AMD Radeon Pro 450, 455, 460 chipsets debuting in the MacBook Pro detailed, benchmarked

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware edited October 2016
AMD has offered up some technical information on the three discrete chipsets debuting in the new MacBook Pro line, showing nearly double the performance on the Radeon Pro 460 over the Radeon Pro 450.




The discrete GPU in the MacBook Pro are based on AMD's 14nm FinFET process, and are designed for power efficiency, more than peak performance. All three units provide 80 GB per second memory bandwidth, and are based on the company's Polaris architecture.

The Radeon Pro 450 offers peak performance up to 1 teraflop, with 10 compute units and 640 stream processors. The Pro 455 performs up to 1.3 teraflops, and has 12 compute units and 768 stream processors.

At the high end, the Radeon Pro 460 available as an upgrade for the new computer provides 1.86 teraflops, and has 16 compute units and 1024 stream processors.





In comparison, the Iris Graphics 540 found on the 13-inch late 2016 MacBook Pro has a peak performance of 806 gigaflops, with the 550 in the higher end configuration coming in at 845 gigaflops.

The 2013 Mac Pro desktop GPU D300 FirePro is capable of 2 teraflops per GPU, and the computer holds two. The D500 FirePro can provide 2.2 teraflops per GPU.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    yojimbo007yojimbo007 Posts: 1,165member
    how do they compare lets say to nvidia gtx 970 .... etc. im thinking VR and gaming support here
    doozydozenargonaut
  • Reply 2 of 34
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator
    GTX 970 is about 4 teraflops, with the 1080 at about 9.
    yojimbo007
  • Reply 3 of 34
    buddyrevellbuddyrevell Posts: 172member
    yojimbo007 said:
    how do they compare lets say to nvidia gtx 970 .... etc. im thinking VR and gaming support here
    Yup, was wondering the same thing. Bought a big bulky Windows gaming laptop to run my Vive. Would love to sell that and get something more streamlined to do the job.
    yojimbo007
  • Reply 4 of 34
    longpathlongpath Posts: 393member
    Why does AMD's graphic say 13 inch when only the 15 inch version gets the AMD GPUs?
  • Reply 5 of 34
    hattighattig Posts: 860member
    longpath said:
    Why does AMD's graphic say 13 inch when only the 15 inch version gets the AMD GPUs?
    I think that's Apple's graphic, that AppleInsider has used incorrectly - there's another slide for the 15".
    Mike Wuerthele
  • Reply 6 of 34
    uniscapeuniscape Posts: 12member
    how do they compare lets say to nvidia gtx 970 .... etc. im thinking VR and gaming support here
    Yup, was wondering the same thing. Bought a big bulky Windows gaming laptop to run my Vive. Would love to sell that and get something more streamlined to do the job.
    Probably need something like this games on Vive. Now we can use it with new MBP.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 7 of 34
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,861administrator
    hattig said:
    longpath said:
    Why does AMD's graphic say 13 inch when only the 15 inch version gets the AMD GPUs?
    I think that's Apple's graphic, that AppleInsider has used incorrectly - there's another slide for the 15".
    Yeah, wrong slide - my fault, and updated. It's been a long day.
    EsquireCats
  • Reply 8 of 34
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,080member
    Interesting that the upgrade GPU is approaching the entry-level GPU on the MacPro (though in fairness the MacPro has two GPUs)

    Pushes the MBP near the MacPro performance in terms of GPU. 

    As much as I'd love a big shooter workstation, the MBP will probably meet my needs 99% of the time. 
    edited October 2016 doozydozentmay
  • Reply 9 of 34
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,613member
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    GTX 970 is about 4 teraflops, with the 1080 at about 9.
    Yup, even the lowly GTX 1060 in mobile applications is 4 TFLOPs
  • Reply 10 of 34
    baconstangbaconstang Posts: 1,105member
    Where does the Radeon R9  395X rate on teraflops?

    Edit:  According to 'GPUBOSS'  it's about 2.9 TFLOPS.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 11 of 34
    mazda 3smazda 3s Posts: 1,613member
    baconstang said:
    Where does the Radeon R9  395X rate on teraflops?
    3.7 TFLOPs
  • Reply 12 of 34
    SvesanSvesan Posts: 2unconfirmed, member
    Waited so long for this upgrade to the 15", but kinda disappointed that the RAM is once again maxed out at 16gb??? I was really expecting 32GB minimum...
    polymniafastasleepargonautlongpath
  • Reply 13 of 34
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    The 460M has a 75w TDP, and yet they had to shave off that extra 0.1mm to stop from offering more than 16 gigs of RAM… Hang on, the M370X was only 45w! There must be something wrong with the spec sheet I read.

    EDIT: Ah, “slightly less than the desktop TDP of…” but still.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 14 of 34
    hakimehakime Posts: 42member
    The 2013 Mac Pro desktop GPU D300 FirePro is capable of 2 teraflops per GPU, and the computer holds two. The D500 FirePro can provide 2.2 teraflops per GPU.

    The MacPro can also be configured with the D700 which pushes up to 3.5 teraflops in single precision with 1/4 of it in double precision. 
  • Reply 15 of 34
    polymniapolymnia Posts: 1,080member
    Svesan said:
    Waited so long for this upgrade to the 15", but kinda disappointed that the RAM is once again maxed out at 16gb??? I was really expecting 32GB minimum...
    That is disappointing. Maybe I sit this out until Rev 2?

    I still have another 1.5 years on my current MBP lease. My MBP was the top spec until this morning...I'm not in any hurry.


  • Reply 16 of 34
    2Cool2Cool Posts: 4member
    I'm going to be looking else where for my next laptop. The graphics for the $$ spent on the top end machine isn't cutting it anymore. I have had every iteration of MBP since 2010, but I can't see paying top dollar for second tier GPU options.
    ZooMigo
  • Reply 17 of 34
    mbene12mbene12 Posts: 42member
    So disappointed with this graphics hardware. Why don't they go with the much better nvidia 1060 at the astronomical price points they have set?   Was it driver issues?   

    The main problem I have is that it seems like their graphics hardware seems a generation behind on launch day and we waited an extra year for a real refresh on this hardware.  It really is keeping me from pulling the trigger.  My 2013 air will have to keep me going for a while longer for minor document editing and things I can't do readily on the phone.  I have to use a desktop system for serious work. The type of programming I do really would benefit from 32 g ram and a decent graphics card. 16 and barely better than integrated graphics just can't be justified for $3k.  I can get the hardware I need in laptop form from pcs but I hate the software so very much. 
  • Reply 18 of 34
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    These are Polaris 11 Mobile Chips you dimwits. My RX 480 does 5.8 TFLOPS and the upcoming Vega does 12+ TFLOPS. But they aren't laptop solutions.
    tmay
  • Reply 19 of 34
    adimensionofmindadimensionofmind Posts: 1member
    While the Radeons aren't as swift as Nvidas offerings I'll spec up to the 460 on the 15". Curious though if with Thunderbolt 3 everywhere on the new Pros there's a chance for external GPU options? Doesn't look like we're getting the fabled Thunderbolt with GPU display. 
  • Reply 20 of 34
    buddyrevellbuddyrevell Posts: 172member
    mazda 3s said:
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    GTX 970 is about 4 teraflops, with the 1080 at about 9.
    Yup, even the lowly GTX 1060 in mobile applications is 4 TFLOPs
    Good info to know. Too bad.
Sign In or Register to comment.