The 16-inch model of the MacBook Pro that appeared last year has an expanded Retina display, a high-quality built-in speaker that can firmly play low frequencies, a battery with a maximum capacity of 100 Wh recognized by U.S.A. law, and the first Magic Keyboard for mobile devices. It was launched and enthusiastically accepted by creators who use mobile computers.
The installed processor was the 9th generation Intel Core, and there was no big change from the previous model, but the sound quality of the built-in speaker and the GPU with the same performance as the iMac have a great evolutionary range “This requires an iMac We've heard from users who are no longer using desktop devices properly.
A model equipped with AMD's Radeon Pro 5600M was added to the 16-inch model of the MacBook Pro. Equipped with 8GB HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) 2 memory.
The 16-inch MacBook Pro now offers four choices for GPU. Although it is the same as the latest generation Radeon Pro that adopts an architecture called RDNA, it is 5300M (4GB GDDR6), 5500M (4GB GDDR6), 5500M (8GB GDDR6), 5600M (8GB HBM2) in order from the bottom, Based on 5300M, the price difference is 5500M for +10,000 yen, 8GB for 5500M for +20,000 yen, and 5600M for +80,000 yen. The new option, the Radeon Pro 5600M, is significantly more expensive.
If you choose the optional GPU on the 16-inch MacBook Pro, it is cost-effective to set it to 5500M (4GB GDDR6) for +10,000 yen, and I personally recommend it. If the amount of data handled by the GPU is large, it may be better to set it to 8GB, but even then it only needs to be increased by 10,000 yen.
Should we add another 60,000 yen to 5600M? So, although the configuration is slightly different, I tried to verify how much performance difference there is between 5500M (4GB GDDR6) and 5600M (8GB HBM2). In both cases, the CPU is the fastest at 2.4 GHz, but the memory is 16 GB for the former, 32 GB for the latter, SSD is 1 TB for the former, 2 TB for the latter.
About 1.5 times the standard GeekBench 5 score
A high-performance GPU accelerates a particular application, but its impact depends on how the application is made and how it is used, making it difficult to evaluate with an absolute benchmark score.
When I picked up the standard cross-platform benchmark Geekbench 5's score from the database, the Metal score of Compute (GPU calculation performance) was 24359 for 5300M and 28750 for 5500M, but it was 32000 when actually measured again. This may be due to improvements in the Metal driver etc. (Maybe the 5300M should also have a higher score).
The 5600M consistently scores above 45,000. Speaking only of the score ratio, the performance improvement is about 140% compared to 5500M, but the degree of improvement will differ depending on the benchmarking process (for details, please compare the contents of the screen shot).
Therefore, in actual applications, the difference may be larger than the benchmark value, while the difference may not be so large. This is where GPU evaluation is difficult. You can directly benefit from the GPU (including Photoshop's 3D layers, etc.) with 3D games (if that's the case, Windows is better, so I won't delve into it here) or 3D modeling tools.Apple releases performance improvement data for tools such as Unity Editor and Maxon Cinema 4DSo, it's a good idea to refer to them.
However, in the case of photo processing and video editing, it depends on the tool you are using and the process you want to perform. The processor installed in the 16-inch model of the MacBook Pro is particularly powerful, so in the case of the 8-core Core i9 model, it does a great deal of effort in CPU processing. As a result, GPUs are not always the dominant one.
Apple has announced a "up to 75% improvement," but what about?
Performance improvement of video editing application is clear
Aside from 3D applications, video editing software had a clear benefit. It was confirmed that the degree of contribution was large. Above all, the video export process of Blackmagic design's DaVinci Resolve and Adobe Premiere Pro is significantly accelerated.
You can experience the effect with DaVinci Resolve, which is often used for video production, especially color grading. I tried compositing two full HD/30P movies, applying film grain effect and color grading to one stream, and compositing wipes and exporting about 16 minutes of video in H.264. As a result, 5500M was 58 minutes 49 seconds, while 5600M was 44 minutes 21 seconds. This means that it is 30% faster.
Since the frame rate of live preview when applying effects is also improved, it can be said that the operability is improved as a whole.
On the other hand, Adobe's Premiere Pro, which is the de facto standard for video editing, has also produced extremely good results. In the case of Premiere Pro, shortening the generation time of preview data also reduces stress.
We performed a test to write a 25-minute movie after wipe-compositing two streams of full HD/30p movie, film grain and color correction on one image. It took 19 minutes and 50 seconds for the 5500M, but 12 minutes and 18 seconds for the 5600M model. The improvement rate is over 60%.
However, whether the benefit is slightly less for applications with light processing, even with the same Adobe product, with the same material in Premiere Rush, when exporting with the color adjustment called "SL Fuji", 6 minutes 31 seconds of 5500M The difference was 5 minutes and 5 minutes and 5 seconds, which was 5600M (the processing time was short).
Also, when encoding 4K video of 25 minutes 48 seconds with H.264 with Adobe's Media Encoder which is a tool to change video encoding, it is as fast as 15 minutes 21 seconds with 5600M at 18 minutes 23 seconds of 5500M Although it was confirmed, the CPU encoding was tested in parallel and it was further shortened to 12 minutes 58 seconds. In other words, it is faster to not use the GPU. It may be better to check this area carefully before using it.
It is difficult to evaluate superiority in camera RAW processing
Speaking of heavy media processing, there is also RAW development for high pixel cameras. However, most RAW development software does not use GPU very effectively. For each application, you need to better understand how fast it will be.
In conclusion, Radeon Pro 5500M (GDDR6 4GB) is enough for those who use Adobe-based photo applications. GPU does not play an active part except for some functions such as enhancement of detail in Lightroom and 3D layer in Photoshop.
On the other hand, the professional development software "Capture One" actively uses the GPU for RAW development. At first boot, a process to measure the available GPU capacity runs and prepares to try to accelerate with the GPU as much as possible.
I have taken a benchmark with RAW development software called Luminar 4 before, but although Luminar 4 uses both CPU and GPU, it depends heavily on CPU as a specific gravity, and in this case there is almost no difference. It didn't come out.
I want you to see the graph of the test result, but it is not as different as the video export. However, if you are dealing with a large amount of high pixel camera RAW, this difference will not be ignored. The GPU is also used to make thumbnails and preview images. Therefore, if you are a Capture One user, you may find a value of 60,000 yen depending on the number of pixels handled and the number of pixels of the camera.
However, as in the case of Adobe's Media Encoder, there was a minute in CPU calculation at absolute speed. It may be because this is a high-end model of Core i9. Is that meaningless? That said, when doing other work in the background while doing RAW development, there seems to be an advantage in that you can develop at high speed while offloading the CPU.
What I think from the comments sent to the 16-inch MacBook Pro introduction video on YouTube
When I first saw the 16-inch MacBook Pro, I was really impressed with the performance and experience level of the iMac class in this size. Of course, it's not cheap, and even GPU performance is a cheaper option for laptop gaming PCs.
However, when it comes to a notebook computer that clears the form factor such as weight, size, and thinness that you can actually carry, has a built-in 100 Wh battery, and has a well-adjusted Display-P3 compatible display and high-quality speakers, Actually, there is no other product to compare.
If you don't carry it around and the quality of the display is "just what you want it to look like", there are many common video editing apps for Windows and Mac. Should be satisfied. CPU and GPU performance are just a few factors in evaluating a computer. A computer considers the difference in operating feeling and functions between Windows and Mac, the difference in the user interface (display, keyboard, etc.) of each hardware, and so on, and decides "This is a good" in total. Let's
By the way, in a comment to my 16-inch MacBook Pro article on YouTube, there was a comment saying, "The reason why some people want MacBook Pro even if the price is high is thinness and lightness." I think it is very important.
If you want the same or slightly higher GPU performance, you can get a gaming laptop with a GPU that competes with the Radeon Pro 5600M even for a gaming laptop for around 170,000 yen. If you just want a high-performance gaming PC, you don't have to stick to the Mac.
The smartest, not the smartest option
For those who want to work on macOS, when using the GPU-intensive application as introduced here in the mobile environment, the option with the highest performance has been created. That means. Apple itself also calls it the "highest-performance MacBook Pro ever."
That leads to the subtitle wording. The Radeon Pro 5300M is, so to speak, like the i3 in Intel Core. And i5, which has the best cost performance, is equivalent to a 5500M 4GB GDDR6 equipped machine. Then what about the 5600M installed machine? Speaking of which, it is a machine that penetrates i7 and is equipped with i9.
Absolute performance, not cost-effective. A battery-powered laptop that can be operated on the go and is easy to carry, but has high performance. It may not be the smartest option, but it is the most attractive option for creators. In particular, there are many people who think that it is worth the investment for video editing.
.(tagsToTranslate)Engadget(t) Japan version (t) Engadget (t) PC (t) Mobile (t) Smartphone (t) iPhone (t) Mac (t) Latest (t) information