than having a laptop for on the go and a desktop for Adobe CC + FCPX.
If FCP X seems to work very well with this new MacBook Pro 15, it remain to be seen with Premiere (The Verge review seemed disappointing in that matter).
I'm gonna need to sale my editing machine - a 2014 27 iMac maxed out - for a "transportable" solution (one of my 2017 project requires mobility) and I would love a machine capable of doing desktop and mobile work at once. I'm not yet sure the MacBook Pro maxed out is the perfect solution so far.
The 15" MBPs have Intel i7-6700HQ/6820HQ/6920 CPUs, which include the slower HD 530. The reason may be that the 15" MBPs contain a discreet AMD GPU, and can switch to that if necessary.
The 13" MBPs have Intel CPUs with the faster Iris 540/550, presumably because there is no option for a discreet GPU.
Fastest 13" CPU:
http://ark.intel.com/products/91167/Intel-Core-i7-6567U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz
Fastest 15" CPU:
http://ark.intel.com/products/88972/Intel-Core-i7-6920HQ-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz
A comparison from one site; others may differ:
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compar...s-Intel-HD-530-Mobile-Skylake/m129148vsm34955
Edit: This difference was noted by Anandtech in their review; the observation was not my own.
The 13" MBPs have Intel CPUs with the faster Iris 540/550, presumably because there is no option for a discreet GPU.
Fastest 13" CPU:
http://ark.intel.com/products/91167/Intel-Core-i7-6567U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz
Fastest 15" CPU:
http://ark.intel.com/products/88972/Intel-Core-i7-6920HQ-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz
A comparison from one site; others may differ:
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compar...s-Intel-HD-530-Mobile-Skylake/m129148vsm34955
Edit: This difference was noted by Anandtech in their review; the observation was not my own.
Last edited:
Yeah, honestly I think we're a way off Premiere performing on mobile systems. To be determined in testing, but the hardware integration Apple's done with FCPX is probably the only thing right now making it feasible to actually edit video on a laptop. Crazy to think we're even talking about that – editing 4K on a lappy. Oh how tech has changed!
I just keep getting flashbacks to 5 years ago when there was a legitimate debate as to whether it was possible to edit video on an iMac. Now we're talking about MacBooks!
its vice versa, because Apple couldn't put the HD 580 they were obligate to have a dGPU in all models. Because in the past you still could have iris pro+dGPU if you wanted to
BTW, Iris Pro scores around 26k in Geekbench compute:
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/compute/230166
I get similar result running it on my MBP.
Ok, so guys, I need some advice please.
Because of all the fun with official retailers and not having Apple Store deliveries in my country I can get either the 455 - OR - get the 460 for 300e more (I would have to go through a different retailer for the BTO option - I don't want to get into it, it doesn't matter)! If it was a 100e, I'd get it for sure - but do you think the 460 vs 455 is worth 300e difference?
Thanks.
Because of all the fun with official retailers and not having Apple Store deliveries in my country I can get either the 455 - OR - get the 460 for 300e more (I would have to go through a different retailer for the BTO option - I don't want to get into it, it doesn't matter)! If it was a 100e, I'd get it for sure - but do you think the 460 vs 455 is worth 300e difference?
Thanks.
Has anyone compared benchmark scores of the different CPU configurations? I ask because I wanted to get the 2.9GHz option with the Radeon 460 graphics, but seeing as the SSD isn't removable, I'm considering just getting the 2.6GHz or 2.7GHz and bigger storage instead...
As I said, specific case here. It should be 100e difference, but not here
Yea, I'm guessing 455 will be fine.
litte reminder... the ps4 pro cost almost the same as your little little upgrade from 455 to 460
The nvidia cards (for mobile) have insane TDPs' though.
The Radeon Pro 460 is a 35W card that's performing 4% slower than a GTX 965m (75W TDP).
GTX 1050m supposedly will have a 80W TDP
GTX 1060m has a 105 W TDP
GTX 1070m has a 130 W TDP
GTX 1080m has a 150W TDP
There is no way apple could cram any recent Nvidia card into the MacBook Pro and have it *not* melt.
You're getting **double** the performance/watt thanks to Polaris, and frankly, these are the best cards to ever be in a MacBook Pro.
[doublepost=1479235724][/doublepost]
Shows that you dont know what you're talking about. Apple reduced the GPU from 50W TDP to 35W TDP. they have plenty of room for a slightly warmer CPU.
This is definitely intel's fault for pursuing more power efficient CPUs.
The Radeon Pro 460 is a 35W card that's performing 4% slower than a GTX 965m (75W TDP).
GTX 1050m supposedly will have a 80W TDP
GTX 1060m has a 105 W TDP
GTX 1070m has a 130 W TDP
GTX 1080m has a 150W TDP
There is no way apple could cram any recent Nvidia card into the MacBook Pro and have it *not* melt.
You're getting **double** the performance/watt thanks to Polaris, and frankly, these are the best cards to ever be in a MacBook Pro.
[doublepost=1479235724][/doublepost]
Shows that you dont know what you're talking about. Apple reduced the GPU from 50W TDP to 35W TDP. they have plenty of room for a slightly warmer CPU.
This is definitely intel's fault for pursuing more power efficient CPUs.
Probably more like 40-50W. The 965M already has the TDP of 60-70W, there is no chance that Pascal is warmer than that. But all in all, I don't think that the mobile 1050 will be substantially faster than the Pro 460. Maybe few percent here and there, at best. And one also shouldn't forget that AMD cards perform really well with next-gen APIs such as DX12, Vulkan (and most likely Metal), so the AMD choice might have been indeed the best one.
Sure they could - if they only weren't so obsessed with thinness!
Examples...
https://liliputing.com/2016/08/giga...-gaming-laptops-nvidia-gtx-1060-graphics.html
Every shortcoming and criticism of the new MBP can be easily overcome if it weren't for the utter obsession with thin and light. 1 more lb of weight and a bit more thickness would have made it into the MacBook PRO, not MacBook ProLight that it is now. Oh and hey - 32GB? No problem for others.