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 Studio Display' With 7K Resolution Reportedly in Development
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
7K isn't just the feature, it's also the price.
Stand not included.
Stand not included.
I'm not sure we'll get a display with all those ports, but boy would I like one.
The Pro Display XDR only has a 1 TB port and 3 USB C ports that require a powerful graphics card (or cores) to make the USB C ports run at more than USB 2 speeds, so recent Apple display offerings have not been great re: ports.
This is something I’d be very interested in buying for use at work with my MBP M1 Max 16”. Using a 32” Samsung that they gave me right now, but there are issues with color rendition and the resolution isn’t great.
We don't know if Apple is going to keep $5k at the top end for this new 7K.
maybe? maybe not. I think we will still top out at 5K for the 7K since apple has had tons of behind-the-scenes marketing and sales info we are not privy to.
also, if they want to make "Studio" as a brand and series of systems, at the very least they might make the 6K much more affordable. and if that's the case. 7K @ $5K IMO.
Guess we will see how wrong or right I am soon.
When I say "sweet spot," I'm referring to the overall package: the quality of the panel, the integrated features, etc. It was an iMac without the brain, which meant it had decently good speakers and webcam. $1,000 is a lot, but it's not too far off from the cost of a basic 27" 1440p display in 2011.
It's all down to features, and it seems to me that Apple will have to focus specifically on creating something that no other brand has. In 2011, it meant doing what they did with the Tb display; today, it may take putting an M1 chip inside the display, to assist the laptop connected to it.
The typical viewing distance of a stand-alone monitor is greater than a laptop screen. the monitor does not need the same 255ppi to be considered “retina”. 220ppi is sufficient. Generally higher ppi are more expensive to make than lower ppi. That is why you see so may, relatively inexpensive, 34” and 43” 4K monitors out there.
it matters in the long arc of technology...
it will come out.
it will have certain specs.
it will be priced at a price.
Then the clock starts to tick as its tech becomes cheaper and cheaper and eventually moves to the mid and lower markets.
I am staring at the LG 5K display in front of me right now.
MUCH better than the screen I had on my Mac SE in 1998?! and cheaper too!
My sense of it (based on this vague rumour) is that this is a replacement for the current Pro Display XDR. Much like the original groundbreaking 22 inch Cinema Display from the late 90s was replaced by the more capable 20 and 23 inch versions within a few years.
The 2019 Pro Display XDR is great, and still has almost no real natural competitors in the market, but the display in the 16inch MBP is better in almost every way except absolute size and resolution. It proves you can move to a much denser higher resolution LED backlight array, with far lower thermal requirements, despite comparable light output (no need for the monstrous heat sink on the back of the current big XDR). This shouldn’t be a great surprise, 2 years have passed, and Apple have gained experience with their much higher volume iPads and MBPs.
My assumption about the built in Apple Silicon, is that dealing with a big dynamic FALD backlight as well as Apple does (meaning way better than it’s nearest competitors like Asus) requires a non trivial amount of processing power.
As for the 7K vs 8K issue, almost no real content is produced in 8K outside of a few YouTube videos of static landscapes, it’s a total non factor in real production work. And even then, content typically doesn’t map 1:1 to your UI display anyway. You’re zoomed in, zoomed out, UI panels here and there. It’s like saying someone working on a 12K x 12K document in Photoshop needs a 12K square screen. Most cinema work is still done at 2K, and even in the age of Ultra HD HDR streaming first shows, my experience is the vast bulk of the screens used to generate that content are as low rez as 1920x1200 SDR, with a bit of 2560x1400, and a handful of real 4K displays (again, think zooming and panning as you work).
The 6K res of the current XDR matters far more for text rendering than it does for video content. Where the XDR makes a difference for video production is it’s fully integrated and usable display of HDR content. There really isn’t anything else on the market that allows you to work on HDR content directly like a Mac with an XDR display does. This is of course a combination of MacOS, the Apps, and these displays.
As for the chap earlier saying he would choose an 8K Eizo with matte finish, good luck with that. Eizo don’t have anything even vaguely comparable to the current XDR. Nothing in 8K, and their only “real” HDR display is the CG3146, which comes in around 6X the price of the XDR. And if you want a matte finish, the nano finish glass, despite its brutal price, is the best matte finish I’ve ever seen.
The 2019 Pro Display XDR is great, and still has almost no real natural competitors in the market, but the display in the 16inch MBP is better in almost every way except absolute size and resolution. It proves you can move to a much denser higher resolution LED backlight array, with far lower thermal requirements, despite comparable light output (no need for the monstrous heat sink on the back of the current big XDR). This shouldn’t be a great surprise, 2 years have passed, and Apple have gained experience with their much higher volume iPads and MBPs.
My assumption about the built in Apple Silicon, is that dealing with a big dynamic FALD backlight as well as Apple does (meaning way better than it’s nearest competitors like Asus) requires a non trivial amount of processing power.
As for the 7K vs 8K issue, almost no real content is produced in 8K outside of a few YouTube videos of static landscapes, it’s a total non factor in real production work. And even then, content typically doesn’t map 1:1 to your UI display anyway. You’re zoomed in, zoomed out, UI panels here and there. It’s like saying someone working on a 12K x 12K document in Photoshop needs a 12K square screen. Most cinema work is still done at 2K, and even in the age of Ultra HD HDR streaming first shows, my experience is the vast bulk of the screens used to generate that content are as low rez as 1920x1200 SDR, with a bit of 2560x1400, and a handful of real 4K displays (again, think zooming and panning as you work).
The 6K res of the current XDR matters far more for text rendering than it does for video content. Where the XDR makes a difference for video production is it’s fully integrated and usable display of HDR content. There really isn’t anything else on the market that allows you to work on HDR content directly like a Mac with an XDR display does. This is of course a combination of MacOS, the Apps, and these displays.
As for the chap earlier saying he would choose an 8K Eizo with matte finish, good luck with that. Eizo don’t have anything even vaguely comparable to the current XDR. Nothing in 8K, and their only “real” HDR display is the CG3146, which comes in around 6X the price of the XDR. And if you want a matte finish, the nano finish glass, despite its brutal price, is the best matte finish I’ve ever seen.
>My assumption about the built in Apple Silicon, is that dealing with a big dynamic FALD backlight as well as Apple does (meaning way better than it’s nearest competitors like Asus) requires a non trivial amount of processing power.
Thank you for this! I did not know that could be a use case for the Apple Silicon in it.
Thank you for this! I did not know that could be a use case for the Apple Silicon in it.
I feel the same way. Improvement is all right, but I don't think it's going to matter much anymore if all we're going to do is try to improve resolution.
As to the DVD/8K thing, that's why I have a CRT and a 1080P TV. If it's DVD, it's CRT. If it's Blu-Ray, it's 1080P. For everything else, it's the 4K TV. Yeah, it's not the most convenient, but like you said, watching a DVD on 4K is not really that pleasant. And you can forget about VHS. Without a CRT, those are useless.
Apple need to release a 24” 4.5k display to match with a 24” iMac.
When they release a new larger iMac it needs to have a matching display too - e.g. a 5k 27”.
I honestly wouldn’t mind if the monitor cost the same as the cheapest equivalent iMac - e.g. take the Mac out, make it a monitor and charge me $1299 for 24” 4.5k that’s fine.
If they don’t we might have to find a youtuber who can show us how to do it ourselves…
When they release a new larger iMac it needs to have a matching display too - e.g. a 5k 27”.
I honestly wouldn’t mind if the monitor cost the same as the cheapest equivalent iMac - e.g. take the Mac out, make it a monitor and charge me $1299 for 24” 4.5k that’s fine.
If they don’t we might have to find a youtuber who can show us how to do it ourselves…
I think you’re going to see a lot of the work being done in the retro game community with increasingly sophisticated CRT emulation shaders eventually bleed over to the video playback world.
I’m hoping that this 7k actually means 7680x4320 which is finally the full ultra HD “8k” resolution.
At the same DPI as the previous existing displays, this would mean a size of roughly 41” which I think is very appropriate. The Philips 41” displays 3840x2160 41” displays are nice to work with at lodpi but that means lodpi.
At the same DPI as the previous existing displays, this would mean a size of roughly 41” which I think is very appropriate. The Philips 41” displays 3840x2160 41” displays are nice to work with at lodpi but that means lodpi.
Anything between 36" - 41" gets to that wonderful and dream-like view of "ALL I SEE IS MY MAC SCREEN IN FRONT OF ME'... which is a life goal of mine.
At least until Apple VR goggles hit the street.
I sure hope they come up with a solution, because it's 2022. The fact that I have to plug my consoles up to a CRT in order to get them to run and play the way they did back in the 80's and 90's (lag free etc.) is ridiculous lol.
Until screens match the resolution of the human eye, there will always be another level they can get to and there will always be a new "full".
The point of “retina” screen is to closely match the resolution of the human eye. What they don’t cover yet is the viewing angle. Yes, a 42” screen comes closer to that, but as a working screen, it becomes a problem when documents and other windows are toward the edges, you can’t really see them as well. that is the reason some prefer curved screens. Personally I haven’t seen any of those that provide enough resolution or display clarity to be worth using.
There is the PRO Display for the Mac PRO
Apple is working on a new "Apple Studio Display" with a 7K resolution, according to 9to5Mac's Filipe Espósito, who cites sources familiar with the matter. The display is also expected to feature a dedicated Apple silicon chip.
The report claims it is unclear whether the display will be a replacement for the Pro Display XDR or a new addition to Apple's standalone display lineup. Additional details are still unknown, including the size of the display and a release timeframe.
Bloomberg's Mark Gurman was first to report that Apple was working on at least one new external display, but he said that display would have a lower price with reduced brightness and contrast ratio. By the sounds of it, the new 7K model would be slotted above the Pro Display XDR in the lineup, so it is possible that Apple plans to offer displays at several price points as it did with its Cinema Display lineup in the 2000s.
Apple released the Pro Display XDR in December 2019 for $4,999, with an optional $999 stand. The 32-inch display features a 6K resolution with peak brightness of 1,600 nits for HDR content, 10-bit depth for 1.073 billion colors, and a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio.
Article Link: 'Apple Studio Display' With 7K Resolution Reportedly in Development
There will be the STUDIO Display for the Mac Studio
The Studio display will be around $2,000 for 32".
I think that the reason it's going to have a chip in it is because of Universal Control. It must have some sort of proximity sensor which tells the headless Mac it's connected to where the display is in relation to whatever other Mac or iPad it has sitting next to it. Not sure why it would contains GPU cores unless they can somehow get whatever extra power is being fed to the Mac at a bandwidth the same speed as, or faster than, those on the SoC.
I am not sure what Apple are thinking. Apple got out of displays as others in the market were making better for less. Apple do a great job with their displays but either a decent 4k or 8k but at a competitive price with good IO. 7k display seems oddly placed and likely with the current Apple pricing structure will not be competitive as really you are only against 4k and 5k monitors as it is not an 8k display =/