AMD announces power-efficient Radeon Pro 400 series graphics

Quote:

---

You saw them first in the all-new Apple MacBook Pro machines last night.

---

Read more.

So basically a mashed up RX 460 makes a 460 Pro.
RX = 14 CUs Pro = 16
RX = 2.2Tf Pro = 1.8Tf
RX = 112GB/s Pro = 80GB/s

So all in all meh.

Less than 35 watts though, thats far from meh

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Platinum

Less than 35 watts though, thats far from meh

---

This!

The radeon pro is basically the usual radeon 'gaming' gpu (a low power version) that has just been given better optimised drivers for 'professional' programs, something that shouldn't 'need' to be done.... but they do this because how else would they be able to charge the usual 5x markup on the price of virtually identical hardware to the consumer stuff. They don't even need to work hard on this optimisation as the code will just be passed down from their firepro models (thats their nvidia quadro equivalent) .

Nvidia do the same, in most cases the quadro and geforce are fundamentally the same under the hood and it's only down the drivers and software being coded to require certain hardware that makes the difference. Perfect example, a geforce gpu will do everything the quadro will do in solidworks but dassault (makes solidworks) disables certain display options unless you have a quadro installed....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mattburnzy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Platinum

Less than 35 watts though, thats far from meh

---

This!

---

Yeah, the power is the same as my 2.5-year-old 860M, but they managed to cut the power usage in half.

Hmm, maybe I'm comparing the power wrong. The 860M and the 460 Pro both have around 1.8TFLOPS but the 1050 TI has ~2.1 TFLOPS and obviously is much more powerful than my 860M. I guess TFLOPS aren't everything?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by plexabit

Yeah, the power is the same as my 2.5-year-old 860M, but they managed to cut the power usage in half.

Hmm, maybe I'm comparing the power wrong. The 860M and the 460 Pro both have around 1.8TFLOPS but the 1050 TI has ~2.1 TFLOPS and obviously is much more powerful than my 860M. I guess TFLOPS aren't everything?

---

They are if you are doing opencl, but Nvidia seem to get more pixels per second out of their flops when it comes to rendering. Either that or Nvidia can keep the chip closer to the peak flops number than AMD can for graphics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LSG501

The radeon pro is basically the usual radeon 'gaming' gpu (a low power version) that has just been given better optimised drivers for 'professional' programs, something that shouldn't 'need' to be done.... but they do this because how else would they be able to charge the usual 5x markup on the price of virtually identical hardware to the consumer stuff. They don't even need to work hard on this optimisation as the code will just be passed down from their firepro models (thats their nvidia quadro equivalent) .

Nvidia do the same, in most cases the quadro and geforce are fundamentally the same under the hood and it's only down the drivers and software being coded to require certain hardware that makes the difference. Perfect example, a geforce gpu will do everything the quadro will do in solidworks but dassault (makes solidworks) disables certain display options unless you have a quadro installed....

---

this is not true for many years now, they share only the same core now, there are differences on how they address resources and memory, because they have to render more polygons and less textures, while the gaming counterparts need the opposite, more textures, less polygons.

but I remember a time when you could hack a gaming nvidia to be quadro, that was like 15 years before however.