Slashdot Mirror
New MacBook Pro's Dedicated AMD Graphics Chips Are 'Significantly' Faster and Support Dual 5K Displays (macrumors.com)
Whereas Apple's new 13-inch MacBook Pros feature integrated Iris Pro graphics, the 15-inch MacBook Pros feature dedicated AMD graphics, resulting in significant performance improvements over previous MacBook Pro models. Ars Technica's Andrew Cunningham found the Radeon Pro 455 graphics chip in particular to be a "significant boost" over the dedicated GPUs available in the 2012-2015 MacBook Pro models, such as the Nvidia GeForce GTX 650M, Nvidia GeForce GTX 750M, and AMD Radeon R9 M370X. MacRumors reports: 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). 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 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.
the Radeon Pro 455 graphics chip in particular to be a "significant boost" over...the Nvidia GeForce GTX 650M, Nvidia GeForce GTX 750M, and AMD Radeon R9 M370X
I bet it is also a lot faster than the graphics on my 1980's BBC Model B too but that's not really a useful comparison is it? It it were not better than the GPUs in machines which are at least 18 months old it would be pretty pathetic. How about the comparison to the new nVidia 10-series mobile GPUs that new non-Mac laptops are getting?
New dedicated graphics chips are faster than integrated ones and dedicated chips that are 4 and 3 generations older. What amazing news!
But, this isn't a high end desktop replacement gaming laptop, is it?! The laptop isn't exhausting very hot air, instead it is a good performing laptop that achieves this within a very usable form factor. There are trade-offs to be made, and so far this *extremely long overdue* refresh is so far looking like it's well balanced. Now, comparing this to previous gen Macbook Pro, is definitely a piss poor comparison.
It's not about modern hardware, it's about hardware with a particular TDP. The engineering choices around the design and the weight/thermal/battery performance gave a certain wattage to be divvied up amongst the components. Maybe you don't like the particular tradeoffs they made, but that's not "bad design".
Those other laptops running Nvidia 10-series chipsets made different tradeoffs. Some are heavier (I saw some on Newegg for 5.5lbs, the MBP is 4.5lbs), some consume battery quicker or take longer to charge. They just picked different points along the power/performance/thermal tradeoff space.
You might as well say a sedan is not a good design because the transmission and tires cannot handle the torque from a sports car engine. Sure you could upgrade the transmission and the tires and the engine, but then you're just asking for a different car entirely.