5K screen for new Macbook Pros?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by TwoBytes, Aug 10, 2016.

  1. TwoBytes, Aug 10, 2016
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2016

    TwoBytes macrumors 68020

    TwoBytes

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    #1
    Is the hardware cheap/powerful enough to support 13 & 15 inch screens?

    This would really equalise the playing field between choosing and iMac vs Macbook if apple were to release 5K screens for the next MacBooks.
     
  2. TwoBytes thread starter macrumors 68020

    TwoBytes

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    #3
    Shame. So the best Mac screens are set to look like the iMac for the foreseeable future.
     
  3. Schranke macrumors 6502

    Schranke

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    #4
    There might come a new display which offers a better resolution. but we know nothing yet
     
  4. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #5
    I'd expect the new laptops to support wide-gamut color. But higher resolution panels? That is very unlikely.
     
  5. PKBeam macrumors regular

    PKBeam

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Location:
    NSW, Australia
    #6
    5K is unnecessary unless your eyes are ridiculously close to the screen.

    Certainly - it would be possible, but with the extra GPU and battery life strain, who would really want it?
     
  6. TwoBytes thread starter macrumors 68020

    TwoBytes

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    #7
    Being a laptop, people are often closer physically to the screen and a desktop. It would work. The GPU of what's offered in laptops vs desktops isn't that far apart..
     
  7. Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #8
    Nope, from the skylake specs:

    Max Resolution (HDMI 1.4)‡4096x2304@24Hz
    Max Resolution (DP)‡ 4096x2304@60Hz
    Max Resolution (eDP - Integrated Flat Panel)‡ 4096x2304@60Hz
     
  8. symphara macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    #9
    I'd think you need at least a 27" screen to have any advantage from a 5k resolution. It's impractical and (in my opinion) totally unnecessary on a laptop, since you probably wouldn't see any difference compared to the current hi-res laptop screens.
     
  9. TwoBytes thread starter macrumors 68020

    TwoBytes

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    #10
    Ah, thanks for the technicals that solidify the answer!
     
  10. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #11
    You have fewer pixels, but they're spread across a smaller area. If you look at the retina displays, Apple has consistently doubled the pixel count in each dimension with respect to the prior standard resolution (yielding 4x the number of pixels). That's why you have 4K on the 21" imac (1920 x 1200 or 1920 x 1080 doubled) and 5K on the 27". The notebooks used the same formula. The standard resolution rather than high res was used.
     
  11. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #12
    That's what I'm thinking, I have to scale the resolution up one notch for my iMac because I think the text/images are too small at the default 5k rendering. I can't imagine how small the text will be for a 5k 15" display (never mind a 13"display)
     
  12. robvas macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #13
    Really? I find it just about right. I could go a little smaller. I like a little closer to 125-130 dpi on a laptop, and 120 or so on a desktop.

    Apple MacBook Air 11.6″ 1366×768 135
    Apple MacBook Pro 17″ 1920×1200 133
    Apple MacBook Pro 15.4″ 1680×1050 129
    Apple MacBook Air 13.3″ 1440×900 128
    Apple MacBook Pro 13.3″ 1280×800 113
    Apple MacBook Pro 15.4″ 1440×900 110
    Apple iMac 27″ 2560×1440 109
    Apple iMac 21.5″ 1920×1080 102
     
  13. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #14
    And at some point they are likely to introduce 3x retina (just as they did on the iPhone). But there is not much purpose going higher then 500-700 PPI — at those resolutions a display would approach/surpass the quality of high-end printed media. Once we have reached such pixel densities, the entire concept of display resolution becomes obsolete, as the eye won't be able to distinguish pixel errors in the first place.
     
  14. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #15
    5K on a rMBP is very unlikely at this point. Apple could bump up the resolution on the 13" to 2880x1800 (1440x900 HiDPI) and the 15" to 3360x2100 (1680x1050 HiDPI) for more screen space but as far as I know there are no rumors as to a resolution increase. Support for the P3 color gamut (as seen on the 4K/5K iMac) is very likely on the new rMBPs.
     
  15. xmonkey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2016
    Location:
    CA
    #16
    5K? No thanks. I like having usable battery life.
     
  16. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #17
    They only recently added that 2x retina option the imacs, and some lower resolution models are still sold today. I don't think you'll see anything like that until after 2x becomes the standard resolution across all Macs rather than an upsell.
     
  17. robvas macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #18
    They only did 3X because they made the phone bigger. The resolution isn't really higher PPI wise
     
  18. FlyingTexan macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2015
    #19
    It's retarded to think your eyes could see that. Just wasted gfx performance. 13/15inch screen would need a magnifying glass to see a pixel.
     
  19. unagimiyagi macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #20
    the best bet is for apple to release a 5K standalone thunderbolt display, or allow target display mode in any new imacs.
    Then anyone who wants a 5K display can just buy it and attach any modern macbook pro to it.
     
  20. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #21
    Pixels per inch is the important metric. iMac is 27" and macbook pro is 13-15" 5k pixels on a 15" screen would be overkill.
     

Share This Page