Why wouldn't it work? I'd think TB2 or whatever DisplayPort runs through it should support 5K.
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.
Apple Announces 27-Inch iMac With Retina 5K Display Starting at $2500
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why wouldn't it work? I'd think TB2 or whatever DisplayPort runs through it should support 5K.
5120x2880 on a standalone display will require Thunderbolt 3 to power it. Find me a computer on the market with Thunderbolt 3.
iMac can do it because the display is hooked directly into the machine.
5K? DAMN! Seriously, how many 4K's are even in homes yet to even go a step higher and talk about bandwidth when watching a Movies or TV Shows in 5K. I do not mind new technology and improvements but they are jumping too fast, not one cable TV Network even broadcast in 1080p only in 480i, 720p and 1080i still.
Get ready for Comcast to slow your internet, good luck with getting anything even at 4K when watching Netflix. I appreciate what Apple is doing this but Apple also needs to find a way to work with ISPs to provide such a high resolution picture.
Get ready for Comcast to slow your internet, good luck with getting anything even at 4K when watching Netflix. I appreciate what Apple is doing this but Apple also needs to find a way to work with ISPs to provide such a high resolution picture.
yups
once again the MacPro users are being ignored
Dell announced a 5k display, it's probably based on the same panel..
Link
Well it could, it just that it would be suboptimal.. maybe only 30Hz display rate, or using two thunderbolt ports.. or maybe use it in PCI-x mode with an integrated GPU instead of the one on the Mac Pro.
Must resist....My late 2008 24" iMac is still going strong, beautiful, and more than capable of running Yosemite.
So I am still very happy with my iMac
Hehe. Yeah. I kept my last Mac for about 7 years and had every intention of doing the same with this 2009 iMac which is still going strong...
... until this came out this morning. The next 2 years is going to be one long struggle
I'm a little weirded out because of the pricing, of course a 5K retina display was never going to be cheap, but this sort of pro version of the iMac threads on Mac Pro territory.
Also, shame about the "old" Radeon R9 GPUs, no idea why Apple didn't go with Nvidia's latest 900 series chips (why pay $2500+ for a computer that uses last year's top GPU again?).
Also, shame about the "old" Radeon R9 GPUs, no idea why Apple didn't go with Nvidia's latest 900 series chips (why pay $2500+ for a computer that uses last year's top GPU again?).
You'd need to use two Thunderbolt cables running to two different Thunderbolt busses on the Mac Pro for it to work. And then it would only work with the Mac Pro.
I think eventually it will. I think the non-retina version will fade out over the next year or two, as the tech gets cheaper. Just like the laptops.
----------
Same here.
That makes for a more power efficient monitor, but not necessarily one that's lighter on the GPU. A pixel is a pixel, a fill rate a fill rate, and the GPU will treat it as such, no matter what kind of monitor its running on.
That said, the GPU is easily beefy enough to handle all the usual things people use a Mac for. No, it won't be able to play games at full on 5k, but it'll do everything else just fine.
So they rumor that it'd need a pair of DisplayPort 1.2 connectors to drive, so you would plug 2 DisplayPort cables into it, right?
Hope Apple will provide something similar in their Thunderbolt Display to let the Mac Pro drive it at 60 HZ.
This. I'd be pretty wary to impulsively buy this machine unless you really need one, you don't game, and you aren't OCD.
Ask yourself these questions:
How might you feel when this time next year they update the GPU to the NVIDIA GTX9XXM? If you answer is "what is NVIDIA?", then don't worry.
I'd also wonder what issues might mass production of 5k monitor's bring...have you had IR or yellowing issues on your rMBP?
They are also leveraging the production facilities for this preexisting iMac design, their purchasing power for components, and their knowledge of future part discounting increasing their overhead in the near future. So, instead, they are reducing current markup to gain more sales/hype knowing that future profit margins will only increase at the same price points.
First of all, you're dead wrong. The Mac Pro isn't getting "killed off". Unless you have proof then you're wrong. The products mentioned today are consumer products. The Mac Pro is for professional applications and the client base who buys them isn't looking for the next new feature about it to come out. Those customers are looking for a power workstation, not a consumer machine that needs a new added feature every 6 months to keep it popular.
But would a game running @ 1080p or 1440p look fuzzy on the 5K iMac, since it's non-native resolution? or is that no longer a concern with modern screens and pixels?
As I understand it the OS will be normally running pixel doubled ala the retina MBPs, so that's why everything will be crystal clear and not fuzzy. But if you run games at a literal (not doubled) 1080p, won't they be quite fuzzy?
[Edited this part because I confused TFT with TN panels, lol]
I think I'm gonna pass on this one. Intel's Skylake next autumn will be a lot faster, any kinks in the technology will be worked out, and it will probably cost at least $200 less. Learned my lesson with the 2012 rMBP bought on day one. Eventually Apple took it back because the image retention issues were so bad and put in a good Samsung display, but I get problems with the thing acting laggy, especially when switching desktops and things of that nature. This thing is pushing almost three times that number of pixels! I'll let you guys test it for me
I'm excited to try Yosemite tonight and see if it helps with the lag. The thing is still fast for many tasks, just needs a beefier GPU or something.
I think I'm gonna pass on this one. Intel's Skylake next autumn will be a lot faster, any kinks in the technology will be worked out, and it will probably cost at least $200 less. Learned my lesson with the 2012 rMBP bought on day one. Eventually Apple took it back because the image retention issues were so bad and put in a good Samsung display, but I get problems with the thing acting laggy, especially when switching desktops and things of that nature. This thing is pushing almost three times that number of pixels! I'll let you guys test it for me
I'm excited to try Yosemite tonight and see if it helps with the lag. The thing is still fast for many tasks, just needs a beefier GPU or something.
Last edited:
Edit, this is wrong: Thunderbolt 1&2 can technically do the throughput.
I just checked, you will need Thunderbolt 3 to do 5K, Thunderbolt 2 can do 4K.
One problem is your GPU can't do the resolution. The max output of the 750M (your graphics GPU chip) is 4096 x 2160 at 24Hz.
See: http://support.apple.com/kb/SP690?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US
- HDMI video output
- Support for 1080p resolution at up to 60Hz
- Support for 3840-by-2160 resolution at 30Hz
- Support for 4096-by-2160 resolution at 24Hz
Apple *might* be working on a Thunderbolt 5K display that supports TB2 connections with 4096x2160/38040x2160/1080p input and upscales it to 5K.
The power of your 750M isn't going to do much at 4096x2160 24Hz other than normal desktop apps. You can still play games at 1080p like a lot of people do on 4K displays.
Edit addition: What will be interesting, is if we will get a MacBook Pro update with GPU's that can support 5K external output...... I really really wish they'd tell us! PLEASE APPLE!
Last edited:
For those complaining about no NVIDIA 980-based GPU:
The NVIDIA 980 GPU was only announced and released by NVIDIA on September 18th. Only one month ago.
Granted, OEMs probably received stock before then. However, it still takes time to complete design changes, validation, and testing, and then not to mention manufacturing, etc in order to have the product make it into a shipping config, and on store shelves on day of announcement.
Put simply, Apple most likely chose the part that was available at the time they were ready to make changes, in which case, this would be the AMD part.
Don't get me wrong ... I empathize with everyone wanting an NVIDIA GPU, as I prefer them in general to AMD too, but it's just not realistic to expect Apple to be able to include them in a system so soon after that GPU's release, and in a system that also has a new 5K display (for which extra validation and testing with the GPU would have been required.) In short: NVIDIA missed the boat here, not Apple, and they (NVIDIA) will lose out on a bunch of sales as a result, because the 980 GPU just was not ready in time.
Also, don't get me started on the mini ... that was pure disappointment all-around for me.
The NVIDIA 980 GPU was only announced and released by NVIDIA on September 18th. Only one month ago.
Granted, OEMs probably received stock before then. However, it still takes time to complete design changes, validation, and testing, and then not to mention manufacturing, etc in order to have the product make it into a shipping config, and on store shelves on day of announcement.
Put simply, Apple most likely chose the part that was available at the time they were ready to make changes, in which case, this would be the AMD part.
Don't get me wrong ... I empathize with everyone wanting an NVIDIA GPU, as I prefer them in general to AMD too, but it's just not realistic to expect Apple to be able to include them in a system so soon after that GPU's release, and in a system that also has a new 5K display (for which extra validation and testing with the GPU would have been required.) In short: NVIDIA missed the boat here, not Apple, and they (NVIDIA) will lose out on a bunch of sales as a result, because the 980 GPU just was not ready in time.
Also, don't get me started on the mini ... that was pure disappointment all-around for me.
Seven pages and nobody has mentioned that Apple said this is a TFT display? I've been kind of out of the loop for the past year or two on display technology, but isn't TFT bad and in-plane switching (IPS) good? I thought TFT had terrible viewing angles and color reproduction.
I think I'm gonna pass on this one. Intel's Skylake next autumn will be a lot faster, any kinks in the technology will be worked out, and it will probably cost at least $200 less. Learned my lesson with the 2012 rMBP bought on day one. Eventually Apple took it back because the image retention issues were so bad and put in a good Samsung display, but I get problems with the thing acting laggy, especially when switching desktops and things of that nature. This thing is pushing almost three times that number of pixels! I'll let you guys test it for me
I'm excited to try Yosemite tonight and see if it helps with the lag. The thing is still fast for many tasks, just needs a beefier GPU or something.
Bro, almost all displays are TFT
and what about the cpu and gpu?
I don't buy that.
A) It's not profitable.
B) A BTO retina iMac with quad-core i7(~4790k?), 16gb of ddr3 ram and 4gb video ram costs 3200 [3500 after taxes]
I just built a hexa-core i7-5820k, 16gb of ddr4 ram, and gtx 980 computer with a 2k (1440p) display for about 2,000 after taxes.
So Apple is charging a ~1500 premium for a 2k->5k display upgrade.
Last edited: