Apple’s 5K Thunderbolt Display Could Include Its Own Graphics Card

[samer1970]

I have a better idea Apple ,

Why use Thunderbolt ? it is about time to make your own connector , a NATIVE PCI EXPRESS 16 LANES 3.0 in all your machines !

who needs 4 lanes Thunderbolt 3.0 when you can make 16 lanes cable ?

Here is the IDEA :

EACH INTEL CPU has 16 lanes that are wasted in ALL APPLE Products !!!

Mac Mini , Mac book , Mac Book pro , Most IMacs

so why waste those lanes ? just make pin to pin connector and connect it to the CPU and make a cable to connect it to PCIe BOX which we can install ANY CARD ... or inside monitors !!

this way even a TINY Mac Mini can turn into full gaming machine !

and ANY notebook as well

and save us the thunderbolt rubbish we want full 16 LANES

WHY WAIT FOR Thunderbolt 1,2,3,4,5,6 when you HAVE 16 LANES PINNED in the CPU and READY ?

and cheaper as well ! no need to use thunderbolt chip.

 

[diipii]

Thunderbolt Display stock shortages at some Apple retail stores have begun sparking speculation that a refresh is coming in the near future, and with current machines unable to run a 5K display over a single-stream cable, discussion has turned towards other methods Apple could use to introduce a functional 5K display.

Stephen Foskett and Daring Fireball's John Gruber speculate that Apple could potentially introduce a refreshed Thunderbolt Display with a built-in graphics card, which would result in a display able to work with almost any Mac because it would be driven by an internal graphics card rather than the machine it's connected to.

9to5Mac is floating a similar theory, claiming it's heard rumors Apple is indeed working on a 5120 x 2880 display that has an integrated GPU. Such a display would likely require the purchase of a newer machine with USB-C or Thunderbolt 3, but it would work with Apple's notebook lineup going forward.

A noted analyst doesn't believe Apple will go to the trouble of introducing a display with a built-in GPU, instead releasing a 5K display that will connect with newer Macs over Thunderbolt 3 by taking advantage of both DisplayPort 1.2 streams.

It's been believed Apple would wait to introduce a 5K display until DisplayPort 1.3 support is built into Intel processors as the standard will allow for plug-and-play support for 5K external displays, but by using both of the DisplayPort 1.2 streams, forthcoming machines that include Thunderbolt 3 ports will be able to drive a 5K display using Multi-Stream Transport without the need for an external GPU.

Multi-Stream Transport (MST) would stitch two halves of a display together to make a single seamless display, with each DisplayPort 1.2 connection driving half of the display, a technique Apple previously used in the first 5K iMac. The 5K iMac used the internal equivalent of a dual cable DisplayPort 1.2 MST setup.

Multi-Stream Transport is inferior to the Single-Stream Transport that would be possible with DisplayPort 1.3, but DisplayPort 1.3 support is not built into Skylake or its successor Kaby Lake, meaning it will be at least 18-24 months (the time until Intel's Cannonlake processors launch) before Apple can introduce machines powerful enough to drive a 5K display over a single-stream cable.

With the Thunderbolt Display having gone without an update since July of 2011, another two years is a long time to wait for a refreshed display.

There is no concrete word on when Apple will introduce a new Thunderbolt Display, but given the stock shortages and the rumblings that a successor is in the works, there is a possibility an announcement could be made at the Worldwide Developers Conference.

Article Link: Apple's 5K Thunderbolt Display Could Include Its Own Graphics Card

Where is the logic for 5k screens ? They overheat and stress graphic cards, thin computers exaggerate the problem, and the increase in resolution simply can't be seen in even medium (27") sized screens.

 

[mozumder]

Yup, same here, still have 2 of these babies going strong, for over 6 years now, love them

Still using my 13-year old first-gen Apple 30" Cinema Display daily!

 

[samer1970]

Where is the logic for 5k screens ? They overheat and stress graphic cards, thin computers exaggerate the problem, and the increase in resolution simply can't be seen in even medium (27") sized screens.

When you work with Photoes and Sat images and medical images you will ask for more pixel even 8K when available.

When people were using 720P monitors on old Pentium 3 machines we were using 4k monitor back in 2001 3840×2400

this one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors

back in 2001 what PC and GPU did we have ???

oh yes and Apple did not invent the Retina display .. it was IBM in 2001

 

[apolloa]

I could cope with no dGPU since the integrated GPUs are starting to be pretty fast. The Iris Pro 550 benchmarks around an nVidia 750M. I don't need a mobile powerhouse, but I'd love to get rid of my desktop entirely knowing that I can dock to a Thunderbolt 2 Display with eGPU which would turn my laptop (3.5lbs! Please!) into a desktop-class machine, complete with extra ports and power adapter.

The new AMD Polaris and new Nvidia platforms just released are a generation ahead of the Intel GPU's. They run cooler and are more power efficient. It is sad that you want to ditch the dGPU in the name of thinness, but it's also clear the MacBook Pro is not aimed at you as you would be better off with the MaxBook Air or the 13" MacBook Pro.

 

[Schizoid]

one of these please!

 

[askunk]

So... if I buy a Mac Pro, I will have three GPUs? Sounds a bit weird... and quite expensive, but I'm curious to see whether it's true.

 

[samer1970]

one of these please!

View attachment 633986

you think Apple could not easily do this ?

it is not a hard idea , but Apple is obsessed with "thin like paper" PC they ruined the iMAC ... and look what they did to the MAC PRO no Upgrades ! a stupid trashcan "small like a soda" PC

 

[diipii]

When you work with Photoes and Sat images and medical images you will ask for more pixel even 8K when available.

When people were using 720P monitors on old Pentium 3 machines we were using 4k monitor back in 2001 3840×2400

this one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors

back in 2001 what PC and GPU did we have ???

oh yes and Apple did not invent the Retina display .. it was IBM in 2001

OK, I hear you, but, I looked at the old iMac 2560x1440 screen and compared it to the new 5k screen version and needed a magnifying glass to see the difference. So did everyone else in the Covent Garden Apple shop.
On really big displays it works, no argument, but for anyone sitting in front of a monitor editing in Photoshop or Final Cut it's a waste of time.

 

[samer1970]

OK, I hear you, but, I looked at the old iMac 2560x1440 screen and compared it to the new 5k screen version and needed a magnifying glass to see the difference. So did everyone else in the Covent Garden Apple shop.
On really big displays it works, no argument, but for anyone sitting in front of a monitor editing in Photoshop or Final Cut it's a waste of time.

it is not about seeing them ... it is about the "dots" are there ... the image is not changed to fit ... 1:1 dots pixel by pixel.
[doublepost=1464860502][/doublepost]

So... if I buy a Mac Pro, I will have three GPUs? Sounds a bit weird... and quite expensive, but I'm curious to see whether it's true.

If they do this , the new Mac Pro will be iMAC pro ... inside the monitor I guess

 

[Schizoid]

you think Apple could not easily do this ?

it is not a hard idea , but Apple is obsessed with "thin like paper" PC they ruined the iMAC ... and look what they did to the MAC PRO no Upgrades ! a stupid trashcan "small like a soda" PC

Would be great wouldn't it, and apparently Nvidia are sticking the same spec for 1080 in laptops with a lower TDP... we can but dream!

 

[samer1970]

Would be great wouldn't it, and apparently Nvidia are sticking the same spec for 1080 in laptops with a lower TDP... we can but dream!

Actually Apple can make iMacs 45 mm thick and with standard slot to add 40mm dual slot cards

Maybe call them imac pro ... and put 6 to 22 cores xeon cpu in there

I dont mind 45 mm thick IMAC ...

and if the screen is 27 or 34 inch they can fit 2 standard cards behind

 

[Xgm541]

I'm on page 3 of comments and honestly I'm not seeing where everyone is getting the idea that this will let you game on a Mac with a low end gpu.

This seems more like a pass through solution that won't actually make gaming or graphics performance any better.

 

[timber]

A large appeal of not using an integrated monitor (for me at least) is having the possibility of upgrading the GPU as needed and as time goes by

This solution seams to sort of deny this. If you are already GPU capped not buying the iMac makes less and less sense. Will Apple include some sort of passtrough so that when possible the computer GPU will drive the display trough displayport 1.3 or better? This doesn't look like a very elegant solution (or saying in other way, as a Apple solution). Better to wait to have everything in place.

 

[mozumder]

OK, I hear you, but, I looked at the old iMac 2560x1440 screen and compared it to the new 5k screen version and needed a magnifying glass to see the difference. So did everyone else in the Covent Garden Apple shop.
On really big displays it works, no argument, but for anyone sitting in front of a monitor editing in Photoshop or Final Cut it's a waste of time.

The point is, for Retina displays, is that you're NOT supposed to see the pixels.

The pixels are supposed to be small enough that they disappear into the image.

If you can see pixels, then that means you have a blurry image.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

This wouldn't be a bad idea if the monitor had a PCI card slot where you could upgrade the graphics card over time. But there's a ZERO percent chance of that happening with Apple. They are the KING of Planned Obsolescence. Frankly, I'd rather just see someone put out a nice hub with an upgradeable PCI graphics card/slot that runs off Thunderbolt III or even USB 3.1-C. I want a Macbook Pro where I can dock it and have a powerful desktop for once (and I say once, since Macs haven't offered a great or even a "good" GPU in ages, let alone an upgradeable option since the old Mac Pro). I should be able to use one machine for every purpose including gaming (even if I have to load Windows on it to do it). Apple should be aiming for a "One Machine To Rule Them All" at this point, but they seem to think loading their horrible "Photos" App should be all you need to do (even though the damn thing doesn't even have a busy indicator to let you know it hasn't crashed as it will just sit there if you try to import a large collection for some time; but then this is what Spotlight does ALL the time now). The GUI conventions have gone out the proverbial Window since Jony Ive took over.... Apple has been steadily going downhill since Steve died, to be honest.

 

[friedmud]

It could technically handle 4k (Intel's spec cheat says so), but with active cooling - which Apple doesn't use in the rMB.

In any case, with its single 5 Gbps USB-C port, it's not anywhere near capable of providing the necessary bandwidth anyway.

Ok everyone let's get a couple of things straight:

1. Thunderbolt 3 uses the same USB-C plug - but is NOT "USB-C". Just like Thunderbolt 1/2 use a DisplayPort plug but are NOT DisplayPort protocol.

2. Thunderbolt 3 can do 40 Gbps... similar to the fastest PCI-express (Edit fastest PCI-express is about 250 Gbps... so T3 is off by about 6x which should be fine for a single graphics card)

3. This is enough to do 5k with this monitor setup because it will communicate with the graphics card in the monitor using PCI-Express over Thunderbolt and the graphics card will output the 5k resolution to the monitor directly (just like it does in the 5k iMac)

4. Using this solution Macs will not be limited by the fact that the thunderbolt "display" bandwidth is not enough to do 5k. It's sidestepping this by outputting to a graphics card that's embedded in the monitor.

 

[bmac89]

Maybe gamers will stop complaining.

This might be stupid... I'm not a gamer and don't know a lot about graphics cards, but I assume the inbuilt graphics card would only power the screen and not the computer also? Of course this would take a huge strain off the computers graphic card giving a boost to performance but you would still need a decent graphics card inside the computer for gaming.
It's not like this would turn a macbook or imac into a gaming machine.

I assume that even if the computer could harness graphics power from the screen that Apple would use a card that was only powerful enough to drive the screen. Having said that any performance boost would make a difference.

It does sound good though.... if it ever happened!

 

[tmoney468]

Would the A9 have enough power to drive a 5k display? With all the past rumors of an actual Apple TV, seems like a worth correlation

 

[manu chao]

Sure, when you have a GPU that can drive it. Any graphical task, such as gaming is a joke at 5k on the iMac.

And since gamers are a very small minority among Mac users that is a rather moot point. Many more Mac users will enjoy the extra working space of a nominal 2560 x 1440 pixel workspace compared to the 1920 x 1080 working space compared to those that would enjoy the faster performance of the lower resolution screen. Why should Apple release something that is preferred by only a minority of its users?

 

[HangmanSwingset]

Ah that's neat. I couldn't find any mention of it anywhere, so I thought it might be speculation.

It's on the product page on Nvidia's website.

 

[crsh1976]

Ok everyone let's get a couple of things straight:

1. Thunderbolt 3 uses the same USB-C plug - but is NOT "USB-C". Just like Thunderbolt 1/2 use a DisplayPort plug but are NOT DisplayPort protocol.

2. Thunderbolt 3 can do 40 Gbps... similar to the fastest PCI-express (Edit fastest PCI-express is about 250 Gbps... so T3 is off by about 6x which should be fine for a single graphics card)

3. This is enough to do 5k with this monitor setup because it will communicate with the graphics card in the monitor using PCI-Express over Thunderbolt and the graphics card will output the 5k resolution to the monitor directly (just like it does in the 5k iMac)

4. Using this solution Macs will not be limited by the fact that the thunderbolt "display" bandwidth is not enough to do 5k. It's sidestepping this by outputting to a graphics card that's embedded in the monitor.

This is all valid info, however I was specifically replying to someone asking about the rMB - which currently lacks a TB 2/3 controller chip. The USB port (with USB-C reversible connector) on the rMB is sadly limited to 5 Gbps, it lacks the bandwidth for driving a 4 or 5k display.

 

[RichardDue]

Hm . . . does anyone know whether or not the external GPU protocol pools GPU processing power? i.e. would a Mac Pro or Macbook Pro with discrete GPU add the processing power of the discrete GPU to the GPU in the display?

 

[TheDoctor7x]

With a high enough end GPU, this is frankly a decent little idea. Most people don't need a swappable GPU, they just need something good enough to last a few years. I don't expect Apple to put a good enough GPU in, but I would be pleasantly surprised if they do.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

So... if I buy a Mac Pro, I will have three GPUs? Sounds a bit weird... and quite expensive, but I'm curious to see whether it's true.

I think I already do. I definitely have two discreet cards (D500s) I guess I don't recall if the board has integrated graphics sitting there too. I'll have to check later. Certainly wouldn't be my first machine with three (or more) though.