AMD publishes specifications for Radeon Pro 400 Series graphics used in new 15" MacBook Pro

[Shawn Knight]

Apple on Thursday gave its MacBook Pro line a long overdue refresh. While most were transfixed on the new TouchBar that replaces the row of function keys, others were more intrigued by AMD’s new Radeon Pro 400 Series graphics processors.

Based on AMD’s Polaris architecture and built using a 14-nanometer FinFET manufacturing process, the new graphics processors feature a thermal envelope of less than 35 watts. AMD has also made use of a process known as “die thinning” that reduces the thickness of each silicon wafer from 780 microns down to just 380 microns which is slightly less than the thickness of four sheets of paper.

As for specifications, the Radeon Pro 450 features 640 stream processors (10 compute units) with peak performance rated at up to one teraflop. The Radeon Pro 455 checks in with 768 stream processors (12 compute units) and 1.3 teraflops of performance while the highest-end Radeon Pro 460 packs 1,024 stream processors (16 compute units) and is good for up to 1.86 teraflops.

All three offer 80GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Raja Koduri, senior vice president and chief architect, Radeon Technologies Group, AMD, said they couldn’t be more proud to have Radeon Pro 400 Series Graphics launching in the new 15-inch MacBook Pro.

Apple’s new 15-inch MacBook Pro is scheduled to ship in two to three weeks with pricing starting at $2,399.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/66851-amd-publishes-specifications-radeon-pro-400-series-graphics.html

 

[Burty117]

I'm surprised they didn't go for Nvidia 1050, 1060 & 1070. Since they'd be able to claim to have "desktop GPU performance" or maybe Nvidia just couldn't meet the thinness criteria?

 

[mosu]

I was expecting the RX460 to pack 1024 CGN units and not 896.Now I see it's possible to have 1024 stream processors (16 compute units) consuming less than 35 W of power and I'm expecting the same 16 compute units to consume under 75 W on the full sized PCI-Ex RX460 videocard.

 

[Kenrick]

I'm surprised they didn't go for Nvidia 1050, 1060 & 1070. Since they'd be able to claim to have "desktop GPU performance" or maybe Nvidia just couldn't meet the thinness criteria?

they won the contract so they will be the supplier of discrete gpu for them for years. how many years and contract details? no info in web about that.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I'm surprised they didn't go for Nvidia 1050, 1060 & 1070. Since they'd be able to claim to have "desktop GPU performance" or maybe Nvidia just couldn't meet the thinness criteria?

They're not looking for performance... they're looking for size... AMD makes the thinnest mobile GPU... this laptop is way too thin to properly cool a 1060 let alone a 1070....

Would be interesting to compare the performance of a new MacBook 13" to the new Surface Book i7... I wonder how the Nvidia GPU inside the SurfaceBook holds up?

 

[Levi Sterling]

Its 2k, I could build a desktop that could transform into a car for that much. No Thanks

 

[smoken]

Cool a 2500 dollar laptop with a 200 dollar GPU......sounds like a mac....

 

[smoken]

I'm surprised they didn't go for Nvidia 1050, 1060 & 1070. Since they'd be able to claim to have "desktop GPU performance" or maybe Nvidia just couldn't meet the thinness criteria?

I guess you missed the lawsuits from users over the failed Nvidia GPU's in the 2008 and 2011 models.....

 

[Chazz]

Its 2k, I could build a desktop that could transform into a car for that much. No Thanks

Could you please? I would like this very much.

 

[petert]

I'm surprised they didn't go for Nvidia 1050, 1060 & 1070. Since they'd be able to claim to have "desktop GPU performance" or maybe Nvidia just couldn't meet the thinness criteria?

Most likely they couldn't agree to the price and conditions. This being said, I am surprised seeing this solution, I would as well expect Apple stuff to pack much more value for the bang.

 

[petert]

Cool a 2500 dollar laptop with a 200 dollar GPU......sounds like a mac....

Is not Apple fault but their fanboys who are ruining the market. Would no one rush to buy their crap, they would have come with much more reasonable priced products. But no, you have to have lines in front of Apple store whenever they crap a new product. Basically Apple is the dream target for every other tech company out there: very few products, no real competition (most people won't bother to switch to a new OS ), a large base of brainwashed fanboys who are waiting year after year to buy their products, etc.

This being said, Apple does bring some innovation from time to time, and kinda like pushes other players to provide more if they wanna stay in the market. But they only exist due to their fanboys - normally with their current line of products, they should get only a very narrow market segment - like executives who need to parade with their shiny new toy during a meeting.