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

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

MH01 said:
Pratical use, no, pixel peeking while getting your nose close to the monitor , sure, some might see a difference.

It's mostly bragging rights , though to push those extra pixels you need a better GPU, which is the main issue with the 5K iMac .
Click to expand...

Or you've never done 4k video editing. Its very nice with a little window resizing to display the viewer in 100% size while still having your timeline, source clips, and effects windows available as 5k gives you 50% more screen real estate than 4k. The only other solutions are mulitple displays (one of which must be 4k res) which takes away time in shifting focus or clicking in and out the full screen viewer.

Also, my camera does 28 MP images so we are nowhere near maxing out resolution for different needs.
 
HangmanSwingset said:
The GTX 1080 could push that many pixels. Hell, it's capable of 8k. Dropping the Quadro equivalent into it would actually be doable.

But, knowing Apple, it'd likely be a mobile GPU.
Click to expand...

Even a 1070 would be good, it beats a 980 Ti in many tests. But we know it won't happen, nor is it likely possible without making the display fat and loud given the power and thermal demands.

Apple has a history of using mid-range/mediocre mobile GPUs for its built-ins. Arguably it tries to find a balance between performance and cost but this makes less sense when the GPU can't be upgraded as it's always the first thing to get old.

Any GPU in the display will likely only be enough for sufficient 2D performance at 4/5k.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Synchro3
PatriotInvasion said:
That's the thing. There are no Macs that already have the capability to drive it. The eGPU is what would make it possible until DisplayPort 1.3 is supported by Intel and Thunderbolt 3/USB-C. I know it sounds complicated, and it is, but a lot of people on this thread are very uninformed about what the true limitations are on the hardware side when it comes to 5K. There are a lot of articles out there that explain this - here's a good start: https://www.macrumors.com/2016/01/15/apple-5k-thunderbolt-display/
Click to expand...

I get it, I guess I forgot to include the second non-gpu version might be 4K. Or, there are other ways to get that 5K stream going even if it means using dual cables.
 
HangmanSwingset said:
The GTX 1080 could push that many pixels. Hell, it's capable of 8k. Dropping the Quadro equivalent into it would actually be doable.

But, knowing Apple, it'd likely be a mobile GPU.
Click to expand...

Was an 8k driver or hardware support mentioned somewhere? NVidia markets it for 4K, but it doesn't seem to mention 8k anywhere. I think 8k @ 30hz is part of displayport 1.3 and full support seems to be available in displayport 1.4. Anywhere where are you getting your information? It can't drive 8k out just because it's powerful. That requires a capable implementation. Quadros have a lower power profile, but NVidia charges quite a lot for that name.
 
manu chao said:
5K on 27" allows you to retain the 27" working space without resorting to interpolated resolutions.
Click to expand...

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

Take the display, run it by a desktop class top end card and you have happy times.
 
PatriotInvasion said:
This (rumored) 5K Thunderbolt Display would not be compatible with MacBook Air's, older MacBook Pro's, or even the latest 12-inch MacBook. It'll require a Thunderbolt 3 equipped USB-C port that'll only be on the new MacBook Pro and other Mac models released later this year and beyond. Thunderbolt 3 is needed to utilize external GPU's and the bandwidth requirements to drive a 5120x2880 resolution over a single cable.
[doublepost=1464831339][/doublepost]

If this even works, it certainly wouldn't be able to drive a 5K resolution over Thunderbolt 1 or 2. It'll require the multiple lanes Thunderbolt 3 provides. Also, not sure why anyone would want to run a lower than native (and non-HiDPI) resolution on a 5K display (or any display for that matter)...it'll look terrible.
Click to expand...

These guys...

https://bizon-tech.com

...are driving a Titan X from quad core rMBP without any problem (as well as some other models). They claim 97% of card potential over Thunderbolt 2 and even 85% over Thunderbolt 1. So it would appear that Thunderbolt 3 is not required to drive a 5K display.
 
Jcknows0 said:
Or you've never done 4k video editing. Its very nice with a little window resizing to display the viewer in 100% size while still having your timeline, source clips, and effects windows available as 5k gives you 50% more screen real estate than 4k. The only other solutions are mulitple displays (one of which must be 4k res) which takes away time in shifting focus or clicking in and out the full screen viewer.

Also, my camera does 28 MP images so we are nowhere near maxing out resolution for different needs.
Click to expand...

Correct I have not done 4K video editing .

In relation to camera's , my image sizes are roughly in that ball park , I definely do not need a 5K monitor for image processing at 27". My biggest gain was moving to 30" . It's a balance between super smooth resolution and actually being able to see things on screen :)
 
It will be a great idea if the new Thunderbolt Display has a standard graphic card interface so that users can easily upgrade the graphic card. If so, I will replay my iMac 5k and 2012 13'' retina macbook pro with the new display and a latest model of macbook pro.

However, we all know it will never come true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jwdsail and PatriotInvasion
thisisnotmyname said:
These guys...

https://bizon-tech.com

...are driving a Titan X from quad core rMBP without any problem (as well as some other models). They claim 97% of card potential over Thunderbolt 2 and even 85% over Thunderbolt 1. So it would appear that Thunderbolt 3 is not required to drive a 5K display.
Click to expand...

There are a number of these solutions available. Heck you can get a 2012 Mac mini with one of these to kick ass.

Though people on here tend to discuss things in 100% potential. 85% of a Titan X ..... Destroys anything apple is going to offer in a GPU.....

Unless Apple releases something worth upgrading for me, I'll get one of these boxes and invest in a desktop GPU.
 
What if....and I know this is pushing it quite a bit...but what if this new Thunderbolt Display is OLED?
I mean Apple seems to be moving towards OLED, with the OLED touch strip, then iPhones in 2017...what if this is OLED as well. Mostly professional photographers, movie editors buy this display, and work in dark GUIs...e.g. Premiere Pro, Photoshop, and I think OLED would offer a really accurate editing experience. They have to do something to differentiate this from the current iMacs...what if they decide OLED it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roobun
thisisnotmyname said:
These guys...

https://bizon-tech.com

...are driving a Titan X from quad core rMBP without any problem (as well as some other models). They claim 97% of card potential over Thunderbolt 2 and even 85% over Thunderbolt 1. So it would appear that Thunderbolt 3 is not required to drive a 5K display.
Click to expand...
I think there are a lot of technical elements with Thunderbolt that you aren't factoring in but I'm not positive. Hope Apple explains thoroughly at WWDC if this rumor is true.
 
If this update happens, would it be better to go with it and the most current Mac Mini or a 5K iMac? It looks like the total price would be close depending on the configuration and what the 5K TBD sells for.
 
Apple-Guy said:
Yup, same here, still have 2 of these babies going strong, for over 6 years now, love them :)
Click to expand...
Yep. Mine two ACDs are still running strong after more than 10 years of heavy use.
Love them, especially the matte option. So sad Apple dropped it for that shiny glaring screen.
That said, can't wait to,buy two 5k displays for my work. They are gorgeous!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apple-Guy
Dumb question: would it be possible to link a dedicated GPU on the display with a local GPU on the computer in some sort of SLI type configuration?

Relying on the GPU in the display seems like it's going to age out too quickly, but having a dedicated device out there to drive the display makes a good amount of sense. If it could be bridged to the system GPU to share a workload, then even if it's outdated it can at least help-- even if it's to collate the render frames.
 
Osty said:
What, like the 13.3 inch models? They're sold as Pro machines.

Seriously, Pro has become a nothing more than a marketing weasel word to make consumers feel better and as justification to sell over priced, under performing hardware.

Apple is Prostituting themselves for their shareholders' benefit - not ours.
Click to expand...

I should have made myself clear in my post. I meant specifically the 15" MacBook Pro.

But, after reading another persons post on here about better and better iGPUs every year, I might just have to take my words back. I completely forgot the pretty great advancements in iGPUs as of late. So certainly anything is possible.

And speaking of the 13" MBP, I never really did quite take the Pro moniker that seriously.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Osty
Is it me, or does this seem like the worst case of lock-in ever.

I can imagine shipping MacBooks with weak graphics cards incapable of driving 5k displays on their own, and the only way you can do so is with one of Apple's own proprietary 5k displays with inbuilt graphics cards. Which I am sure will come with integrated hubs and all, but cost a pretty penny as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navier
thekev said:
Was an 8k driver or hardware support mentioned somewhere? NVidia markets it for 4K, but it doesn't seem to mention 8k anywhere. I think 8k @ 30hz is part of displayport 1.3 and full support seems to be available in displayport 1.4. Anywhere where are you getting your information? It can't drive 8k out just because it's powerful. That requires a capable implementation. Quadros have a lower power profile, but NVidia charges quite a lot for that name.
Click to expand...

In the announcement they stated that Pascal can run 8k @60Hz. And Nvidia's Maxwell based 24GB M6000 Quadro with a TDP of 250W, same as the Titan X.
 
HangmanSwingset said:
In the announcement they stated that Pascal can run 8k @60Hz. And Nvidia's Maxwell based 24GB M6000 Quadro with a TDP of 250W, same as the Titan X.
Click to expand...

Ah that's neat. I couldn't find any mention of it anywhere, so I thought it might be speculation.
 
WardC said:
Imagine having a curved display that is the equivalent of putting two curved 5K displays side-by-side. That's where I see the future. A 32" size display, but two of them side-by-side and CURVED. 2x5K!!!
Click to expand...
Curved Display is the worst display invention ever made. It distorts proportions in all kind of ways. Maybe its okay for watching movies or playing few games, but for nothing that edges an professional usage, or stuff like CAD. Lol a skyscraper designed on curved display.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveW928
I'm curious about what this would mean for wacom. If they ever make a 5k cintiq, it'll probably not be compatible with any mac.
 
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