A binned A19 Pro running the display is not a big deal. What I really care about is the specs of the screen itself. 5K 120hz would be ideal.
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.
'A19 Pro' Chip Coming to Studio Display 2
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, but the A19 Pro is probably more expensive to fab than older iPhone Pro class SoCs. Also one would think Apple would need all the A19 Pros they can get to feed iPhone Pro production. (though see below reply to DankeBrutas)
It runs the camera and other functions.
This does make some sense if it is using A19 Pros with too many defects to be used in any iPhone 17 model. So instead of just tossing the SoC into the bin to be recycled or disposed of, they could use it here as it likely only needs one or two functional cores of each type.
Last edited:
Such a weird story.
The Studio Display jumping from the A13 to the A19 Pro as a display controller would be bizarre.
Are we sure this isn't just following the rumoured A Series Mac laptop and isn't an education focused iMac?
The Studio Display jumping from the A13 to the A19 Pro as a display controller would be bizarre.
Are we sure this isn't just following the rumoured A Series Mac laptop and isn't an education focused iMac?
Some retro Mac users use BlueSCSI SD card adapters to replace the old internal hard drives.
The SoC on those BlueSCSI adapters is way faster than the Macs they're being put in.
Why does a display need a CPU this powerful? Hey Siri and all that crap is just a larger attack surface for hackers.
Pardon my ignorance but why do displays need a chip? Is this because of the webcam or maybe smart capabilities? I have a 30" ACD and I also believe the XDR don't have any chips on them and they last a long time. I'm afraid adding chips will just diminish the longevity of displays.
This is also my gripe. This is so stupid. The Studio Display line and the iMac line should merge… and the Studio Display should use a modular logic board (based around Type C Thunderbolt) that can be swapped out. "Studio Display" would be equipped with a basic monitor driver board. Better yet, it would also feature Apple TV functionality. (If the iPad can run Safari and Excel, there's no reason why these things can't do that too with a BT keyboard and mouse added.) "iMac Studio" would be the same panel but with a M5 module in there, same performance as the Mac mini and MBA. Down the line, want to upgrade to a M7 iMac? OK, swap out the M5 module for a Display module and gain a 2nd monitor. (Better yet, IMHO, the "iMac module" should be able to put into Target Display Mode with a firmware update, turning it into a Display Mode. Any nonsense about energy savings is a red-herring… the M4/M5 are power-sippers compared to the driver boards in the older Apple displays.) This could be done at an Apple Store or by an Apple Authorized Repair Partner.
Along those lines, the 24-inch iMac (which, also IMHO, should drop the "i" and become just "Mac") would incorporate the same modular motherboard design, but not have a Display version… just a Mac. But it should also be able to be converted into Display Mode with a dedicated firmware update. Users could then purchase 24-inch Macs to use as monitors if they don't want 27-inch billboards on their desks.
For all the talking that Apple does about environmentalism, the fact that the iMac is so entirely wasteful and the Stupido Display is so "dumb" is unconscionable.
(As an aside, seems to me that if the Apple TV, Studio Display, Mac mini, iMac, and MacBook Air all consolidated around a modular motherboard design, Apple could benefit greatly. The M# Pro mini and the Mac Studio should share a Pro mobo with the MBP too. Why Apple doesn't seem to consolidate down like this puzzles me. Even iPhone/Pro and iPhone Plus/Pro Max use different mobos… WHY????)
Please write a letter to Tim Cook letting him know his project managers, systems engineers, and hardware engineers don't know what they are doing and are making a terrible mistake!
Or... could it be that maybe they know what they're doing and tech forum pundits have no clue?
Most high-end displays have embedded processors rather than hard-wiring dedicated circuitry for all of the controls. Many other manufacturers offer firmware updates for their displays (link to random Dell firmware update page) which is kinda a clue that they have processors. Sticking a phone-class processor in a Studio Display to run things doesn't make it an iMac.
They might also have to perform upscaling/downscaling if fed with a non-native resolution or colour depth.
I guess operating MiniLED backlighting in response to an incoming HDR signal also needs processing.
The Studio Display also has to drive a smart webcam with subject tracking etc. and also drive a spatial audio speaker setup.
So, yes, it needs a processor, preferably with a GPU that can process 5k HDR video and spatial audio.
Now, the A19 Pro still sounds like overkill vs. using a third party embedded processor and some sort of embedded OS/firmware framework - but I expect Apple can get A19 Pros at "mates rates" - plus they will already have Apple Silicon driver software for spatial audio and webcams to use in iPhones, HomePods etc. so it probably makes sense for Apple to eat their own dogfood.
...Apple will be making A19 Pros by the metric shedload for the iPhone which should push the cost right down, especially if they can use "binned" chips for the display.
Why?
It's no different to any other modern peripheral with a processor & updatable firmware (like, well pretty much everything! These days, if you plug it in it's probably got an ARM or some other processor/microcontroller running firmware rather than lots of expensive custom logic).
The Studio Display has no network connection, no user-installable/third party apps, no auto-updates that don't come via your computer, isn't dealing with cloud services, isn't a target for malware, and has absolutely zero reason to stop working when Apple stop updating the firmware.
I mean, Apple could always be jerks and deliberately knobble an old product out of greed - but that would be a case of pulling support from MacOS rather than a display firmware change. The fact that the SD is running "iOS" (probably a stripped-to-the-bone headless distribution) doesn't make that any more likely.
The alternative would be far worse - make the SD a dumb peripheral and put all the highly hardware-specific smarts in the Mac OS driver software - making it far more likely that the display would stop working on future MacOS as soon as Apple stop updating the drivers - and, unlike your display firmware, you'll will need to update MacOS periodically (or when you get a new Mac).
Well, I sold $1600 5K iMacs by the metric buttload. I know of 4 Studio Displays among all my clients. I have sold 3 M1 iMacs, and every one of those clients were peeved when they learned they couldn't use them as external displays for their M4 Pro MacBook Pros when they upgraded. Yup, Apple's brain trust really knows what they're doing, you're right.
The fact that you believe Apple's engineering folks have ANY control over what gets sold shows how dumb you are. Clearly you aren't actually familiar with how Apple works internally. (Hint: it is 'Marketing' that decides this stuff. And the senior Exec team members. Who get paid by stock, aka profits from high-margin, propaganda-sold kit that idiots buy just because there's a shiny Apple logo on it.)
First - maybe you should stop being passive-aggressive and rude towards Macrumors users calling them "tech forum pundits that have no clue".
Second - can you read? I have literally ASKED why a monitor would need that kind of SOC. How does that make ME a "tech forum pundit"? We're obviously discussing rumours but even if it happened to be true, I would love to know the reasoning behind putting slower chip in a MacBook compared to a monitor.
Third - you just responded "all excellent points that make a ton of sense" to a person that literally said "the A19 Pro still sounds like overkill" while being "sarcastic" and making "fun" of people that ask legit questions so maybe your "tech forum pundits that have no clue" is actually you describing yourself.
Anything to keep the price high. I don’t need the camera or speakers or Hey Siri, I want a nice Apple Display that matches my Mac without costing more than my Mac.
Sure, but were those sales going up or going down as laptops in general got more powerful & popular and Macs in particular started using the exact same SoCs in both laptops and desktops?
The end of the 5k iMac also saw the beginning of the Mac Studio and a much improved Mac Mini - previously, some of us only bought 5k iMacs because it was Apple's only non-stratospherically-expensive desktop option.
Yet the 5k iMacs always had the exact same issue, but still sold by the metric buttload.
...and they were upgrading from M1 iMacs ($1300) to M4 Pro MacBook Pros ($1999+) (as I said, there is a steady drift from desktop to laptop). Meanwhile Apple get some money for any MBP user who decides to fork out for a Studio Display vs zero money if they'd been able to use their iMacs as displays. Sounds like more money for Apple to me, so yeah, maybe they do know something!
I feel like they were talking about a new studio display like three years ago. Hopefully now is the time. Wake me up when they actually make a display with a higher refresh rate though.
The iPhone 17 / iPhone 17 Air is still going to have a minimum acceptable defect rate in terms of the compute, GPU and neural engine cores. If an A19 Pro SoC is so defective it does not have sufficient functioning cores, it would be rejected for iPhone use.
I apologize. Not making fun of anybody or being sarcastic. A tech forum pundit is someone who speculates about what a company, such as Apple, is developing. While not having the benefit of working there and having inside information as to what's being developed, and how. Thus, they have no clue, and must rely on guessing and speculation. It's not an insult.
Regarding my response "all excellent points," in my opinion they were.
"so maybe your "tech forum pundits that have no clue" is actually you describing yourself."
Absolutely with respect to me commenting about how Apple's product development process works internally, not having worked there.
However... I have worked for multiple companies in Silicon Valley that have developed products... as a systems engineer, hardware engineer, and project manager. And thus have some experience in the process.
These chipsets are just an excuse to charge ridiculous prices for their displays. Nothing but bs fluff