Apple adds Radeon 5600M 16-inch MacBook Pro & Mac Pro SSD upgrade kits [u]

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 48
    Marvin said:
    blastdoor said:
    $800 for a GPU upgrade is offensive. It's like Mr. Cook randomly pulls a lever and takes that value. As an upgrade price, $400 would be more reasonable.

    Compared to what? How is $800 offensive but $400 just fine? Doesn't it depend on what you're getting for the money? 

    Upgrading to the highest spec, especially in a laptop, is often very expensive and makes sense only for a small minority of users. If you don't see the value in the option, don't choose it. Otherwise, why should you be "offended" that this option (and it is an OPTION) is made available to people who might appreciate it? 
    At first I figured it must be AMD setting the prices but other manufacturers are pricing this line of GPUs much lower. Here's a laptop with a faster RX 5600M laptop for $879, $1299 for 1TB SSD and 16GB RAM:

    https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/new-dell-g5-15-se-gaming-laptop/spd/g-series-15-5505-laptop/gn5505dyics
    https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/new-dell-g5-15-se-gaming-laptop/spd/g-series-15-5505-laptop/gn5505dymms

    Apple's cheapest option for the 5600M is $3199. Given that manufacturers can sell an entire laptop with a faster version of that chip for $879 and still make a profit, Apple charging $800 just for the GPU upgrade seems a bit excessive.

    They are using HBM memory instead of GDDR, which adds something to the cost but it shouldn't be all that much extra.

    They might be pricing it to avoid it being a mainstream option if it runs hotter than the lower performance GPUs. If they priced it reasonably, more people would buy it and possibly complain about thermals. We'll see when the reviews come in if it runs hotter.

    It's nice to have the option at least. I hope this doesn't mean they'll be skipping RDNA2 GPUs (September) until next year though. RDNA2 is supposed to come with a 50% performance-per-watt increase. If that turns out to be true, I'd rather have an entry model with RDNA2 in September.
    agreed that it's eyewateringly expensive. But I think the HBM2 is a big part of the cost, and binning may be the rest of the story (plus Apple tax of course). 50W TDP for the Pro 5600M package, as opposed to something like 85W for the standard RX 5500M. And higher performance. That's a pretty big deal.
    ne1watto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 48
    KITA said:
    Radeon Pro 5600M - 5.3 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5500M - 4.6 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5300M - 4.1 TFLOPS

    (All numbers are FP32)
    AMD's page for the Radeon Pro SKUs for Apple seems to indicate that the Radeon Pro 5300/5500 are lower performance as produced for Apple. 

    Pro 5600M: 5.3 TFLOPS
    Pro 5500M: 4.0 TFLOPS
    Pro 5300M: 3.2 TFLOPS

    https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 48
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,294member
    Has anyone found an external enclosure for Mac Pro SSDs? If you get the upgrade kit, what do you do with the old SSDs? The aren't typical SSDs, correct? They require the T2 chip to function so unless the T2 chip can access external SSDs, I can't see there being any resale value for older SSDs.

    Correct me if I'm wrong.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 24 of 48
    KITAKITA Posts: 409member
    KITA said:
    Radeon Pro 5600M - 5.3 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5500M - 4.6 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5300M - 4.1 TFLOPS

    (All numbers are FP32)
    AMD's page for the Radeon Pro SKUs for Apple seems to indicate that the Radeon Pro 5300/5500 are lower performance as produced for Apple. 

    Pro 5600M: 5.3 TFLOPS
    Pro 5500M: 4.0 TFLOPS
    Pro 5300M: 3.2 TFLOPS

    https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series
    Yes, thanks for that correction. My numbers are for the RX 5500M and RX 5300M, not the Radeon Pro versions.
  • Reply 25 of 48
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,837member
    Nice price gouging there. It’s getting absurd now. 
  • Reply 26 of 48
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member


    The Mac Pro SSD user upgrades come in 1TB, 2TB, 4TB, and 8TB sizes. The order page notes that the 1TB upgrade retails for $600, the 2TB kit sells for $1000, with the 4TB kit coming in at $1600. The 8TB upgrade retails for $2800.

    When initially purchased, 1TB of storage is a $400 premium versus 256GB. The larger 2TB, 4TB, and 8TB configurations add $800, $1400, and $2600, respectively


    This is why buying an Apple Mac makes no sense anymore.   It is bad enough that the Mac Pro gets creamed buy cheap Thread ripper systems but then you have these outlandish prices for storage options and upgrades.   I really don't see why people even bother with Macs any more.   Even the laptop upgrades make no sense cost wise.
    elijahg
  • Reply 27 of 48
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    tht said:
    rob53 said:
    tht said:
    Nice to see!

    Just keep making incremental updates and options. Hopefully upgradeable SSDs will be available for all of the other Macs in the future.
    They won't be unless Apple makes a total change in the enclosures. You can open a current MBP and iMac but the iMac is not that easy. We'll see if Apple goes back to an easy to open front or rear case for the iMacs but I don't see them changing from soldered RAM and SSD on some of the MacBooks or changing back to a screwed on case. Most CPUs are also soldered to keep the height of the motherboard as thin as possible. Adding a CPU socket doubles the height of the CPU.
    I think the low end ARM Macs will be quite integrated, SiP-like integrated where the RAM will be in the CPU package like in iPhones and iPads, or on the CPU like in iPad Pros. For the desktop and expensive laptops, will be interesting to see how they handle it.

    Apple and all manufactures will eventually have to put RAM in package.   It is the only way to really scale performance.   We already live in an era where the APU chips simply don't have enough bandwidth to memory and DDR5 is only a minor improvement.    HBM2 in package or something similar, will have to be implemented to address the bandwidth to off chip memory issue.   Of course on Apple's current hardware, the stacked RAM is more about density than performance but even there I suspect that the are real power usage gains.

    So how many people will complain if the ARM chips come with 16GB of HBM2 RAM in package.   Especially in the case of a compact laptop.   I wouldn't but I realize that there are users that need more RAM but this is different than RAM required for a compact laptop serving the needs of general users.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 48
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    KITA said:
    KITA said:
    Radeon Pro 5600M - 5.3 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5500M - 4.6 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5300M - 4.1 TFLOPS

    (All numbers are FP32)
    AMD's page for the Radeon Pro SKUs for Apple seems to indicate that the Radeon Pro 5300/5500 are lower performance as produced for Apple. 

    Pro 5600M: 5.3 TFLOPS
    Pro 5500M: 4.0 TFLOPS
    Pro 5300M: 3.2 TFLOPS

    https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series
    Yes, thanks for that correction. My numbers are for the RX 5500M and RX 5300M, not the Radeon Pro versions.
    I suspect part of the lower performance numbers is that Apple simply wants more reliable hardware.   Even so It isn't ht e chips that are a problem but what Apple charges for them that is an issue.
    elijahg
  • Reply 29 of 48
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    tht said:
    rob53 said:
    tht said:
    Nice to see!

    Just keep making incremental updates and options. Hopefully upgradeable SSDs will be available for all of the other Macs in the future.
    They won't be unless Apple makes a total change in the enclosures. You can open a current MBP and iMac but the iMac is not that easy. We'll see if Apple goes back to an easy to open front or rear case for the iMacs but I don't see them changing from soldered RAM and SSD on some of the MacBooks or changing back to a screwed on case. Most CPUs are also soldered to keep the height of the motherboard as thin as possible. Adding a CPU socket doubles the height of the CPU.
    I think the low end ARM Macs will be quite integrated, SiP-like integrated where the RAM will be in the CPU package like in iPhones and iPads, or on the CPU like in iPad Pros. For the desktop and expensive laptops, will be interesting to see how they handle it.
    Or maybe a replaceable stick. Mac-on-a-stick, Graphics-on-a-stick, storage-on-a-stick. If I say it enough, it might happen.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 48
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    wizard69 said:
    tht said:
    rob53 said:
    tht said:
    Nice to see!

    Just keep making incremental updates and options. Hopefully upgradeable SSDs will be available for all of the other Macs in the future.
    They won't be unless Apple makes a total change in the enclosures. You can open a current MBP and iMac but the iMac is not that easy. We'll see if Apple goes back to an easy to open front or rear case for the iMacs but I don't see them changing from soldered RAM and SSD on some of the MacBooks or changing back to a screwed on case. Most CPUs are also soldered to keep the height of the motherboard as thin as possible. Adding a CPU socket doubles the height of the CPU.
    I think the low end ARM Macs will be quite integrated, SiP-like integrated where the RAM will be in the CPU package like in iPhones and iPads, or on the CPU like in iPad Pros. For the desktop and expensive laptops, will be interesting to see how they handle it.

    Apple and all manufactures will eventually have to put RAM in package.   It is the only way to really scale performance.   We already live in an era where the APU chips simply don't have enough bandwidth to memory and DDR5 is only a minor improvement.    HBM2 in package or something similar, will have to be implemented to address the bandwidth to off chip memory issue.   Of course on Apple's current hardware, the stacked RAM is more about density than performance but even there I suspect that the are real power usage gains.

    So how many people will complain if the ARM chips come with 16GB of HBM2 RAM in package.   Especially in the case of a compact laptop.   I wouldn't but I realize that there are users that need more RAM but this is different than RAM required for a compact laptop serving the needs of general users.
    Hasn’t the Radeon Pro Vega II got 32GB HBM2? (Not the Duo).
    I’d have though feeding all cores at 1TBps would be a huge advantage.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 48
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    KITA said:
    Radeon Pro 5600M - 5.3 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5500M - 4.6 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5300M - 4.1 TFLOPS

    (All numbers are FP32)
    AMD's page for the Radeon Pro SKUs for Apple seems to indicate that the Radeon Pro 5300/5500 are lower performance as produced for Apple. 

    Pro 5600M: 5.3 TFLOPS
    Pro 5500M: 4.0 TFLOPS
    Pro 5300M: 3.2 TFLOPS

    https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series
    How do the thermals compare? That’s more important in a constrained enclosure.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 48
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,927member
    $800 for a GPU upgrade is offensive. It's like Mr. Cook randomly pulls a lever and takes that value. As an upgrade price, $400 would be more reasonable.
    Are they bumping up the cost so the ARM MBP with their own GPU looks so much better?
  • Reply 33 of 48
    CheeseFreezeCheeseFreeze Posts: 1,336member

    Check the laptop prices at the end of the video. It's not the laptops I'm comparing with a Macbook Pro 16", but the $1200 price range for a laptop including a 5600M, where Apple dares to ask a $800 UPGRADE (in addition to the base GPU) for. 

    What an insult!!!
    elijahg
  • Reply 34 of 48
    elijahgelijahg Posts: 2,837member
    wizard69 said:
    tht said:
    rob53 said:
    tht said:
    Nice to see!

    Just keep making incremental updates and options. Hopefully upgradeable SSDs will be available for all of the other Macs in the future.
    They won't be unless Apple makes a total change in the enclosures. You can open a current MBP and iMac but the iMac is not that easy. We'll see if Apple goes back to an easy to open front or rear case for the iMacs but I don't see them changing from soldered RAM and SSD on some of the MacBooks or changing back to a screwed on case. Most CPUs are also soldered to keep the height of the motherboard as thin as possible. Adding a CPU socket doubles the height of the CPU.
    I think the low end ARM Macs will be quite integrated, SiP-like integrated where the RAM will be in the CPU package like in iPhones and iPads, or on the CPU like in iPad Pros. For the desktop and expensive laptops, will be interesting to see how they handle it.

    Apple and all manufactures will eventually have to put RAM in package.   It is the only way to really scale performance.   We already live in an era where the APU chips simply don't have enough bandwidth to memory and DDR5 is only a minor improvement.    HBM2 in package or something similar, will have to be implemented to address the bandwidth to off chip memory issue.   Of course on Apple's current hardware, the stacked RAM is more about density than performance but even there I suspect that the are real power usage gains.

    So how many people will complain if the ARM chips come with 16GB of HBM2 RAM in package.   Especially in the case of a compact laptop.   I wouldn't but I realize that there are users that need more RAM but this is different than RAM required for a compact laptop serving the needs of general users.
    I don't think people would care about non-upgradable RAM if the prices weren't 4x the market rate - they'd just buy more when they first bought their Mac. It's just price gouging because Apple knows if you want a Mac, you have no choice. So people are shunning Macs in favour of Windows because you can get a comparable PC for half the price. If this gouging continues my current Macs will unfortunately be my last, after being an Apple fanboi for 25 years. The merits of having a numbers focussed beancounter at the top, I guess.

    Also it's not the case that RAM will have to be in package in the near future at least. The CPUs are still socketed and they work just fine at speeds much faster than the RAM.
    edited June 2020
  • Reply 35 of 48
    YP101YP101 Posts: 172member
    I am not sure why consumer hate about this new Mac Pro or any Pro line up model price.
    The line up is for Professional..Not for the consumer. So the price tag is set for whom ever willing to pay for it.
    Apple know this.. And they don't care how many Pro line up Mac sold. They already make enough money with iPhone, iPad, watch and iPod.

    Since when Apple charge fair market price for the upgrade component? Give it up.
    If you really want to Apple to change their mind? Then stop buying it.. Then they will change it.
    thtwatto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 48
    shaminoshamino Posts: 537member
    The purchase page notes that "software reinstallation requires a second Mac running Apple Configurator 2 and a USB-C cable. Compatible with Mac Pro (2019),"
    Interesting.  I wonder how Apple is going to cryptographically pair the new flash modules with the T2 chip.  I can only think of two possible ways.  Either you send Apple your motherboard serial number so they can pair them in the factory or the Configurator app can perform the pairing.

    If the latter is true, then it opens the question about whether we may see third-party upgrades in the future that can also be paired with Configurator.  Or if you will be able to move Apple's flash modules to a different Mac Pro and use Configurator to re-write the pairing (wiping the contents, of course).

    I'll be very interested to learn the answers to these questions.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 48
    thttht Posts: 5,635member
    wizard69 said:
    tht said:
    rob53 said:
    tht said:
    Nice to see!

    Just keep making incremental updates and options. Hopefully upgradeable SSDs will be available for all of the other Macs in the future.
    They won't be unless Apple makes a total change in the enclosures. You can open a current MBP and iMac but the iMac is not that easy. We'll see if Apple goes back to an easy to open front or rear case for the iMacs but I don't see them changing from soldered RAM and SSD on some of the MacBooks or changing back to a screwed on case. Most CPUs are also soldered to keep the height of the motherboard as thin as possible. Adding a CPU socket doubles the height of the CPU.
    I think the low end ARM Macs will be quite integrated, SiP-like integrated where the RAM will be in the CPU package like in iPhones and iPads, or on the CPU like in iPad Pros. For the desktop and expensive laptops, will be interesting to see how they handle it.

    Apple and all manufactures will eventually have to put RAM in package.   It is the only way to really scale performance.   We already live in an era where the APU chips simply don't have enough bandwidth to memory and DDR5 is only a minor improvement.    HBM2 in package or something similar, will have to be implemented to address the bandwidth to off chip memory issue.   Of course on Apple's current hardware, the stacked RAM is more about density than performance but even there I suspect that the are real power usage gains.

    So how many people will complain if the ARM chips come with 16GB of HBM2 RAM in package.   Especially in the case of a compact laptop.   I wouldn't but I realize that there are users that need more RAM but this is different than RAM required for a compact laptop serving the needs of general users.
    For the lower priced laptops, not many will complain about in-package or on-package RAM as it really isn't different from the last 8 years of Apple laptops. The big issue is whether 32 GB to 64 GB of RAM can be on-package for the expensive laptops. 8 64-Gbit DRAM chips sounds doable if the package is 25x25 mm, with 4 stacks of 2 LPDDR4/5 DRAM per stack. HBM would be cooler, lower power consumption, but a lot more expensive. That is "sounds doable". Don't think there is enough margin in using a custom ARM CPU over a 60% margin Intel CPU to make the net costs about equal. Don't know what happens if the compute chip is say a 50 Watt chip. They'll need to design a unique heat transfer lid/cover/package.

    Anyways, Apple would be in a really good position to do on-package or in-package DRAM stacking with their ARM chip presumably having the highest perf/Watt, especially if it is with HBM. A nice super high bandwidth, low latency memory for all the compute on the chips, including CPU, GPU, and neural units. It could save enough PCB board space or laptop floor space for their NAND modules!

    For >64 GB memory support, my interest will be in how many memory channels they will be using. Hopefully it's 4 channels, even for the large display iMac. 4 lanes of PCIe 4 will be enough for 2 USB4 busses, 4 lanes for the SSD, 8 lanes for a dGPU, and 2 for whatever other I/O. Hopefully they will really take advantage of the weaknesses in x86 platforms.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 48
    thttht Posts: 5,635member

    mcdave said:
    KITA said:
    Radeon Pro 5600M - 5.3 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5500M - 4.6 TFLOPS
    Radeon Pro 5300M - 4.1 TFLOPS

    (All numbers are FP32)
    AMD's page for the Radeon Pro SKUs for Apple seems to indicate that the Radeon Pro 5300/5500 are lower performance as produced for Apple. 

    Pro 5600M: 5.3 TFLOPS
    Pro 5500M: 4.0 TFLOPS
    Pro 5300M: 3.2 TFLOPS

    https://www.amd.com/en/graphics/radeon-apple-5000m-series
    How do the thermals compare? That’s more important in a constrained enclosure.
    anandtech is saying the Pro 5600M is 50 Watts. I would imagine the Pro 5300M and Pro 5500M are on order 50 W to 80 W, especially since they are using GDDR6 memory with higher boost clocks, while the 5600M is using HBM with much lower boost clocks.
    mcdavewatto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 48
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 6,452member
    wizard69 said:


    The Mac Pro SSD user upgrades come in 1TB, 2TB, 4TB, and 8TB sizes. The order page notes that the 1TB upgrade retails for $600, the 2TB kit sells for $1000, with the 4TB kit coming in at $1600. The 8TB upgrade retails for $2800.

    When initially purchased, 1TB of storage is a $400 premium versus 256GB. The larger 2TB, 4TB, and 8TB configurations add $800, $1400, and $2600, respectively


    This is why buying an Apple Mac makes no sense anymore.   It is bad enough that the Mac Pro gets creamed buy cheap Thread ripper systems but then you have these outlandish prices for storage options and upgrades.   I really don't see why people even bother with Macs any more.   Even the laptop upgrades make no sense cost wise.
    You don't have to use Apple's storage — there are myriad choices for SATA drive bays or PCIe NVMe host cards that are far cheaper. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 48
    shaminoshamino Posts: 537member
    You don't have to use Apple's storage — there are myriad choices for SATA drive bays or PCIe NVMe host cards that are far cheaper. 
    Not only that, they're faster too
Sign In or Register to comment.