8k iMac ??

Discussion in 'iMac' started by roadkill401, Apr 6, 2015.

  1. roadkill401 macrumors 6502


    Jan 11, 2015
    I wonder with the posting from LG about an 8k iMac, I am wondering what size display that would be?

    Lets face it, they can only squish them pixels so small. Like I have not seen a 20" 4K monitor yet. So if they are going to an 8k, will it mean that they are going to require a larger screen than the current 27"??
  2. pmau macrumors 65816

    Nov 9, 2010
    I'm guessing a new monster MacPro with a long-expected 8k display that you can only order with the machine, if you have the money ;)
  3. rkaufmann87 macrumors 68000


    Dec 17, 2009
    Folsom, CA
    At least 54"!:)
  4. loekf macrumors 6502a


    Mar 23, 2015
    Nijmegen, The Netherlands
    It's not that crazy, maybe journalists can't read numbers and it's actually a 3840 x 2160 = "4K" screen with ~8 million pixels ?

    8K (~33 pixels, 7680 x 4320) on a < 30" monitor makes no sense to me. I saw 8K on IBC in Amsterdam 2 years ago and on that 1.5 meter wide projection screen it looks almost real.
  5. Sciuriware macrumors 6502


    Jan 4, 2014
    If you want to spend your money on something you believe in ....
    ... it's YOUR money.
    But, I recently tested an iMac vs. a full blown iMac Retina, side by side.
    Well, the difference was hard to see and the faster CPU was hardly noticed.
    So, for most of us, the top model is sheer luxury.
    And soon it may be topped by a model with quadruple pixels, 16-core CPU,
    80 Tb disk and a gold lining ....
    I'm just glad I can choose.
  6. redheeler macrumors 604


    Oct 17, 2014
    That rumor is rubbish. The next resolution change is still years off, and I wouldn't be surprised if they skip plain old 8K and go strait to 10K ;)

    Clearly you have not seen some of the insanely high pixel densities found in smartphones, some double the 220 PPI of the 5K iMac.
  7. aevan macrumors 68030


    Feb 5, 2015
    Well, it's not that simple. First, you look at the smartphone screens from a much closer distance, so a higher ppi is more noticeable. However, it doesn't stop there. Not all ppi is the same. For example, pentile displays need much higher ppi to match the sharpness of non-pentile screens. So, a 500ppi pentile AMOLED is not the same as a 500ppi LCD, because they use subpixels. A photo-aligned LCD like the one on an iMac 5K is not like a small 5.5 screen with a supbixel matrix scheme. And I think even LCD screens of that size use tricks to make the whole process less taxing. That is why a phone can run a high resolution screen while a, say, MacBook Pro can struggle with it - because it's not the same. One is a mass market consumer device and the other one is something intended for professionals as well. Also, Macs use better and more demanding supersampling methods than mobile devices.

    So, I think we're still far away from 8K screens on iMacs or even Mac Pros. It would be very demanding even for top hardware and the benefits are questionable for anything other than 40+ inch screens.

    Apple doesn't do something just to have a "first!" moment. Currently, I don't see a need for desktop screens higher than 200ppi. My Retina Macs look just as well if not better than my iOS Retina devices, unless I get close enough to strain my eyes. For something that would be hard to notice, the tradeoffs of 8K would be too much. Unless they are actually working on a gigantic retina screen (but then again, I don't see what a super-expensive and problematic 40" 8K screen could do that 2 5K 27" monitors couldn't).

    I could be wrong, but I don't expect 8K Macs anytime soon.
  8. fisha macrumors regular

    Mar 10, 2006
    I think there certainly is a future in 8k as it's the natural quad of 1920 hd stuff.

    I remember reading an article that a fixed place 8k camera in a football stadium could have enough resolution such that you could drag a 1920 hd loupe window around the 8k image and that would be good enough for normal hd broadcast. I.e. You wouldn't need a camera man moving the camera at the stadium.

    So having an 8k display to handle that and follow the ball could be done remotely. . . . . And also would capture all events on the pitch at once . .. Even off the ball incidents.
  9. AsprineTm macrumors member

    Jun 14, 2014
    Smells like a Imac Pro to me. Comes right in time with Skylake and Nvidia GPUs with the second generation of HBM memory.
  10. bulldoze macrumors regular

    Mar 15, 2011
    I am hoping for a 2015 iMac with a curved 32" screen.

    Curved TV screens are a curiosity and the benefits are minimal as you sit too far way, but a curved PC monitor? doesn't this make perfect sense?
  11. owleyes macrumors newbie

    Apr 7, 2015
    The 4K (or 8K) represents pixels PER INCH. All things being relative, making a 20" or a 90" screen, the pixels are the same size.

    - Steve
  12. WilliamG macrumors G3

    Mar 29, 2008
    Err... no. That's simply incorrect. Everything you said there = incorrect.
  13. Sciuriware macrumors 6502


    Jan 4, 2014
  14. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 604

    Oct 24, 2013
    Look at the S6

    The galaxy S6 almost quadruples it. it'll still be awfully oversaturated and unnatural looking I am sure but it does have over 700ppi.
  15. kepler20b macrumors 6502

    Oct 18, 2014
  16. redheeler macrumors 604


    Oct 17, 2014
    Same things you can do with a 5K iMac, but in 8K.

Share This Page