Apple has confirmed they're back in the display business and they'll (almost assuredly) launch the display in connection with next year's MacPro. I'm betting that that display will be 8k. If so, I just wondered what everyone's thoughts are on whether they'd offer that display on a 2019 iMac Pro?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
8k iMac Pro
- Thread starter Michael73
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the refresh rate of the iMac Pro is like that of the MacPro where updates can be years apart (currently 4.6 years) there won't be any 2019 iMac Pro.
They did say it would be a pro display, so don't be surprised if it has a pro price tag. They've pre-announced all of this because they are trying to stop professional users from leaving their ecosystem, which they've mysteriously only just realised they are willing to do when they are repeatedly disrespected.
Last edited:
What about a retina (curved) ultrawide display? Ie. a quadrupling of 3440x1440. Now, THAT would be something.
I totally expect this. I'm still using a 30" ACD that I paid $2k for back in the day. I love the matte display and 16:10 aspect ratio.
I could see an iMac Pro with a BTO 8K option (assuming an 8K display is launched with the MacPro next year) and a $2k(?) up-charge.
Thoughts?
That is highly unlikely for several reasons.
1. Apple really hasn't been in the new 'pure' monitor business in 14 years. It is highly unlikely they are going to do a complete 180 on that after 14 years. More likely Apple is being consistent in language usage here and 'display' really means Thunderbolt Display docking station.
The iMac Pro , MBP would also be targets of the display along with a new Mac Pro. It is not probable this new monitor is exclusively targeted at the Mac Pro. There are way more other Macs to attach an Apple monitor to than they will sell Mac Pro systems ( by their own admission Mac Pro are in the single digit range of the Mac market. That isn't likely to change. ).
8K would mean they would sell it to even less folks, totally decouples it from Thunderbolt , and almost guarantees will need a two cable solution... None of those Apple particularly wants to do. They haven't done any of those in over a decade.
2. This is tail wags the dog. The 27" Cinema/THunderbolt displays sailed in the bow wave of the 27" iMacs. 27" iMacs were the volume. 8K iMacs aren't going to be anyones volume leader.
Apple isn't going to pick 8K for some standalone display and that will drive iMac design constraints. That's is 180 degrees backwards "tail wag dog" motivation. It isn't the iMac's job to make the monitors more cost effective products.
Frankly, should be getting to the point on next iteration of 5K display where don't need the "custom" TCON and can drive them single connection.
3. If Apple did the same panel as in the 27" iMac and added an colorimeter addressable LUT and more calibration that would be "Pro" enough. The very high gamut on the iMac / iMac Pro is high. Much of the moaning and groaning though is about adjusting the colors and the color spaces provided.
A secondary moaning and groaning is about "matte". ( the modern Apple 27 panels used are significantly less reflective that 8-9 years ago. The "need' to mutate stuff on the glass to diffract light outside (and inside) the panel isn't as high as it was. )
That would be riding a maturing technology to a more evolutionary state. I wouldn't be surprised though if this was simply just a 27" panel used in the iMacs that just had 120Hz range to it and some HDR gamut/brightness adjustments . ( ProMotion from the iPad Pro moved up to the Mac space along with HDR certifications ).
Apple stayed out of the initial 4K "revolution". MP 2013 shipped with 3rd party 4K option in the Apple store. 4K monitor prices started out very high and rapidly dropped over the first 2 years. Apple got into a 4K display for iMac after the initial bubble.
Apple got into 5K earlier but coupled it to an iMac 27". They never did release a monitor. ( Well perhaps half started on one and then handed it over to LG to finish as the LG Ultrafine. ) Apple fumbled that 5K monitor situation. I think that is why they want to take control of it again. But that doesn't mean they are going to gamble on the high end on some super sky high monitor which only to see competition rapidly drive down those "year 1" prices. Apple likes to set a price and then stick to it. They also like "monitors" with one and only one input to them. The 3rd parties don't really want to do one of those (LG probably did what they were told not what they wanted to do).
If 8K panel prices are going to wildly fluctuate over the first 3 years they probably aren't going to touch them. They'll assign that risk to the 3rd parties. 8K's general usefulness is suspect. Better and higher color/range of pixels have now is more useful traction than just having more primarily just for "more " sake. 8K is bloat more than usefulness.
[doublepost=1535410082][/doublepost]
Dell's 4K HDR sells for more than their 4K Ultrasharps. 5K HDR would be more than those. They can have an higher than average 27" monitor price without just throwing pixel count at the problem. Dell prices their 4K HDR at $1,549 at the following line currently.
https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/sho...sories/ar/4009?~ck=mn&appliedRefinements=2542
The 8K is marked down over $1K in price ( that probably in part a gimmick). Apple doesn't need to sell a $2+K monitor to be "Pro".
If the Mac Pro is late in the year ( Q4 2019)., Apple wouldn't have to wait for the Mac Pro to release it. Apple didn't state they were tightly coupling the monitor to the Mac Pro. Neither one of them was going to ship in 2017, that's about it. It may be they both slide into 2019 but still not necessarily to the same spot.
The iMac Pro is probably getting an update in 2019. If the screen improves that's probably what would be coupled to Apple's new Display Docking solution.
The real problem was not the hardware. The primary problem was them not doing anything for long periods of time ( going into 'Rip van Winkle" mode). If Apple sits on the iMac Pro for 3-4 years without doing any upgrades it is the same problem. Apple doesn't need to "announce" they need to "do". For example, sitting on a finished Display (docking ) solution waiting on the Mac Pro to finish would be a bad idea.
It wouldn't surprise me if it was 8k (or 6k, which would be useful for editing 4k video with more palette space). It would probably also have to be 32" to accommodate such a display. That's not a killer for the iMac Pro, and might differentiate it from other iMacs. It would add volume to Apple's panel purchases for the pro monitor. The problem is that Dell's 32" 8K monitor is around $3600, most of which is panel cost. Figure that it adds $2000 to the cost of an iMac Pro since Apple's volume is much higher than a specialty Dell monitor, then subtract $500 for the 27" panel you're giving up. Right now, an 8K iMac Pro starts at $6499. Maybe that goes way down by the iMac Pro refresh...
Yep and will need more resources that will add a higher TDP to the chassis. Getting acceptable graphics performance at 8k... be nice if they put a powerful enough GPU in the 5k before making an 8k. The 580 is bang middle of the range and you have to spend £5000 to get a half decent internal solution.
I dont think 8k is on the horizon for a prosumer machine. I would say transitioning the 5k will make more sense with the newer HDMI, DP 1.4 and TB3 you can use one cable to push the pixels, cheaper to produce and people like it.
This is the iMac PRO - a Vega 64 should push 8K just fine! Here's an article showing that it's already possible using a standard PC Vega 64 and 2 DisplayPort 1.4 cables. Apple would undoubtedly use a customized card that was better set up for it...
https://techstunt.com/the-best-ever-screen-resolution-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-running-at-8k/
https://techstunt.com/the-best-ever-screen-resolution-amd-radeon-rx-vega-64-running-at-8k/