That doesn't explain how an external display can be driven at 5120x2880 over a single cable using any currently existing or proposed interface. I did read that, btw, you'll note my nickname in the comments there as well.
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 Posts 27" Retina iMac-Sized OS X Mavericks Background
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That doesn't explain how an external display can be driven at 5120x2880 over a single cable using any currently existing or proposed interface. I did read that, btw, you'll note my nickname in the comments there as well.
I read on these forums a few times that required bandwidth for such a display would need to be double that of the current thunderbolt standard. That I don't know for sure just going by what I have read here a few times. I really hope that isn't the case though and you're right
Dang, I was thinking about getting a new iMac or Thunderbolt display. Now I'll have to wait for the Retina version (assuming there'll be one) as the MacBook Retina screen is drop-dead gorgeous.
I hadn't expected today's announcements to derail my upgrade plans, but all credit to them, they've managed it. There's a nice Mac-R2D2-Pro space available on my desk already...
I hadn't expected today's announcements to derail my upgrade plans, but all credit to them, they've managed it. There's a nice Mac-R2D2-Pro space available on my desk already...
Actually, it wasn't really sarcasm. That image is almost 3x the size of the 2560x1440 picture, so it will take 3x to download. Then, I'm talking about all of the websites that you go to start programming for retina displays and putting up content like that, and all of the sudden you will find that your cache is 3 times what it is today, and it takes longer to surf - Safari won't seem quite as "snappy" anymore, and it's because its dealing with a ton more data.
I wasn't talking just about one picture, but the notion that once this happens to all of the pictures on all of the sites that folks visit with retina machines, then things get out of hand.
I read on these forums a few times that required bandwidth for such a display would need to be double that of the current thunderbolt standard. That I don't know for sure just going by what I have read here a few times. I really hope that isn't the case though and you're right
Lucky for thunderbolt 2 then
People won't put up with the high incur costs of using TB versus the much much cheaper USB 3.0 cables and devices. They want the best performance for cheap, that's only possible through USB.
For hard drives and such, USB 3 is fine for most folks, they're not doing anything that requires ultra-low latency and can put up with the CPU spikes, they usually have good enough CPU to handle such a demand.
Nobody wants to pay 20-30$ a cable in addition to 50-100$ higher price just to use TB on a hard drive. You can get 2TB USB 3.0 device for 100-120$ on a good deal and use any USB 3.0 cable for less than 5$. Good luck trying to find 2TB Thunderbolt one for less than 200$ and a good quality cable for less than 20$.
What are you talking about? What display is there that uses 5120x2880?
Remember two display that uses 5120x2880 are not the same as a single display using 5120x2800. Those two displays are going into two separate ports that can handle the bandwidth where the a single port can't.
Just switched my desktop to this new one, but wondering if anyone has or has seen the image instead from the banner where you can see the top of the wave? Even for my iPhone or iPad, I'd like to have the other one that doesn't look so zoomed in.
How do PCs connect to devices like the Pegasus R6 (which exceeds the bandwidth of USB 3)? Six eSATA cables?
There are PC or Television focused screens that are 5120x2880 for sale... At least outside of specialty commercial signage..
Couldn't agree more
----------
Now, if it only would stay as the background after a restart.....
Yeah uhh... why does that happen on my rMBP all the time? Lol I kind of just ignore it, but it is kind of annoying.
----------
Found me new wallpaper
My prediction is that later this year we'll see a retina iMac with 4k display and a simultaneous release of a standalone 4K ACD. Shortly thereafter the new MP will become available.
My only wish is that Apple will offer us Pros a 4K ACD (in either 27" or 30") that is either anti-glare or with an anti-glare option.
My only wish is that Apple will offer us Pros a 4K ACD (in either 27" or 30") that is either anti-glare or with an anti-glare option.
1. Mountain Lion and Cougar is the same thing.
2. John Mellencamp was originally john mountain lion mellencamp.
3. 1 is true, 2 is not.
That's what this whole discussion is about. Apple has created background art that measures 5120x2880, which is presumably the resolution of the next generation iMacs and Apple Thunderbolt Displays. How do you drive an ATD at that resolution with a single cable? If you're paying attention, that is not twice the pixels of the current 2560x1440 panels, but 4x.
Nope. 1 Gbit = 1,000,000,000 bits. There are no base 2 antics involved here. 20 Gbit = 20,000,000,000 bits.
And when you're calculating the bandwidth requirements of a display, you need to account for various types of overhead. More "pixels" are required than are actually displayed. For VESA CVT (Coordinated Video Timings), there are blanking intervals, front porch, sync, and back porch in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions. 5120x2880 at 60 Hz with reduced blanking ends up being 5280x2962. So 5280 * 2962 * 24 * 60 = 22,520,678,400 bit/s, which is pretty darn close to 22.52 Gbit/s. Thunderbolt 2 provides exactly 20 Gbit/s per link to the upper layers, and DisplayPort 1.2 with HBR2 offers 17.28 Gbit/s over a 4-lane main link.