Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Details Expanded 4K Display Support Included in OS X 10.9.3

thedarkhorse said:
You can push 4k over TB1, just not at 60hz like this update adds on TB2 computers. TB1 is limited to 24 or 30hz at 4k
Click to expand...
I understand the TB limitation; I was asking in regards to OSX. 🙂

The article states:

Running OS X 10.9.3, the 2013 Mac Pro and the 2013 Retina MacBook Pro now support several new 4K displays, including the Sharp PN-K321, ASUS PQ321Q, Dell UP2414Q, Dell UP3214Q, and the Panasonic TC-L65WT600.

This implies that only those two models support 4K displays (regardless of refresh rate). Can I plug a 4K monitor into a Mac Mini or Macbook Air (with Thunderbolt) and have full OS display options to run it (granted, at 30hz), or will it just not work due to an OS limitation? I realize that TB1 supports 4K/30hz, but that doesn't mean the OS plays nicely with it.

----------
zorinlynx said:
Does anyone know what happens if you plug one of these displays onto an earlier Mac than the ones listed on that page? Like my 2012 iMac?

Will I get 4K resolution @ 30Hz? or will it not work at all?
Click to expand...
Right, this was my question. And not just will it show a picture, but will it have scalability options through the OS like the rMBP does on its display, or be locked to a single resolution?
 
Viewing distance

I hope users know they need to view their 32 inch monitor from less than 12" if they want to see the full resolution. Sorry, but that's too close for me.
 
thekev said:
You can't effectively displace 27" with a 4K 21". 24" is probably the smallest practical size for the top imac.
Click to expand...

I just think apple will follow the iphone model with the 5c and 5s. I also don't think there is a gpu available to drive a 27" retina imac yet. 21" yes.

If I remember correctly they did the same thing with the MBP. Retina came to 13" first then 15".
 
Sneakz said:
No official Samsung U28D590D support? Arguably the most popular based on its price.
Click to expand...

WTF does Apple need to "officially support" every stinking monitor being manufactured? That could get really ugly really fast trying to depend on Apple to release new drivers all the time when they cannot even keep their regular video drivers and 3D system up-to-date in a timely fashion. There should be a STANDARD that all 4k monitors support and Apple should then just support that standard, not this piece meal one-at-a-time approach.
 
Can anyone confirmed whether the latest Macbook Pro 13 inches can support those monitors listed at 4K@60Hz using thunderbot 2 connector? Initially the change log clearly state only the 15 inch Macbook Pro will support it. Now this new page say something slightly different.
 
iBug2 said:
I don't think they will make a 4K display. They need a 5K display with the current tech or otherwise we'll have giant UI elements. That, or they need to update the OS for more resolution independence. The scaling method puts too much extra work on the GPU and the CPU.
Click to expand...

I'm worried that if I buy 2013 Mac Pro now then if a 5K display comes out it won't work on the 2013 Mac Pro.

But if Apple release a 4K display I will buy that and a Mac Pro straight away.

I always use the 'best for display' resolution on my 15 inch rMBP as I find the other modes are nowhere near as sharp, I think I'd do this too on any desktop monitor.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-05-16 at 4.46.15 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-05-16 at 4.46.15 PM.png
    166.2 KB · Views: 181
ericdyk said:
I just think apple will follow the iphone model with the 5c and 5s. I also don't think there is a gpu available to drive a 27" retina imac yet. 21" yes.

If I remember correctly they did the same thing with the MBP. Retina came to 13" first then 15".
Click to expand...

Who said anything about retina? I said 4K. You are incorrect on the rmbp. The 15" came out mid 2012. The 15" rmbp came out in June 2012. The 13" came out in October. The 15" models probably carry higher margins. They could do that as an upgrade to the 21", but it doesn't actually have to be retina. As for drivers, many gpus are capable of supporting 4K. If they want to support a custom resolution that no one else will use, it won't be a matter of simply waiting for drivers to show up.
 
SirHaakon said:
Do these only work on the newest Mac Pro and Retina MBP because of the Thunderbolt 2 support? Can one not push 4K over Thunderbolt (1)?
Click to expand...

I believe you need like 14GB/s+ for 4k. That's why TB(thunderBolt)3 will be the true update to TB. TB1 and TB2 are both 20GB/s connections. TB1 was 2 10GB/s with TB2 combined the two into one 20GB/s lane. TB Display uses about 7GB/s by itself. Since TB1 is limited to 10GB/s per lane you can't push thought enough data to run a 4K monitor. That's not taking into account you graphic card limits.

That's one of the reasons I'm waiting to upgrade my Macbook Pro early 2011. I'll either get a Mac Pro or wait until 2015 when TB3 is to come out. That and I have to save up for it.
 
nol2001 said:
I'm worried that if I buy 2013 Mac Pro now then if a 5K display comes out it won't work on the 2013 Mac Pro.

But if Apple release a 4K display I will buy that and a Mac Pro straight away.

I always use the 'best for display' resolution on my 15 inch rMBP as I find the other modes are nowhere near as sharp, I think I'd do this too on any desktop monitor.
Click to expand...

I think 5K should be able to work with TB2 as well. The bandwidth should suffice.
 
$150B in the bank and they can't hire a few extra worker bees to find time to get a new Thunderbolt Display out the door? Only been 3 years and millions left on the table.
 
iBug2 said:
I think 5K should be able to work with TB2 as well. The bandwidth should suffice.
Click to expand...

TB2 may in theory have 20Gb/s bandwidth. But unfortunately all Intel TB2 controller uses x4 PCIe 2.0 interface which has already close to max out at 4k @ 60hz resolution. Any higher resolution, higher refresh rate, or higher color bit rate seems to be impossible. x4 PCIe 3.0 interface will double the bandwidth but that's probably we are talking about the next generation of hardware.
 
Nacho3891 said:
Anyway, I want THAT wallpaper.
Click to expand...

It think it's Danali/Mt McKinley, so you could find something similar with a google image search.


If it was a California mountain, we'd probably assume that's the name of the next OS X release. 🙂
 
imac futures?

I am one who knows nothing about computers but check in here hopping for evolution clues for the imac. Do you think this could also signal a retina imac boost or at the very least, reasonable to think this 4k update thus allows the possibility to exist that an upgraded imac could arrive in the distant future?

----------

Same 4k store showing mountain wallpaper.....That wallpaper looks so "PC" to me...You want that? (said with a questioning tone of disbelief)
 
When will we get resolution independence, so you can run it at native resolution and have larger text & UI elements?

I dislike the promotion of this scaling crap as being a viable solution to the text getting to small on larger screens with a higher pixel count.

Would it really kill them to have a second display preference for the interface elements like: smaller, normal, larger, extra large?
 
Just make all your Mac products come built-in with 4K Retina Display already. No need for all these other products.
 
Jetfire said:
I believe you need like 14GB/s+ for 4k. That's why TB(thunderBolt)3 will be the true update to TB. TB1 and TB2 are both 20GB/s connections. TB1 was 2 10GB/s with TB2 combined the two into one 20GB/s lane. TB Display uses about 7GB/s by itself. Since TB1 is limited to 10GB/s per lane you can't push thought enough data to run a 4K monitor. That's not taking into account you graphic card limits.

That's one of the reasons I'm waiting to upgrade my Macbook Pro early 2011. I'll either get a Mac Pro or wait until 2015 when TB3 is to come out. That and I have to save up for it.
Click to expand...

If TB1 has a limit of 20GBPS and one TB Display uses 7GB, then how are people running a triple TB display setup on TB 1? Just curious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back