Hands On: Sonnet eGFX Breakaway Puck with Radeon RX 560

External GPU enclosures can be pretty massive. Sonnet has a solution to the problem with the portable eGFX Breakaway Puck — and AppleInsider has one to test.

The eGFX Breakaway Puck comes in two models, one with a Radeon RX 560 similar to that in the high-end 15-inch 2017 MacBook Pro, and a second with the Radeon RX 570 as found in the high-end 20.5-inch 2017 4K iMac and one model of the 5K iMac — we have the RX 560 model on-hand.

The enclosure provides three DisplayPort 1.4 ports, and one HDMI 2.0b port, all capable of 4K resolution at 60Hz. At present, the RX 560 model needs a relatively minor hack to work, but we expect that this requirement will be exterminated once full support for external GPUs arrives in the spring.

The unit provides 45W of charging power to connected laptops through the Thunderbolt 3 port. While not sufficient to maintain full charge when a computer is under heavy load, the unit provides sufficient power to significantly reduce battery drain and will charge a connected computer fully given time when not in use.

The unit measures 3.2 pounds, 6 inches wide, 5.12 inches long, and 2 inches tall — seen pictured with an iPhone SE in a Newer KX case for comparison.

While Apple was rumored to be working on a display with an integrated GPU, Sonnet may have a solution for inventive users. We've also got the VESA "PuckCuff mount for the breakaway puck on hand, so going forward we'll experiment with strapping the Puck to the back of a display, and see what we can do about attaching it to our wall-mounted articulated arms.

But, don't plan on using the included Thunderbolt 3 cable for this. At 18 inches, it is far too short to be of any practical use. Plan on spending about $50 for a longer, active cable.

Initial AppleInsider tests show the RX 560 to be faster, but close to the speed of the GPU included in the 15-inch 2017 MacBook Pro. We haven't strained the pair in parallel at this point — so a closer examination will have to wait for the full review.

Non-quantitative observations show the eGFX Breakaway Puck to be slightly quieter than the eGFX Breakaway Box with the RX580 PCI-E card installed, but as with benchmarks, a more precise measurement will have to wait for the full review.

The eGFX Breakaway Puck Radeon RX 560 has a retail price of $449. The higher-end eGFX Breakaway Puck Radeon RX 570 retails for $599. The optional PuckCuff VESA Mounting Bracket Kit sells for $59.

Latest Exclusives

Latest comparisons

13 Comments

lilred505 4 comments · 7 Years

About 7 years ago

I'd love to see the benchmarks and real world performance with this paired with an older Thunderbolt 2 Mac (iMac, MacBook, mini etc..). Just add on the $50 apple thunderbolt 3-2 cable and you'd be good to go. This could extend the life of my mid 2012 MacBook pro for another few years. Id buy it in a heartbeat if graphics performance was close to the performance of the new MacBooks. Cant wait for benchmarks.

Mike Wuerthele 6901 comments · 8 Years

lilred505 said:

I'd love to see the benchmarks and real world performance with this paired with an older Thunderbolt 2 Mac (iMac, MacBook, mini etc..). Just add on the $50 apple thunderbolt 3-2 cable and you'd be good to go. This could extend the life of my mid 2012 MacBook pro for another few years. Id buy it in a heartbeat if graphics performance was close to the performance of the new MacBooks. Cant wait for benchmarks.

We've checked Thunderbolt 1 and 2 compatibilities with all the other eGPU enclosures we've tried. That said, you have a mid-2012. That means you have Thunderbolt 1.

That's a really bandwidth-constrained environment. While it's 10Gbit per second per channel, with two channels, it'll only use one of them resulting in one quarter the effective data transfer rate as TB3.

It's hard to recommend spending money on an eGPU for a TB1 machine.

GeorgeBMac 11421 comments · 8 Years

Mike Wuerthele said:

lilred505 said:

I'd love to see the benchmarks and real world performance with this paired with an older Thunderbolt 2 Mac (iMac, MacBook, mini etc..). Just add on the $50 apple thunderbolt 3-2 cable and you'd be good to go. This could extend the life of my mid 2012 MacBook pro for another few years. Id buy it in a heartbeat if graphics performance was close to the performance of the new MacBooks. Cant wait for benchmarks.

We've checked Thunderbolt 1 and 2 compatibilities with all the other eGPU enclosures we've tried. That said, you have a mid-2012. That means you have Thunderbolt 1.
That's a really bandwidth-constrained environment. While it's 10Gbit per second per channel, with two channels, it'll only use one of them resulting in one quarter the effective data transfer rate as TB3.

It's hard to recommend spending money on an eGPU for a TB1 machine.

Perhaps his answer will come when more mainstream but lower performance & lower cost eGPUs become available? Right now its all bleeding edge stuff.

Along those lines: I see enormous growth potential here for enabling lower power mobile/portable devices to drive large(r) screen applications.

GeorgeBMac said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

lilred505 said:

I'd love to see the benchmarks and real world performance with this paired with an older Thunderbolt 2 Mac (iMac, MacBook, mini etc..). Just add on the $50 apple thunderbolt 3-2 cable and you'd be good to go. This could extend the life of my mid 2012 MacBook pro for another few years. Id buy it in a heartbeat if graphics performance was close to the performance of the new MacBooks. Cant wait for benchmarks.

We've checked Thunderbolt 1 and 2 compatibilities with all the other eGPU enclosures we've tried. That said, you have a mid-2012. That means you have Thunderbolt 1.
That's a really bandwidth-constrained environment. While it's 10Gbit per second per channel, with two channels, it'll only use one of them resulting in one quarter the effective data transfer rate as TB3.

It's hard to recommend spending money on an eGPU for a TB1 machine.

Perhaps his answer will come when more mainstream but lower performance & lower cost eGPUs become available? Right now its all bleeding edge stuff.

Along those lines: I see enormous growth potential here for enabling lower power mobile/portable devices to drive large(r) screen applications.

Don't get me wrong -- anything Lilred gets will be faster than what's on board. I just think that maybe the money is better saved for a new machine.

simms327 2 comments · 7 Years

Does this mean one could buy a 13" MBP w/o touch bar and have it run a powerful graphics card for FCP when at a desktop work station, but still have excellent portability?