From seeing all the benchmarks, I'm going to say this is a good dGPU right? or has everyone decided it's either mediocre or sucks? ha ha
Kal.
Kal.
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.
CINEBENCH! AMD Radeon R9 M370X
- Thread starter admanne
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, or a refurb 2014. I have a 13" rMBP from last year with a MP SSD installed (900MBs/900MBs) and I am very happy with it.
That is quite good for a rebadge.
A bit, but 6760m->6770m->650m->750m->m370x is pretty flat compared to advancements in the Windows PC world. I was eager to get one, less so now because my Y50 is better for gaming.
To me the scores are pretty amazing! But hey everyone wants to complain about something.........
It's not worth it in a premium PC. It's only about 70% as fast as the 960m that most people were expecting it to have. Half as fast as the 970m in the similarly sized Raxzer Blade.
Arghh could've gotten a brand new 2014 rmbp 15 512gb 750m for <$2100 shipped on clearance from best buy before they ran out. Now even adorama is sold out.... I guess I'll be waiting for another year for skylake. I hope either AMD 14nm gpus are out by then or Apple gets some sense and puts a maxwell in it, not a rebadged 3 year old gpu.
For gaming or professional use (Adobe Ill. Lightroom, Final Cut Pro, iMovie etc, etc?) I think people expecting the Pro to be a a huge gaming laptop is kind of odd, I have NEVER heard Apple even mention something like: "you'll love the added GPU power for gaming the best games out there." They only ever mention using it for work, photography, productivity, and stuff of that sort.
So in my eyes the new AMD processor is really quite amazing, it obliterates the 750M and apparently is just slightly below the dGPU that you all seem almost obsessed about having. If you want that particular dGPU then why don't you go buy a laptop or desktop with it and stop expecting Apple to read your minds about what you want exactly? They are aiming towards the crowd who do more video and photograpy work on this machine so putting the latest greatest GPU in for gaming would be actually out of character IMO.
No offense intended BTW, I am just confused why so many complain about something they can just get on a different machine... and one that is a Windows (which most use VM or parallels anyway for Macs to play them,) so cut out the middle man (Apple) and just buy a Windows PC with the dGPU you want... problem solved.
Kal.
Well, this time there was no main processor to update it with. Appel can't just pull a non-existing CPU out of its sleeve. I guess, the proper way to look at the 2015 15" is like this — you pay the same price but get a 2x faster SSD and 30-50% faster GPU. Which is definitively not terrible and less what we get with a MacBook update on average.
----------
Its not really about putting the latest and greatest computer for gaming... its about using the best technology you can. It is a fact that Nvidia's current GPUs use half as much power while delivering superior performance — both for professional workflows and gaming. And they cost the same. So for a compact laptop like the MBP, the Maxwell GPUs are the best possible choice. Last few years Apple was indeed putting the best available GPU in the 40-45W class into their laptops, so its disappointing to see that they have chosen an inferior hardware option this time.
All in all, I think the upgrade is good. I am definitively getting the 2015 as replacement for my 2012 rMBP. But it does comes short of expectations (realistic expectations, to be clear).
Every release of new MBPs the board is filled with disappointed gamers. You'd think they'd get the hint after years and years that it's not a gaming laptop.
Looking forward to the improvements the dGPU and SSD will bring for lightroom, photoshop, and final cut for me.
Looking forward to the improvements the dGPU and SSD will bring for lightroom, photoshop, and final cut for me.
Every release of new MBPs the board is filled with disappointed gamers. You'd think they'd get the hint after years and years that it's not a gaming laptop.
Looking forward to the improvements the dGPU and SSD will bring for lightroom, photoshop, and final cut for me.
Well, I can't really afford two computers, and since I locked in Apple hardware for work, it would be nice if they released on that I can play on it...
But I'm not complaining that much, at least the card is faster then 750m, so for me it's an improvement.
Every release of new MBPs the board is filled with disappointed gamers. You'd think they'd get the hint after years and years that it's not a gaming laptop.
That comment is a bit one-sided. If you are concerned about image/video editing, then you should also be disappointed that they didn't go with the Nvidia GPU. It would be another 25-50% faster in compute tasks.
Not really. My post was poking fun at the year-after-year misguided expectations of some users on here. I said nothing about my preference
Truth is... I think we need to wait for a good video that shows the render times, load times, and actual usage of the new GPU before deciding it's a disappointment. And isn't it true the scores are not exactly accurate since Nvidia and AMD use different technologies, so trying to compare them in benchmarks is actually kind of pointless or inaccurate?
I mean people can compare them if they want, but I feel real world usage is where you'll notice the differences, the benchmarks just throw out some numbers but at the end of the day what does that really mean? For instance many people (myself included weren't too fond of the GT 750M) yet it could game at 60 fps on medium-high settings on many games, so that would make it a fairly good card right? So if this AMD is actually "70-80% faster" than the 750... then that is great. So we are talking 80-90 fps on medium settings or 70 fps on max settings, or am I totally wrong in my terrible math skills? lol
Kal.
I mean people can compare them if they want, but I feel real world usage is where you'll notice the differences, the benchmarks just throw out some numbers but at the end of the day what does that really mean? For instance many people (myself included weren't too fond of the GT 750M) yet it could game at 60 fps on medium-high settings on many games, so that would make it a fairly good card right? So if this AMD is actually "70-80% faster" than the 750... then that is great. So we are talking 80-90 fps on medium settings or 70 fps on max settings, or am I totally wrong in my terrible math skills? lol
Kal.
Not really. My post was poking fun at the year-after-year misguided expectations of some users on here. I said nothing about my preference
I don't think there is anything wrong with expecting best-in class hardware, within reasonable limits of course. I also think its ridiculous that some people were expecting cards like 960m/970m in the MBP, that would never happen, their TDP is just too high. But 950M would have been absolutely reasonable. Anyway, we got what we got, and while its slightly dissipating, its still a solid upgrade.
Your point about using less power with superior performance is accurate (half the power is a slight stretch). But the 970m and 980m do not cost the same, they are very expensive GPUs. You can actually find the prices on those Chinese sites that sell parts, I just had a quick look.
Yep, its pretty clear Apple is phasing Nvidia out of all their computers. Starting with the 2013 Mac Pro, every machine introduced with new tech thats not intel GPUs has been AMD. Apple probably gets them at a discount with improved OpenGL and OpenCL performance. Thats been true for the Mac Pro, Retina iMac and now the macbook pro. The only machines left with Nvidia are the bottom tier iMac, which is only a matter of time before they get swapped out for new retina versions with AMD.
Definitely waiting for Skylake and a potential case refresh. Apple should've dropped the price a little for this ageing model (SSD aside).
This case is nearly 3 years old now. It's way too expensive with Skylake 9 months away. I think Q1 next year Skylake will permit a case trimming.
I also want a better screen with 100%+ sRGB.
This case is nearly 3 years old now. It's way too expensive with Skylake 9 months away. I think Q1 next year Skylake will permit a case trimming.
I also want a better screen with 100%+ sRGB.
I think most people expected the 950m, not the 960m. And there was 0 chance the 970m was happening.
----------
This is probably the only negative. New CPUs are not available, and the GPU seems like a standard Apple move. But the prices, 950m or AMD equivalent, are way to high for what you get.
Hey guys, I'll be around tomorrow for a few more benchmarks. I think some gaming benchmarks would be helpful, as we have some conflicting results. Fire strike shows a 24% gain, but 3DMark11 shows a 60% improvement. Tomorrow morning I will run the full 3DMark suite and provide the Cloudgate and Ice Storm tests on both machines.
There is no doubt that overall, its a decent upgrade. I am booting OS X in 6 seconds, same as I was booting Windows. So the SSD 4x PCIE upgrade is pretty big by itself.
Lets come up with a short list of games that I can install on both the 750m and the 370x, and preferably ones that have built in performance tests. This would add to our data collection.
For those looking for more on WOW performance, I did run it but it was somewhat subjective. I need to do some more testing tomorrow, and try to come up with some areas in the game to consistently test the same conditions on both machines.
There is no doubt that overall, its a decent upgrade. I am booting OS X in 6 seconds, same as I was booting Windows. So the SSD 4x PCIE upgrade is pretty big by itself.
Lets come up with a short list of games that I can install on both the 750m and the 370x, and preferably ones that have built in performance tests. This would add to our data collection.
For those looking for more on WOW performance, I did run it but it was somewhat subjective. I need to do some more testing tomorrow, and try to come up with some areas in the game to consistently test the same conditions on both machines.
I was curious, so I went ahead and ran full 3DMark Suite tests on both machines. Some interesting findings, pay attention to the graphics scores:
3DMark Suite 750M
3DMark Suite M370X
3DMark Suite 750M
3DMark Suite M370X
When did you order? Mine was slated to be delivered on this coming Monday. But it was delivered early today. (And I was out of town since I wasn't expecting it!) luckily they didn't leave it
I think all that matters really is how fast this is relative to the 950m.
Anything higher than that (960, whatever) was unrealistic to begin with.
So, the only thing that matters is 3dmark or some other GPU benchmarks (done in WINDOWS, not OS X) vs a 950m.
Anything higher than that (960, whatever) was unrealistic to begin with.
So, the only thing that matters is 3dmark or some other GPU benchmarks (done in WINDOWS, not OS X) vs a 950m.