iMac and TBD 4K

Serban said:

I really feel that Apple will bring with iMac refresh an 4K iMac and TBD. They are behind Samsung and they need their market people to buy from Apple and not Samsung

It is time.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/09/06/samsungs-4k-31-5-inch-monitor-eyes-on/

Click to expand...

You are comparing a monitor to an all-in-one computer. If I wanted to do a dual display setup, I could hook up that samsung monitor to the iMac. I could also take that same monitor and hook it up to a mac mini or a mac pro.

Serban said:

It is a samsung display for desktop so the imac has a display right? so....if they release only the TBD (Thunderbolt display) 4K they will kill the iMac sales...like me i would prefer the 4K display with a mac mini or mac pro or with a macbook.
So they have to come along both

Click to expand...

It cannot kill iMac sales because they're not even competing in the same market. It's like comparing a 4TB External hard drive to an iMac. The monitor is just an accessory.

Granted, the iMac is a beautiful display in its own right. Perhaps, sometime in the future we'll see screens even larger than 27" with higher resolutions. Right now, I'm looking at a 20 inch VGA monitor that is in dire need of replacement. Fortunately, that will happen when I grab my new iMac!

Serban said:

you dont understand me...apple need to release a 4K display. So that means a 4K thunderbolt display, but if apple only release the 4K TBD they will kill imac sells because everyone will want that 4K and for that they will buy the 4K TBD +mac mini/macbook/mac pro, instead of an 1080p(21.5")/1440p(27") iMac

Click to expand...

I wouldn't want a 4k display at this point in time. You need a lot more power to drive that size display and the current top of the line graphics card has enough difficulty running modern graphics applications at the native resolution with a good framerate. 4k is overrated at this point and I really have no idea why everyone is making such a fuss.

Serban said:

you dont understand me...apple need to release a 4K display. So that means a 4K thunderbolt display, but if apple only release the 4K TBD they will kill imac sells because everyone will want that 4K and for that they will buy the 4K TBD +mac mini/macbook/mac pro, instead of an 1080p(21.5")/1440p(27") iMac

Click to expand...

I think you're confusing your wants and needs w/ the market. And you also don't seem to know what kind of gpu power it takes to power a 4K display properly.

man a 4k 32inch imac would be amazing lol with dual gpus

"Everyone would want a 4K display"

First of all you should never use words like that, speaking for everyone is not wise. Lets take an iMac owner, my fiancé, she has a 2010 27" iMac, are you saying that she will want a 4K monitor when/if Apple releases it. She doesnt even know what 4K is nor would she care less about it. Who do you mean when you say "everyone"? do you mean all the people on this forum, or this thread or the State of California? I would bet the majority of people in the USA dont know what 4K is, and the I can only speak for the people I know, most dont care. You are projecting your wants on others, and not just a small amount of others. You are projecting your wants on "everyone".

I love the idea of high resolution screens, and when you look how far we have come in the last 10 years, its interesting thinking where we would be 10 years from now. I think Apple may not follow the 4K bandwagon and do what they do best, Lead. They may use a higher resolution, like the Mavericks Wallpaper download, I believe that is 5K.

I'm sure Apple with deliver higher resolution displays within a year's time or so, but at present time these displays are just too expensive for the mainstream market. You also have to consider the fact how Apple uses the retina resolutions, and also 4K with a regular resolution at 31'' is really pushing the limit regarding a practical UI/text size.

Serban said:

21.5" imac display is so old..1080p is already used in 5" mobile devices

Click to expand...

Well, I hope you get what you want, I don't need it. I will say this, IF they do that it won't be on the 21.5" model, they consider that to be the entry level Mac. The 27" has always had the premium feature set.

Serban said:

Apple is still a premium brand, so we can see a 4K thunderbolt display at 1500$ and 4K iMacs starting around 1799$

Click to expand...

Considering the cheapest 4K PC monitor is the Asus 31.5" at $3500, an Apple 4K Thunderbolt Display would be more like $4500 and a 4K iMac would be $6000.

Not sure "everyone" will want to spend that.

Serban said:

you dont understand me...apple need to release a 4K display. So that means a 4K thunderbolt display, but if apple only release the 4K TBD they will kill imac sells because everyone will want that 4K and for that they will buy the 4K TBD +mac mini/macbook/mac pro, instead of an 1080p(21.5")/1440p(27") iMac

Click to expand...

Apple has never worried about new products killing old. iPhones took sales from iPods - iPads took sales from MacBooks. If 4K TBD + Mac Pro takes sales from the iMacs, I would expect Apple to view that as a success - not a problem.

iMacs are currently using mobile GPUs in them.

a GTX Titan has trouble running a 4K.

This won't happen for at least another year, or more.

How would you run a 4K display with current GPU? Maybe if you only use it for desktop environment and some UHD videos playback .. it's fine.

How about gaming and 3D applications? Dual GPU barely runs for 1440p gaming, now 4K?

Serban said:

even that mobile gpu drives fluent now 5" 1080p like galaxy S4 and so on...and an powerful desktop cannot manage to run double of that

Click to expand...

Even low end GPU nowadays can run desktop environment of 4K resolution. The challenge comes when you do 3D and games. Not just Bad Piggies or Fruit Ninja kind of games.

Something like BF4, or maybe GTA V when it comes to PC. Runs in 4K .. hmm, well maybe not.
Sure you can downscale to 1080p but it defeats the purpose of owning 4K awesomeness.

iSayuSay said:

How would you run a 4K display with current GPU? Maybe if you only use it for desktop environment and some UHD videos playback .. it's fine.

How about gaming and 3D applications? Dual GPU barely runs for 1440p gaming, now 4K?

Click to expand...

easy. you would still run it in 1440p.

i remember the days when we used CRT displays with Pentium processors. Most of those CRTs could push 1200x1600 res, could I game on it? No, I used it for desktop only. I ran games usually in 800x600.

so there you go - I dont hear people complaining on 50 inch TVs either.

comatory said:

easy. you would still run it in 1440p.

i remember the days when we used CRT displays with Pentium processors. Most of those CRTs could push 1200x1600 res, could I game on it? No, I used it for desktop only. I ran games usually in 800x600.

so there you go - I dont hear people complaining on 50 inch TVs either.

Click to expand...

16:9 4K (which is what this thread is talking about) is 3840 × 2160, which is not pixel doubled from 1440p. You'll get quite a bit of "fuzziness"; similar to running 1080p on a 1440p display. CRTs didn't suffer this as much due to their design, but it was still apparent and it's not a valid solution.

50" TV's have a resolution of 1080p, too.

Serban said:

even that mobile gpu drives fluent now 5" 1080p like galaxy S4 and so on...and an powerful desktop cannot manage to run double of that

Click to expand...

Try getting that mobile GPU to drive any modern PC game and see where that gets you

If they have any chance of me getting it, it better have 2880 cuda cores, or mabey 5760 cuda cores with 2xGK110 in SLI. It must also have be 3840x2400 4k, not some other, funny 4k.

----------

iSayuSay said:

How would you run a 4K display with current GPU? Maybe if you only use it for desktop environment and some UHD videos playback .. it's fine.

How about gaming and 3D applications? Dual GPU barely runs for 1440p gaming, now 4K?

Click to expand...

My single 7970 manages 1600p pretty well.