30" ACD on an iMac?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by wonga1127, Apr 2, 2006.

  1. wonga1127 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Location:
    Wishing for a magic bus.
    #1
    Maybe a dumb question, but would an intel iMac 20" support the 30" ACD without any kinks?
     
  2. mjstew33 macrumors 601

    mjstew33

    Joined:
    May 29, 2005
    Location:
    Illinois
    #2
    I doubt it, you need dual DVI. The iMac'll only give 1.

    I'm not sure, though.
     
  3. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #3
    Is this an Intel iMac?

     
  4. iPhil macrumors 68040

    iPhil

    #4

    No . the specs needed for the system to push that is:

    30-inch Cinema HD Display

    - Power Mac G5 (PCI-X) with ATI Radeon 9650 or better or NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT DDL or better with Mac OS X v10.3.9 or Mac OS X v10.4.2 or later
    - Power Mac G5 (PCI Express), all graphics options
    - PowerBook G4 with dual-link DVI support and Mac OS X v.10.3.9 or Mac OS X v10.4.2 or later
    - MacBook Pro with Mac OS X 10.4.4 or later
    - Windows PC and graphics card that supports DVI ports with dual-link digital bandwidth and VESA DDC standard for plug-and-play setup


    :eek: :eek:
     
  5. Caitlyn macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2005
    #5
    I believe so. I think you can only go up to 23" ACDs on the iMacs.
     
  6. Rod Rod macrumors 68020

    Rod Rod

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #6
    The iMac Core Duo does support being connected to the 30" Apple Cinema Display HD, but not at the full resolution. You'd get 1280x800 on the 30". That would be great for presentations but probably not for everyday use.
     
  7. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #7
    Yeah, the problem is the system Apple must use to connect such a high resolution monitor. It splits up the signal into two DVI signals, in two separate DVI cables, and re-integrates them at the monitor. So you cannot *really* use it on a Mac that doesn't have two DVI ports (and the capability to split a signal across them, I guess). :(
     
  8. Ryan T. macrumors 6502a

    Ryan T.

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #8
    It's not two physical cables guys, it's just a "dual link" port.
     
  9. Rod Rod macrumors 68020

    Rod Rod

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #9
    I think mkrishnan was trying to be funny.
     
  10. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #10
    Sorry, not funny, but overly simplistic. It's two discrete DVI-D signals, isn't it?
     
  11. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #11
    Two different signals (sort of), one cable. This is possible because DVI is capable of digital signals. Only 1s and 0s are being transfered and they correspond to a pixel on the monitor. The monitor must be displaying it's native resolution. It only has to update the pixels being changed and not the whole screen (unlike an analog signal). I'm sure someone else can elaborate more.
     
  12. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #12
    Then I'm not really sure I get it... what exactly is the difference between DVI with dual link and a normal DVI-D signal? The things you describe are all true about digital signals sent to a monitor in the absence of dual link. Well, except saying that it can transmit "update" images of only changed pixels. I'm not so sure that's true. But everything else seems the same.
     
  13. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #13
    I don't think it stretches, I'm pretty sure it would put a black border around that section of the screen.
     
  14. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #14
    Everything is the same except that one signal is sent, then the second signal is sent. Because the signal is digital and the bits transfer faster than the eye can see, the monitor can update before you can notice.
     
  15. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #15
    I don't mean to beat a dead horse... :eek: But if one cable sends the two signals down the same pipeline sequentially, then why on earth is this technology even necessary? How is that an improvement over just sending one larger signal over the same pipeline, since all the data is being sent through the same transfer mechanism, anyway. My impression was that dual link essentially used two separate parallel DVI pathways to get a higher throughput to enable the larger resolution....

    EDIT: I found this here:

    So *something* is bandwidth limited... but I guess it's the transceivers? But then how is it possible to have a non-dual-link-capable cable? There's some physical difference between the cables, it seems.
     
  16. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #16
    I'm not sure if the cable is different or if more pins in the cable are used.

    EDIT:
    The cable is different.
    http://money.howstuffworks.com/monitor3.htm
     
  17. Rod Rod macrumors 68020

    Rod Rod

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #17
    If I understand you correctly, you're asking for a reference. I don't have any except for what I remember from reading about people connecting their non-dual-link PowerBook G4s to the 30", and getting a stretched 1280x800 on it.

    This forum thread might give a clue also:
    http://forums.nvidia.com/lofiversion/index.php?t1201.html

    It's possible to have non-dual-link capable cables because there's a difference in the number of pins when you compare non-DL and DL cables.

    edit: grapes911, yup it's the number of pins being used (in the case of a DL cable in a single link application) and the number of pins present (in the case of a DL application).
     
  18. eXan macrumors 601

    eXan

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2005
    Location:
    Russia
    #18
    No it wouldn't. It would be very blurry, becasue it's not the native resolution, for such price its not worth it :rolleyes:
     
  19. Rod Rod macrumors 68020

    Rod Rod

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    #19
    :rolleyes: I didn't say it was a cost effective solution. Anyhow if you're giving a presentation and need a 30" screen for it, your audience will be far enough away to not notice the fuzziness. :rolleyes: Otherwise you'd do the presentation off your MBP / PB's screen.
     
  20. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #20
    Thank you for the education, Rod and Grapes. :) *goes off to apply for CE credit* :)
     
  21. grapes911 Moderator emeritus

    grapes911

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Location:
    Citizens Bank Park
    #21
    Hey, I learned some things here too. I had a general understanding, but it makes a lot more sense now. I love this forum. :)
     

Share This Page