New MacBook Pro's Dedicated AMD Graphics Chips Are 'Significantly' Faster and Support Dual 5K Displays

[MacRumors]

Apple dropped Intel's integrated Iris Pro graphics in favor of dedicated AMD graphics across its entire new 15-inch MacBook Pro lineup, resulting in performance improvements over previous models. Perhaps more interestingly, the switch to AMD provides expanded external display support that desktop users have patiently waited for.

As Andrew Cunningham at Ars Technica explains, AMD's Polaris-based Radeon Pro 450, Radeon Pro 455, and built-to-order Radeon Pro 460 GPUs in the new 15-inch MacBook Pro support up to six displays, whereas Intel's integrated GPUs affixed to the logic board can drive a total of three displays.

The expanded support enables the new MacBook Pro to drive two of Apple and LG's new UltraFine 5K displays at 60Hz simultaneously. Intel's GPUs can't because, due to bandwidth limitations of the DisplayPort 1.2 spec, the two 5K displays technically function as four displays. This method is known as Multi-Stream Transport (MST).

When you hook one of LG's 5K monitors to one of the new MacBook Pros, what you're actually seeing on the screen is two pictures stitched together to make a single seamless image. This is because the version of the DisplayPort spec supported by Intel's GPUs and almost all monitors these days--version 1.2--doesn't have enough bandwidth to drive a 5K display at 60Hz all by itself. [...] Apple is actually pushing two DisplayPort 1.2 streams to the monitor over the single Thunderbolt 3 cable.

There's nothing wrong with this method, except that it cuts down on the number of external displays your computer can support. Intel's integrated GPUs can drive a total of three displays, but you use up two of those three streams to drive one 5K monitor and one of them to drive the laptop's internal display. AMD's GPUs support up to six displays, so you can use two of those connections for one 5K monitor, two of them for the other 5K monitor, one for the laptop's internal display, and still have one left over for yet another monitor if you really wanted to use one.

Apple could have used Nvidia's faster Pascal-based GPUs, which support DisplayPort 1.3, but Thunderbolt 3 and most monitors do not support the higher-bandwidth spec yet. In the meantime, Nvidia's GPUs can only drive up to three displays beyond the main MacBook Pro screen -- not enough for dual 5K displays over MST.

Apple will have more flexibility again when DisplayPort 1.3 becomes more common. Those future laptops will be able to drive two 5K screens plus a laptop's internal screen using just three DisplayPort streams instead of five. For now, though, if pushing two high-end 5K screens at once was a design goal for Apple, AMD was the only way to go.

In terms of performance improvements, Cunningham benchmarked the mid-range 2.7GHz 15-inch MacBook Pro with the Radeon Pro 455 graphics chip to determine just how much faster the notebook truly is compared to the 2016 12-inch MacBook and older MacBook Pros released over the past few years.

He found the Radeon Pro 455 to be a "significant boost" over the built-to-order dedicated GPUs available in the 2012-2015 MacBook Pro models, namely the Nvidia GeForce GTX 650M, Nvidia GeForce GTX 750M, and AMD Radeon R9 M370X respectively, but said the new MacBook Pro remains unsuitable for high-end gaming and VR.

Is it disappointing that Apple didn't decide to push the envelope a little more? Sure. Is it too bad that performance and power efficiency were apparently sacrificed in the name of external display support? Yes. Are these midrange GPUs in any way inconsistent with any MacBook Pro released in the last decade? No.

Apple officially says the 15-inch MacBook Pro offers up to 130% faster graphics performance, and up to 2.5x more computing power per watt, compared to the previous-generation 15-inch MacBook Pro, but those stats are based on the built-to-order Radeon Pro 460 chip that costs between $100 and $200 extra.

Article Link: New MacBook Pro's Dedicated AMD Graphics Chips Are 'Significantly' Faster and Support Dual 5K Displays

 

[Faltek]

How fast is the 460??

 

[avanpelt]

Ok, so we'll add this "pro" to the list of cons.

 

[Crosscreek]

460 is a budget GPU.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

I am ready to spend $4,500 on a maxed out model after hearing this.

 

[pgiguere1]

Crazy how the Radeon Pro 455 is barely faster than the Iris integrated graphics.

Wouldn't Iris Pro graphics be just as fast, if not faster than a Radeon Pro 450 then? Makes me wonder why they'd waste money/battery life on discrete graphics if they don't really provide anything on the base model.

 

[Pez555]

whats that? some good news about the new macbooks? I dont believe it.

 

[iChrist]

Apple pumped up the price by $500 USD. You are only paying for the new form factor, not really a practical improvement in performance. If the form factor is worth that much to you then fine.

 

[RumorConsumer]

Waiting for a benchmark on that 2.9ghz beast.

 

[jclardy]

Crazy how the Radeon Pro 455 is barely faster than the Iris integrated graphics.

I'm curious now how it would compare to an intel chip with Iris Pro graphics.

 

[MrGimper]

The bump in performance on the Iris 540 and 550 over the 6100 is the most interesting part of this really.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

Well it's good news.

 

[My iPhone3G]

Such a significant boost that it was slower than what the article said was faster! It's like they didn't even read their own graph.

 

[ljjycss]

Crazy how the Radeon Pro 455 is barely faster than the Iris integrated graphics.

That's onscreen test. In offscreen test Radeon Pro is much faster than previous gpu. According to Ars Technica, 2016 Macbook Pro is rendering at 3360x2100 by default instead of 2880x1800.

Offscreen:

 

[jamesrp]

He found the Radeon Pro 455 to be a "significant boost" over the built-to-order dedicated GPUs available in the 2012-2015 MacBook Pro models, namely the Nvidia GeForce GTX 650M, Nvidia GeForce GTX 750M, and AMD Radeon R9 M370X respectively

That graph seems to show the 2015 AMD Radeon R9 M370X is faster than the 2016 cards. So which is it a significant boost or not?

 

[rx7dude]

Glad to read my 2015 MBP is faster than the new 2016 MBP

 

[pat500000]

Need rx 480 and hopefully nmp comes out.

 

[25ghosts]

The way this is going for Apple, is going to cause the Mid-2015-MBP used-prices to sky-rocket !

 

[DevNull0]

Just for a little perspective, the GTX 1080 does T-Rex at 1190fps (windows and DirectX).

I still don't really know why supporting a certain number of displays is supposed to mean anything when you don't have the GPU power to do much more than light the pixels.

Even the GTX 1060 can do 72.3 gigapixelx/second. If you're driving 5k screens at 60Hz, that translates to 80 5k screens you can drive from a GTX 1060. Most people who care about performance seem to think that GTX 1060 is pretty marginal for a single 4k screen.

 

[Faltek]

Anyone have a link to a 460 benchmark?

 

[djcerla]

But... but... Pro something

 

[manu chao]

Crazy how the Radeon Pro 455 is barely faster than the Iris integrated graphics.

Wouldn't Iris Pro graphics be just as fast, if not faster than a Radeon Pro 450 then? Makes me wonder why they'd waste money/battery life on discrete graphics if they don't really provide anything on the base model.

To allow you to have 'six' displays (aka two 5K + two smaller or one 5K and four smaller) whereas the Iris Pro would only allow you to have 'three' displays (aka one 5K + one smaller).

 

[oneMadRssn]

Crazy how the Radeon Pro 455 is barely faster than the Iris integrated graphics.

Wouldn't Iris Pro graphics be just as fast, if not faster than a Radeon Pro 450 then? Makes me wonder why they'd waste money/battery life on discrete graphics if they don't really provide anything on the base model.

I think the idea in selecting the GPU here was the ability to drive multiple 5K displays, and not exact rendering speed. The Intel Pro can't run two 5K displays simultaneously.

 

[keysofanxiety]

Just for a little perspective, the GTX 1080 does T-Rex at 1190fps (windows and DirectX).

How is that perspective? It's a desktop GPU. Unless you're talking about the 1080M, in which case you're looking at a laptop that's only portable on wheels.

And just for perspective, the 2012 Cray Titan outFLOPs a dual Xeon workstation.

 

[ilikewhey]

no **** sherlock of course its a significant boost compared to old 28nm technology. stack the 455 or 460 against any "current" gen gpu tech and its literally the bottom of the crap barrel.
[doublepost=1479149816][/doublepost]

How is that perspective? It's a desktop GPU. Unless you're talking about the 1080M, in which case you're looking at a laptop that's only portable on wheels.

And just for perspective, the 2012 Cray Titan outFLOPs a dual Xeon workstation.

there is no 1080m all current gen laptop have desktop gpu in them. since the 16nm gpu is efficient enough to be not cut back like all the previous gen. so hes not wrong when he say to put in perspective.