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

Radeon Pro 555X vs 560X

retailacc

retailacc

macrumors member
Original poster
Jun 19, 2017
41
23
Boston, MA
Hello guys,

I'm a student so with the discount it's a $90 upgrade. Worth it?
Some my usage that makes use of the GPU includes but not limited to:
  • Final Cut Pro X
    • very very little use of Apple Motion
  • Affinity Photo
  • Very casual Fortnite (I promise it's just casual)
  • Very not-so-casual X-Plane 11
So $90 might not seem like a lot in a $2300 laptop but if we're talking about a negligible 1% upgrade, then I would happily save my money.

Thank you in advance!
 
fokmik said:
Since now both have 4 gb vRam..i think you are good with 555X
Click to expand...
Yeah I’d agree, the 4GB VRAM was probably the biggest reason to update - the difference in performance won’t be Earth shattering either way.
 
unlogic said:
Could you share the 555X and 560X specs? I could not find the info anywhere.
Click to expand...

I think we are all just assuming that they are slightly overclocked versions of the older GPUs, so you can google and compare the Radeon Pro 555 and 560 on Notebookcheck. As far as I know, a lot of other entry to mid-tier gaming laptops using AMD graphics are using the 560X, which has clocks close to the desktop version, and comes close to a laptop GTX 1050 in terms of benchmarks, between the 1050 and 1050 Ti in certain situations (Doom) as far as average FPS goes. Clearly good enough for casual play at Medium settings @ 1080p for most titles on Bootcamp.
 
Go with slightly more than the minimum that suits you, because 5-6 years down the line, it will be time for another upgrade anyway. Save that $90 and treat yourself over the purchase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Precursor
I think this year's more expensive base model (via the edu store) is actually worth it. With the student discount it's only $300 more than the cheaper base model and you get a cpu/gpu/storage upgrade. And since you're video editing you would actually be able to take advantage of the speed before throttling kicks in. With the exception of encoding of obviously.

But overall it's still an eye watering 2.7k.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhturner and macintoshmac
unlogic said:
Could you share the 555X and 560X specs? I could not find the info anywhere.
Click to expand...

I don't think they are available anywhere. But its the same GPU as 555 vs 560, maybe with slightly higher clocks.
 
padams35 said:
Worse. They are the same identical card. Maybe Apple's are different, but the rumor I heard was that the 'X' is market speak for 'OEM promise this card ships with the updated drivers.' https://www.pcworld.com/article/326...s/amd-radeon-rx-500x-series-graphics-gpu.html
Click to expand...
560 was just a renamed 460 without any clock speed changes and now we can expect 560X will be same as 560. We are stuck with the same GPU for 3 years:(

When 460 was released back in 2016, it was quite impressive (35W TDP with acceptable good performance). But nowadays, NVIDIA has better performance per watts.
 
unlogic said:
When 460 was released back in 2016, it was quite impressive (35W TDP with acceptable good performance). But nowadays, NVIDIA has better performance per watts.
Click to expand...

Nvidia hasn't released a new GPU in 2.5 years now... Their performance per watt is the same as in 2016. Actually, their strategy up to now is sell underclocked GPUs (which their marketing department calls "max-Q").
 
leman said:
Nvidia hasn't released a new GPU in 2.5 years now... Their performance per watt is the same as in 2016. Actually, their strategy up to now is sell underclocked GPUs (which their marketing department calls "max-Q").
Click to expand...
Oddly enough in the below 50 watt TDP range AMD is actually decent (except their Bootcamp drivers stink), it isn’t until you get to the 1060 Max Q range and above is when Nvidia begins to really pull away in power/performance.
 
Agenesis said:
I think this year's more expensive base model (via the edu store) is actually worth it. With the student discount it's only $300 more than the cheaper base model and you get a cpu/gpu/storage upgrade. And since you're video editing you would actually be able to take advantage of the speed before throttling kicks in. With the exception of encoding of obviously.

But overall it's still an eye watering 2.7k.
Click to expand...
“Only 300 more” for a student that’s not an “only.” I’m a student in the market and I’ll be getting the cheaper base model. If I want better graphics, I’ll get a case for my GTX 970 and use eGPU. It’s easy to start saying “it’s only $90 more, it’s only $100 more,” and soon enough you’re at a configuration that’s $700 more than when you started!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crunch and Hitrate
Tapiture said:
“Only 300 more” for a student that’s not an “only.” I’m a student in the market and I’ll be getting the cheaper base model. If I want better graphics, I’ll get a case for my GTX 970 and use eGPU. It’s easy to start saying “it’s only $90 more, it’s only $100 more,” and soon enough you’re at a configuration that’s $700 more than when you started!
Click to expand...
Whatever makes you happy. The base 15 is already 2350 after taxes, right up there with the most expensive flagship gaming laptops like the razer blade. I think you're already well beyond the point compromise.

Like I said I would never dream of spending 2.7k on a laptop, yet here I am because it's only a few hundred dollars more. In the long run the little extra won't mean much and I won't have that itching thought on the back of my head that I could've gotten a bit more for a few hundred. Storage especially, because I hate babysitting and managing it. 512gb is a good point where if it fills up I know I've been neglecting housekeeping. 256gb goes extremely quick when once you install a few Adobe programs, bootcamp with one or two games, and whatever garbage I download.

I''m only saying this because I got a credit card with a $750 bonus after spending $3000. 2k is my upper mental limit without going into the doubt/buyers remorse territory.

So perhaps look into that as well. Capital one venture offers a $500 after $3000 spend. For hitting the remaining you can buy some visa gift cards to later use for groceries. Just trying to help out. I was a poor student not too long ago.
 
Agenesis said:
Whatever makes you happy. The base 15 is already 2350 after taxes, right up there with the most expensive flagship gaming laptops like the razer blade. I think you're already well beyond the point compromise.

Like I said I would never dream of spending 2.7k on a laptop, yet here I am because it's only a few hundred dollars more. In the long run the little extra won't mean much and I won't have that itching thought on the back of my head that I could've gotten a bit more for a few hundred. Storage especially, because I hate babysitting and managing it. 512gb is a good point where if it fills up I know I've been neglecting housekeeping. 256gb goes extremely quick when once you install a few Adobe programs, bootcamp with one or two games, and whatever garbage I download.

I''m only saying this because I got a credit card with a $750 bonus after spending $3000. 2k is my upper mental limit without going into the doubt/buyers remorse territory.

So perhaps look into that as well. Capital one venture offers a $500 after $3000 spend. For hitting the remaining you can buy some visa gift cards to later use for groceries. Just trying to help out. I was a poor student not too long ago.
Click to expand...
Haha funny you mention the Venture Card because I’m a Venture Card holder! I love it by the way, can’t wait for all the points I’m gonna get when I buy it. But I get what you’re saying. I was deciding between the base model 15” and the 13” with upgraded RAM and processor. Still kind of on the fence. But when I added both to my cart, the price difference between the two was $140. An added $140 for a larger screen, DDR4 RAM and 6-core processor seemed worth it. Although I’m uncertain whether the upgraded 2.6 GHZ 4-core would perform better or worse than the 2.2 GHZ 6-core.

(Sorry for slightly thread-jacking, OP)
 
magbarn said:
Oddly enough in the below 50 watt TDP range AMD is actually decent (except their Bootcamp drivers stink), it isn’t until you get to the 1060 Max Q range and above is when Nvidia begins to really pull away in power/performance.
Click to expand...

And I suspect its because AMD never really tried to create such a config. They know that the gaming laptop battle is lost to them, so they focus on other areas of the market instead. From what I've seen so far, it actually seems that Polaris has a rather good performance/watt, but their power consumption skyrockets once you start clocking them higher. And that is what AMD does on the desktop in order to be competitive with Nvidia...

At any rate, there is a change for the 560X to be significantly better — all they had to do is increase VRAM speed. We'll know more once people bench them using updated drivers from bootcampdrivers.
 
FrozenDarkness said:
Yea, it's weird when people compare Nvidia to AMD. WHat's Nvidia's offering in the 35W range?
Click to expand...
1050 max-Q is a 34-40 watt part. 1050ti is a bit higher sitting in the 40's to low 50's range.
The performance of the 560 is somewhere between the two, so it's really not that bad. I just wish Apple would find a way to fit something like a 570 inside of it (or even better switch to nvidia IMO)
 
Here's a geekbench result for a 555x

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621953

44223

OpenCL Information
Platform Vendor Apple
Platform Name Apple
Device Vendor AMD
Device Name AMD Radeon Pro 555X Compute Engine
Compute Units 12
Maximum Frequency 907 MHz
Device Memory 4.00 GB
Click to expand...

and for a 560x
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621930
64936
OpenCL Information
Platform Vendor Apple
Platform Name Apple
Device Vendor AMD
Device Name AMD Radeon Pro 560X Compute Engine
Compute Units 16
Maximum Frequency 1.00 GHz
Device Memory 4.00 GB
Click to expand...

Here's one for a 555
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621804
34971
OpenCL Information
Platform Vendor Apple
Platform Name Apple
Device Vendor AMD
Device Name AMD Radeon Pro 555 Compute Engine
Compute Units 12
Maximum Frequency 855 MHz
Device Memory 2.00 GB
Click to expand...


and a 560
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621840

47767

OpenCL Information
Platform Vendor Apple
Platform Name Apple
Device Vendor AMD
Device Name AMD Radeon Pro 560 Compute Engine
Compute Units 16
Maximum Frequency 907 MHz
Device Memory 4.00 GB
so, the cards are clocked 5-10 percent faster. And they're disproportionately better at equalizing histograms and processing depth of field.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ojdgaf, Petetastic, Born2bwild and 2 others
560X - 64936 and 560-44223 you think this is just 10% faster?? there are 20713 points between them
 
fokmik said:
560X - 64936 and 560-44223 you think this is just 10% faster?? there are 20713 points between them
Click to expand...

He said 10% faster clocks, not 10% faster ;) But those benchmark results are strange. I’d like to see more reliable benchmarks.
 
jerwin said:
Here's a geekbench result for a 555x

http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621953

44223



and for a 560x
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621930
64936


Here's one for a 555
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621804
34971



and a 560
http://browser.geekbench.com/v4/compute/2621953
44223




so, the cards are clocked 5-10 percent faster. And they're disproportionately better at equalizing histograms and processing depth of field.
Click to expand...

Seems you posted the results of 555x for 560... Anyway a 10% increase in frequency is not bad for a rebranding
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back