Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

thelnnovator

macrumors member
Original poster
Sep 15, 2014
35
17
Which video card is going to be better for gaming:

iMac - Radeon Pro 5700 XT with 16GB of GDDR6 memory
16" MBP - AMD Radeon Pro 5600M with 8GB of HBM2 memory


Debating which machine to get. It's not primarily for gaming, I use the Mac for Design, Video Stuff, General, Coding, Etc...

But I do game, especially in Bootcamp. I've seen some video about the new card in the 16" MBP that is fantastic for gaming and wondering how the iMac card does with Gaming.

Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluefinTuna
I put together the specs for the whole AMD Pro 5000-series in MBP/iMac/Mac Pro for comparison. I also included specs for RX cards that pc users buy or you can use as eGPU with Mac. Many tests on Youtube for example show the result for RX cards which are faster than Pro cards in Macs. The specs are from AMD's website.


5300 in iMac is like 5500M in MBP in terms of TFLOPS. 5500XT is like 5600M in MBP. The more I think of it the more disappointed I feel about the GPU options in these new iMacs. I'm not even a serious gamer, but a casual gamer that plays games even with 20 fps with my iMac 2011 Radeon 6750 512MB, but as it is now the only option for us that want to buy a decent and somewhat future proof gaming Mac is to spend 3500-3800 dollars (in Sweden) on a iMac 27" with Radeon 5700/5700XT.

Radeon 5300 is the worst card in the 5000-series. You can't even buy it in the retail stores or from AMD. You can't even now pay a bit extra to get a better GPU like 575X vs 570X. You can't even choose storage size for the first 27" model. You're stuck with 256GB. You must go all the way up to the top model to get 5500XT, the cheapest and most underpowered GPU in the 5000-series on the market which manages about 40-50 fps in 1440p TODAY. That for ca $3100!

I think this update is one of the worst with least options for those without a pocket full of money. Instead of giving 5300 to iMac 21.5" they gave it to 27" and didn't do a thing with 21.5". The base 27” should start with 5500XT. There would still be several options for the other models. For example, what happened to 5600 and 5600XT? Tier 2 iMac 27” could have 5600 and the top 27” could start with 5600XT, with 5700 and 5700XT as option. Or it could be like 5500XT, 5600XT and 5700 with 5700XT as BTO, but 5300 in both cheaper models?

My only hope now is that Apple gets its act together and at least offers decent GPUs in AS iMacs. Btw, don’t put your money on the 10-core i9 for gaming. Better to buy the 8-core with higher base frequency.

Skärmavbild 2020-08-05 kl. 05.01.07.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rashy and Tankmaze
You're stuck with 256GB. You must go all the way up to the top model to get 5500XT, the cheapest and most underpowered GPU in the 5000-series on the market which manages about 40-50 fps in 1440p TODAY. That for ca $3100!
Some years, the value proposition of Apple macs turns out to be at least somewhat reasonable. In other years, they like to charge for the privilege of taking our money. Case in Point: the mac pro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Homy
My only hope now is that Apple gets its act together and at least offers decent GPUs in AS iMacs
It will be about 5700XT vs Apple Silicon iGpu
If Apple can reach the same performance at least from the start with this 5700XT it will be huge
 
It will be about 5700XT vs Apple Silicon iGpu
If Apple can reach the same performance at least from the start with this 5700XT it will be huge
I really hoped so but after this release I wouldn't be surprised if Apple decided to play cheap and disappoint us again.
 
looks like the 5700XT is a improvement on the 5600M, though the imac's increased resolution may eat up some of those improvements.

Gaming in 5k makes little sense. Reduce the resolution to 1440p (that's exactly one fourth of the pixels of 5k).
 

(contains a table of specs)


looks like the 5700XT is a improvement on the 5600M, though the imac's increased resolution may eat up some of those improvements.

Is that negated by the fact that I run my MBP on an external 4k monitor. Since it has to push those pixels, that does hinder the performance?
 
Well, if you set the ingame resolution to 4k, and your 5600m is capable of running the game at a playable framerate, the 5700XT would have to be at least 25--30 percent faster to run the game at 5k, at a playable framerate...
 
5500XT is actually similar to 580X. Here you can see that RX 5500XT performs the same as RX 580 in some games and a little better in other games. So not much improvement over the past three years. 5700 should be standard on the top model. You never know with Apple though. They may have clocked 5500XT in such a way that it appears to be faster than 580X.
 
Today you will always need a portable computer, then a desktop. Get the MBP first and then get an extra monitor for the desk.
 
I really hoped so but after this release I wouldn't be surprised if Apple decided to play cheap and disappoint us again.
it will be very strange, and i think at first...for apple to make a step backwards on performance...si expect same performance or better.They already know what they will put in the next year imac...so if Apple couldnt match at least the 5700XT..i bet they didnt include it as an option for this imac
[automerge]1596691043[/automerge]
 
  • Like
Reactions: Homy
Well, if you set the ingame resolution to 4k, and your 5600m is capable of running the game at a playable framerate, the 5700XT would have to be at least 25--30 percent faster to run the game at 5k, at a playable framerate...
But 5K resolution is 60% more than 4K
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.