Eight unreleased AMD Radeon GPUs found in second macOS Catalina beta

Posted:
in macOS edited June 27
The second developer beta of macOS Catalina 10.15 has seemingly revealed a list of unannounced AMD Radeon graphics cards, with eight references to GPUs bearing the "RX" and "Pro" prefixes, including seven under "Vega 20."

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, a graphics card for the modular Mac Pro
The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, a graphics card for the modular Mac Pro


The betas of Apple's operating systems have previously hinted at the launch of new GPUs and cards in AMD's Radeon lineup, like one for Mojave in December, but it seems the same thing has happened again for Catalina. A collection of eight yet-to-launch models have surfaced in an inspection of macOS 10.15 beta 2, which is due to arrive in the fall.

Spotted by developer Steve Moser, the cards are split into two categories: RX and Pro. There are six GPUs identified as Radeon RX Vega 20 cards, with a variety of different suffixes, as well as two under Radeon Pro Vega 20.

Unannounced AMD GPUs mentioned in Catalina Beta 2:
Radeon RX Vega 20 GL XT WKS
Radeon RX Vega 20 GL XT Server
Radeon RX Vega 20 XTA
Radeon RX Vega 20 XLA
Radeon RX Vega 20 XTX
Radeon RX Vega UNKNOWN
Radeon Pro Vega 20 XTA
Radeon Pro Vega 20 XLA /cc @TUM_APISAK @_inside pic.twitter.com/GCzdScDhPo

-- Steve Moser (@SteveMoser)


The RX list are said to be the Vega 20 GL XT WKS, GL XT Server, XTA, XLA, and XTX, as well as one described as "Unknown." All of the RX cards are also flagged as "Prototype," which could simply be a way of stating they are in development and could launch from AMD soon.

The other two are called the Radeon Pro Vega 20 XTA and XLA.

It isn't clear what each of the different acronyms refer to, but they could be for different Mac variants. For example, the Pro models could be destined for use with the new modular Mac Pro, while others could be discrete GPUs in revised MacBook Pro variants, replacing the existing Vega 20 and Vega 16 options.

As it isn't entirely descriptive what the cards could be, launches from the last year may give some clues as to what to expect for the cards.

Though using the new RDNA gaming architecture and Navi GPUs rather than Vega, one of the cards could be an intentionally misnamed version of the Radeon RX5700 series, which boast 7nm GPUs and up to 10.14 teraflops of performance. At the top of the list is the RX 5700 50th Anniversary Edition, which offers 40 compute units, 2,560 stream processors, and 8GB of GDDR6 memory.

It is unlikely that any of the cards will turn out to be the Radeon VII, as it is already supported in macOS as of version. 10.14.5. Offering 25-percent faster performance than earlier Vega cards, the Radeon VII has 16 gigabytes of memory, offering up to 60 compute units clocked at up to 1.8GHz.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 32
    I continue to ask if a mac mini with discrete GPU (Vega 20?) and industry standard storage drive options makes sense...?
    edited June 27 bsbeamerGG1
  • Reply 2 of 32
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,140member
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    williamlondonkestralelijahgFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 3 of 32
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,309member

    The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, a graphics card for the modular tubular Mac Pro
    There we go!
  • Reply 4 of 32
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,309member
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?
    tmayllama
  • Reply 5 of 32
    BigDannBigDann Posts: 45member
    I'm wondering if Apple is going to surprise us this October!

    What if Apple is going to offer a smaller version of the new Mac Pro! Basically, a desktop Vs Tower with fewer slots and less RAM support.

    More of a system for photographers and gamers! We don't need as deep RAM as video editing or deep VR/CAD workstations.

    Basically, replacing the 2013 Mac Pro which while many people won't want to hear was a pretty good system for what it was! As one who owns one I love it but its too limiting from a graphics perspective. Thats why I think Apple would be smart to offer a Desktop Mac Pro!

    These GPU's would play well in such a system. Just think, a Mac Pro for the rest of us!
    llama
  • Reply 6 of 32
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    edited June 27 StrangeDaystmayFileMakerFellerrezwitsmarine.ep@gmail.com
  • Reply 7 of 32
    dr. xdr. x Posts: 186member
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    elijahgmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 8 of 32
    karmadavekarmadave Posts: 322member
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    Interesting observation. I wasn't aware of Nvidia's restrictions. However, I have to take exception with your statement that 'Nvidia is a consumer company'. While it's true that they produce GPU's for the consumer gaming market a big thrust of their business is Commercial applications such as EDA, MCAD, and most recently AI/ML. In fact they are a leading OEM to companies such as HPE, Dell EMC, Cisco and others. My customer choose their GPU's over AMD almost 10:1. Just an observation...
    elijahgfastasleepmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 9 of 32
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    So what? The whole article you linked explains how Nvidia has spectacularly failed to be an OEM Partner. It just supports the fact that Nvidia is nothing more than a consumer graphics card company.
    StrangeDaystmay
  • Reply 10 of 32
    dr. xdr. x Posts: 186member
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    So what? The whole article you linked explains how Nvidia has spectacularly failed to be an OEM Partner. It just supports the fact that Nvidia is nothing more than a consumer graphics card company.
    The article goes into the history of Apple and nVidia and gives some background which isn't bad to share. I too wish Apple could support nVidia on the Mac platform. All Apple has to do is say let's forget the disputes of the past and hash out a deal with nVidia if they choose to do so.
    elijahgFileMakerFellermuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 11 of 32
    matrix077matrix077 Posts: 729member
    dr. x said:
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    So what? The whole article you linked explains how Nvidia has spectacularly failed to be an OEM Partner. It just supports the fact that Nvidia is nothing more than a consumer graphics card company.
    The article goes into the history of Apple and nVidia and gives some background which isn't bad to share. I too wish Apple could support nVidia on the Mac platform. All Apple has to do is say let's forget the disputes of the past and hash out a deal with nVidia if they choose to do so.
    It omits almost anything about Metal though. It paints Apple high exec as some kind of a stubborn child but what benefit Apple gains by sticking to AMD only? Almost none. The article just failed to try to see another side WHAT nVidia did that prevented Apple to re-embraces it. All those history are just minor problems that can be easily solved. 
    tmay
  • Reply 12 of 32
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,309member
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    It doesn’t. It’s also just conjecture, admitting that none of the unnamed sources AI spoke with knows why or what the issue is. 

    This bit about a prior licensing dispute may shed the most light:

    “If Nvidia tried getting Apple to pay its license fees then Apple seemingly said no. In 2016, it also said no to putting Nvidia processors in the 15-inch MacBook Pro. Instead, Apple went with AMD GPUs publicly because of performance per watt issues, but the real reason is anybody's guess.”
    tmayfastasleep
  • Reply 13 of 32
    macplusplusmacplusplus Posts: 1,888member
    dr. x said:
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    So what? The whole article you linked explains how Nvidia has spectacularly failed to be an OEM Partner. It just supports the fact that Nvidia is nothing more than a consumer graphics card company.
    The article goes into the history of Apple and nVidia and gives some background which isn't bad to share. I too wish Apple could support nVidia on the Mac platform. All Apple has to do is say let's forget the disputes of the past and hash out a deal with nVidia if they choose to do so.
    The whole dispute is summarized in that press release from Nvidia, as quoted in the article:

    Developers using Macs with NVIDIA graphics cards are reporting that after upgrading from 10.13 to 10.14 (Mojave) they are experiencing rendering regressions and slow performance. 

    Apple fully controls drivers for Mac OS. Unfortunately, NVIDIA currently cannot release a driver unless it is approved by Apple. 

    Our hardware works on OS 10.13 which supports up to (and including) Pascal.

    As a computer and operating system producer, Apple has right to control every aspect of the products it is selling, including the drivers. If NVIDIA doesn’t consent their drivers to be approved by Apple, it is their marketplace choice: they prefer consumer products to the OEM products. If they do consent, then where are their Metal-compatible drivers? 
    edited June 27
  • Reply 14 of 32
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 749member
    AMD should be very upset that Apple leaked some of its unannounced products. AMD should respond by boycotting Apple and not selling them any video cards. After all, Apple boycotts companies like nVidia for similar reasons.

    P.S. In reality I'm an Apple supporter, but that doesn't mean I can't write something that's 50% facetious, 50% sincere, against Apple from time to time.
    elijahgFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 15 of 32
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,860member
    I continue to ask if a mac mini with discrete GPU (Vega 20?) and industry standard storage drive options makes sense...?
    Well let’s put it this way, it would make lots of sense for Apple to offer a cost effective desk top with a discreet GPU chip.  It doesn’t have to be precisely Mini form factor, in fact it would be better if it isn’t.  Ideally it would take standard PCI-Express GPU cards in the under 100 watt range. 
  • Reply 16 of 32
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,860member
    Well one thing has been obvious to me for long time and that is that Apple needs a low cost desktop with a discreet GPU and no that is not an iMac.  The ultra high price on the Mac Pro just reinforces that idea.   Frankly a fat Mac Mini would solve a lot of problems but I still would rather see a machine taking a expansion card.  

    In any event that is a lot of cards res and may highlight a very interesting fall release schedule.   I’d like to see Apple go a step further though and start using AMDs APU and other chips.  Far better GPUs in the APUs the. What Intel has to offer is the reason.   These days CPU performance is a wash so that isn’t a problem any more.  So it makes me wonder if there is a way to tell if any of these are AMD APU GPUs?  
  • Reply 17 of 32
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 991member
    AMD accidentally leaked that a new PowerBook was on its way once, and Apple threw a toddler tantrum and switched to Nvidia. I wonder if AMD will stop supplying Apple due to this leak and Apple will be forced to go cap in hand to Nvidia... One can only hope.
  • Reply 18 of 32
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 991member
    matrix077 said:
    dr. x said:
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    So what? The whole article you linked explains how Nvidia has spectacularly failed to be an OEM Partner. It just supports the fact that Nvidia is nothing more than a consumer graphics card company.
    The article goes into the history of Apple and nVidia and gives some background which isn't bad to share. I too wish Apple could support nVidia on the Mac platform. All Apple has to do is say let's forget the disputes of the past and hash out a deal with nVidia if they choose to do so.
    It omits almost anything about Metal though. It paints Apple high exec as some kind of a stubborn child but what benefit Apple gains by sticking to AMD only? Almost none. The article just failed to try to see another side WHAT nVidia did that prevented Apple to re-embraces it. All those history are just minor problems that can be easily solved. 
    Apple execs have been like stubborn children before and eventually relented. The App Store was one, the trashcan Mac pro, external storage on iPad, NFC access, mouse on iPad, loads of things. "All those history are just minor problems", precisely, but Apple's childishness over these minor issues means they won't support Nvidia.

    If it truly is - and there has been zero evidence of this - because Nvidia won't allow low-level access to the Nvidia GPU core, then that's something that has Nvidia to blame. Nvidia always wrote drivers for Mac, and Apple wrote the AMD ones. And the AMD/Apple drivers were always pretty crap compared to the Nvidia ones. But it also might be that Nvidia doesn't want to spend millions developing drivers for an API that sees relatively little use versus a much much more popular and open source API - Vulkan.
    edited June 27 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 19 of 32
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 991member

    dr. x said:
    dr. x said:
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Simply not true. This is Nvidia who don’t allow their processors to be programmed at the “Metal” level. Apple as a computer producer has right to access and control a processor using up to the most granular elements of the processor’s instruction set. As such, Nvidia is a consumer company. It produces some consumer graphics cards, mostly for gaming, mining and alike. It is not an “OEM partner” to Apple like Intel, AMD, or Samsung.
    You can read the article, Apple's management doesn't want Nvidia support in macOS . .  which goes into depth that's it's Apple, Not Nvidia who doesn't want support.
    saarek said:
    I wish Apple would just sort out their issue with nVidia. Not knocking ATI Radeon's here, but it would be nice to have the choice and it's Apple causing the block, not nVidia.
    Source? I don’t know why they don’t exist on Macs, but I’ve read it’s a dispute over drivers. What details do you have that settle the matter?

    See the link I posted above. Hope it helps.

    So what? The whole article you linked explains how Nvidia has spectacularly failed to be an OEM Partner. It just supports the fact that Nvidia is nothing more than a consumer graphics card company.
    The article goes into the history of Apple and nVidia and gives some background which isn't bad to share. I too wish Apple could support nVidia on the Mac platform. All Apple has to do is say let's forget the disputes of the past and hash out a deal with nVidia if they choose to do so.
    As a computer and operating system producer, Apple has right to control every aspect of the products it is selling, including the drivers.
    Absolutely they do. That right ends with a purchase however. Apple does not have any right to choose what hardware is used with that computer, nor what software is run on it. It is my device, with which I shall do as I please. If that thing isn't sanctioned by Apple, boo boo I'm going to do it anyway. If Apple is artificially restricting software choice because of some stupid old spat with Nvidia then that is bad for everyone, and anticompetitive.
  • Reply 20 of 32
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 991member

    wizard69 said:
    Well one thing has been obvious to me for long time and that is that Apple needs a low cost desktop with a discreet GPU and no that is not an iMac.  The ultra high price on the Mac Pro just reinforces that idea.   Frankly a fat Mac Mini would solve a lot of problems but I still would rather see a machine taking a expansion card.  

    In any event that is a lot of cards res and may highlight a very interesting fall release schedule.   I’d like to see Apple go a step further though and start using AMDs APU and other chips.  Far better GPUs in the APUs the. What Intel has to offer is the reason.   These days CPU performance is a wash so that isn’t a problem any more.  So it makes me wonder if there is a way to tell if any of these are AMD APU GPUs?  
    Unfortunately I don't think this is ever going to happen whilst Cook is at the helm. He can see that a lot of people (me included) would have gone for the likely cheaper xMac/FatMac/maxiMac rather than the expensive kitted out iMac. He doesn't want people upgrading their machines post-purchase as that money doesn't go through Apple. I used to have a cheesegrater Mac Pro and loved it, but now my only real choice was an iMac with a pretty poor GPU, which I have. It's a really nice machine, but the GPU is not great. They could have offered the Vega 64 rather than topping out at the 48, but that'd cannibalise the iMac Pro too much so they wouldn't do that either.

    It's this kind of nickel and diming and meticulous positioning of products so that the better option is always just out of reach (no GPU upgrade in anything other than the "best" iMac) without forking out an extortionate amount to jump up to the next tier (think £2500 imac -> £5000 iMac Pro) that really pisses me off with Apple lately. They never used to do this, it's another Cookism.
    edited June 27 entropysmuthuk_vanalingam
Sign In or Register to comment.