The first test of 5600M. Faster than Vega 56 in iMac Pro and 5700 XT eGPU in Unigine Heaven. If it can do this at 50W imagine what it can do in an iMac. Still expensive though.
Mm. So. It's pulled just behind, level or in front across the spread of benches.
Largely being compared to mediocre gpus in the Macbook's case.
...and 3 year old gpu tech' in others.
Or bandwidth limited eGPU solution.
Sure, the inclusion of HBM helps get the gpu to run cooler and perform with sound bandwidth. But it's an expensive solution...band aided onto year old tech'?
The 40 cu units are nice. (But so last year?) As is the inclusion of HBM2.
Apple actually coming up with a custom solution for it's Mac customers (see the dual and quad GPU cards of the Mac Pro...technologically? No complaints. But the 5700 is old tech'. It's year old...) is 'nice' to see.
But paying through the nose for them. eg. The 5600M is £800. That's 8 times the baseline. It is 8 times faster? The 5500m seems better value to me. £100. (...save teh £700 for eGPU and RDNA2.) Or £200 if (!) you need the 8 gigs of vram.
I'd save the £700/800 and buy the future. Which is a couple of months away. -ish. eGPU caddy and RDNA2 will make this seem like what it is.
Old tech' fancied up with very pricey HBM2.
If this is the solution awaiting the BTO GPU in the new iMac. I won't be buying it. The benches are not worth the outlay. Just as the Blackmagic egpu was balkingly priced.
This is custom made for the Macbook, then. I think a rational solution is awaiting in the iMac 'new.'
Azrael.