Apple's Rumored 27-Inch Display With Mini-LEDs Delayed Yet Again

[theorist9]

It looks like this is going to be the year of the Retina-class (≳220 ppi) external monitors. At least four will likely be released: This one (first half 2023?), the new XDR (likely 2023), the 27" 5k Samsung Viewfinity S9 ("in the coming months", according to what Samsung told The Verge) and the 32" 6k Dell U3224KB ("first half of 2023", from Dell blog).

Samsung ViewFinity S9 first look: a sleek alternative to Apple’s Studio Display

It looks the part of a high-end 5K monitor, but what will it cost?

www.theverge.com

Dell’s new UltraSharp monitor is a 6K powerhouse for pros [Updated]

The IPS Black monitor will likely be a cheaper rival to Apple’s Pro Display XDR.

arstechnica.com

Dell Technologies Introduces More "World's First's" Collaboration Tools | Dell

Maximize productivity with the world’s first 6K monitor with IPS Black and world’s first Zoom certified collaboration keyboard.

www.dell.com

 

[iBug2]

They can probably do this by using two Thunderbolt channels internally to get the necessary video bandwidth. Much like the original 5K iMac was technically two video controllers running two virtual 2.5K screens on one 5K panel.

Yes but that's internal. When you release a display, a single cable must connect it to the Mac. Such cable and interface does not exist.

 

[mabaker]

I do wonder what'll happen to the Pro Display XDR if they don't release another display in the next couple of years. Will they discontinue it or just continue to sell a display from late 2019 for original price in 2024?

Nothing happens. Just the price will get adjusted for inflation to around 10k USD.

 

[ducknalddon]

I'm not sure this bodes well for a potential 27'' iMac.

I could be the iMac has been delayed because they are waiting for this panel.

 

[Schnegg]

Bummer. I like the ASD but the MBP14 screen is so much better. Was hoping for a $2500 27" that would rival the MBP.

Exactly. I just want a 27" that matches the quality of the MBP.

 

[Smartuser]

I could be the iMac has been delayed because they are waiting for this panel.

I think they should also make a Mac Pro all-in-one, possibly with an on-screen keyboard only.

 

[amartinez1660]

This.

I paid the full $1599 for mine and it has been nothing but a total joy to use. What the naysayers don't understand about this monitor is just how well it integrates with the Mac computing experience.

It works seamlessly, I can adjust brightness and sound from the keyboard and the 600nits holds its own next to my window on the sunniest of days (I live in San Diego). The speakers sound excellent. Everything plugs in via a single cable. It never fails to wake up or go to sleep like my Dell monitor sometimes does, and the webcam with center stage is good enough for Zoom/Teams. Oh, and 5K > 4K all day long.

It's too expensive, so it's not for everyone, but I've never understood why people who have never used it hate on it so much!

Seconded. I got two, each at a different location.
After having had two Thunderbolt Displays for well over 10 years (and still going strong), the price point was easy to digest.
The second one was at $1300, when I saw the price, got it. (Also $1000, the original TB Display price, in 2010 is ~$1350 today)

It’s a joy to use, it just works… plug the single cable and have a crisp looking reliable screen docking station.
I usually have a second/third cheaper non apple display with them and the fringe/ghosting when text moves, the matte fuzziness, the very slow wake up (very rarely it fails even and displays white noise), etc makes it abundantly clear the quality gap, they are perfectly usable for sure though.

Changing screen resolution to non retina (I use Blender seldomly and retina on the main screen tanks the computer in some scenes) doesn’t even flinch… remember those long seconds of blinking with a prompt “your resolution has changed, accept in the next 10 seconds or it will revert back”? So prehistorical by comparison, on the studio display the screen doesn’t even seem to react at all, just the sharper or fuzzier text change.

Anyways, sure the camera is not photographic quality by any means and it only tilts, but for me it’s been nothing but a joy to use.

 

[visualseed]

Yes but that's internal. When you release a display, a single cable must connect it to the Mac. Such cable and interface does not exist.

Yes, that’s why the iMac would be the easier product with a 5K high-refresh display to release. The cable system for an external display is simply to use two cables. Other vendors have done this in the past, but it is simply not in Apple’s DNA to do it.

 

[Quu]

Yes but that's internal. When you release a display, a single cable must connect it to the Mac. Such cable and interface does not exist.

Yes it does. Look back at my post from the other page, you can already connect two 6K Pro Display XDR's at full bandwidth (60Hz, 10-bit with HDR) to a M1/M2 Pro/Max or Ultra equipped Mac via a single Thunderbolt 4 cable.

It just requires a Thunderbolt dock. Apple could totally do a 120Hz 6K Pro Display XDR utilising the same method, by sending two signals through 1 cable (each 50% of the displays resolution at 120Hz) and then combining them inside the monitor using a custom chip.

This is actually exactly how the current 6K Pro Display works on Thunderbolt 3 equipped Macs, two signals through one cable that the display combines. They would do the same thing again just with a doubling of bandwidth.

This is partly why if you look at that dock I showed it doesn't support doing this on the Mac Pro or Intel based MacBook Pro's. The newer Macs have more bandwidth combined with a newer Thunderbolt standard.

 

[uptownnyc]

It looks like this is going to be the year of the Retina-class (≳220 ppi) external monitors. At least four will likely be released: This one (first half 2023?), the new XDR (likely 2023), the 27" 5k Samsung Viewfinity S9 ("in the coming months", according to what Samsung told The Verge) and the 32" 6k Dell U3224KB ("first half of 2023", from Dell blog).

Samsung ViewFinity S9 first look: a sleek alternative to Apple’s Studio Display

It looks the part of a high-end 5K monitor, but what will it cost?

www.theverge.com

Dell’s new UltraSharp monitor is a 6K powerhouse for pros [Updated]

The IPS Black monitor will likely be a cheaper rival to Apple’s Pro Display XDR.

arstechnica.com

Dell Technologies Introduces More "World's First's" Collaboration Tools | Dell

Maximize productivity with the world’s first 6K monitor with IPS Black and world’s first Zoom certified collaboration keyboard.

www.dell.com

Hate the camera on that Dell.

 

[dlopan]

Dammit Apple, I need an upgade. My current display can barely refresh fast enough to play the latest good Apple game
.View attachment 2156655

there are lots of displays out there that refresh fast

 

[Adelphos33]

Is it just me, or do they need a display that is cheaper than the Apple Studio Display more than they need a more expensive one?

Apple needs to provide displays and accessories that alow for you to fully kit out a desktop at around $2,000. For context, the iMac is at around $1,499. An additional $500 for a larger screen seems fair. This means Mac mini for $599/$799, a display for around $999, and keyboard/trackpad for $250/$300

 

[derdante]

They pushed it out of the timeframe in which I would have cared. Now Apple themselves have dual-stack OLED coming up and other OLED manufacturers are also on the verge of having some major advancements which will bring them closer to LED in terms of brightness while having pixel-perfect backlight control so there is no blooming.
At this point I think it would have to be a straight replacement for the Studio Display at the same price point to have any kind of relevancy. People won't pay Pro prices for Mini-LED in 2024.

 

[racoop]

True, but Apple prices themselves out of large segment of the market. If the Studio Display was $1299 instead of $1599, they would gain marketshare. But instead, Tim's more interested in profit margins.

It was $1299 for a week or two just recently at Amazon, Costco, maybe others (?). By the time I ordered mine from Amazon, the shipping time moved from a day to a week, I'm guessing due to demand.

 

[oceptis]

He expected the display to launch in June 22 and then October 22, neither occurred. Why is it it described as “pushed back several times”? Doesn’t that simply mean he was wrong?

 

[Quu]

He expected the display to launch in June 22 and then October 22, neither occurred. Why is it it described as “pushed back several times”? Doesn’t that simply mean he was wrong?

It means that in his opinion it was going to launch on those dates and Apple internally pushed the dates back. It's a simple concept.

Keep in mind the latest MacBook Pro M2's were meant to release last year in October-November. They were pushed back. Did the leakers get it wrong? no. Apple really did push them back and the evidence is the videos they posted unveiling the systems were dated to those time frames last year, even the URL's in the address bar had those dates in them instead of 2022 dates.

When discussing leaks, things change over time. It's hard to be spot on when the company hasn't unveiled it and they can and do change the time frames.

We had amazing leaks for the M1 Ultimate in the Mac Pro, the 4-die design, the interposer, and even the pin out for the SoC was all leaked with cad drawings. But a year on from those leaks, no machine, where is it? - Cancelled. Doesn't mean the leaks weren't accurate at the time they were revealed to us, it's that plans at Apple changed.

 

[Nsully59]

Does Apple not have the higher-end thing kinda sewn up already?

I know tons of third-party ~24" displays exists, so many of them awful, but wouldn't a decent 24" display, not all tricked-out to the heavens but still of true Apple quality/design/features (remember those older aluminum 20" Cinema Displays?), pair nicely with the Mac mini, and various MacBooks (especially the 13" and 14" models). and even the 24" iMac (assuming they thought enough to build it at the same height and all, so they could sit nicely side-by-side).

 

[System603]

Takes them so long that I can now easily wait for 27" QD-OLEDs releasing this year. When this all starred, they were years away. If I could get a proper QD-OLED before this, it's silly.

 

[theorist9]

I do wonder what'll happen to the Pro Display XDR if they don't release another display in the next couple of years. Will they discontinue it or just continue to sell a display from late 2019 for original price in 2024?

Nothing happens. Just the price will get adjusted for inflation to around 10k USD.

Historically, Apple does the opposite—it drops prices on older models that haven't been updated. For instance according to https://512pixels.net/2018/05/the-2013-mac-pro-five-years-later/
"A maxed out Mac Pro with a 12-core Xeon, 64GB RAM, 1TB flash SSD, and dual AMD FirePro D700 GPUs" dropped from $9,599 when it was introduced in 2013, to $6,999 in 2018". At worst, they will keep the price of the XDR constant.

I believe the retail price of the 2014 Mac Mini also dropped between 2014 and 2018, but feel free to check that yourself.

Having said that, I don't anticipate them not being able to release a new XDR in 2023.

 

[theorist9]

You can run 2 x Pro Display XDR at full 6K 60Hz via a single Thunderbolt cable today (using a Caldigit Thunderbolt 4 dock) with an M1 or M2 Pro/Max/Ultra machine. So it's definitely possible to do 1 x 6K 120Hz based simply on that.

If anyone needs proof, look at this product page and scroll all the way down to the display table https://www.caldigit.com/thunderbolt-station-4/

You'll see 2 x Pro Display XDR supported on this dock but only when connected to an M1 to M2 Pro/Max/Ultra machine.

Nice find. As the webpage you linked says, that's only possible because of Display Stream Compression. I wonder if the amount of compression they need to support 2 x 6k@60Hz (or 1 x 5k@120 Hz) over TB4 is visually lossy. VESA claims DSC is visually lossless, but I'd like to see a sufficient number of independent, well-designed studies verifying this, especially at very high compressions.

I correpondingly wonder if Apple plans (or planned) to introduce this new display alongside a Mac Pro that supports Display Port 2.0, which I believe offers double the bandwidth of DP 1.4/TB4.

From CalDigit:

"NOTE: If you intend to connect dual monitors above 4K 60Hz, such as dual 5K 60Hz or 6K 60Hz, your monitors and host GPU must support DSC 1.2 (Display Stream Compression) and DP 1.4 HBR3. Apple M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max & M1 Ultra support DSC 1.2 & DP 1.4 HBR3. Please note that the LG UltraFine 5K monitor does not support DSC."

 

[Quu]

Nice find. As the webpage you linked says, that's only possible because of Display Stream Compression. I wonder if the amount of compression they need to support 2 x 6k@60Hz (or 1 x 5k@120 Hz) over TB4 is visually lossy. VESA claims DSC is visually lossless, but I'd like to see a sufficient number of independent, well-designed studies verifying this, especially at very high compressions.

I correpondingly wonder if Apple plans (or planned) to introduce this new display alongside a Mac Pro that supports Display Port 2.0, which I believe offers double the bandwidth of DP 1.4/TB4.

From CalDigit:

"NOTE: If you intend to connect dual monitors above 4K 60Hz, such as dual 5K 60Hz or 6K 60Hz, your monitors and host GPU must support DSC 1.2 (Display Stream Compression) and DP 1.4 HBR3. Apple M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max & M1 Ultra support DSC 1.2 & DP 1.4 HBR3. Please note that the LG UltraFine 5K monitor does not support DSC."

The Pro Display XDR 6K actually already uses DSC and it has several modes to be more compatible with a connected Mac. For example the USB ports on the back of the display run at USB 3.0 speeds when connected to 2019+ Macs (Late Intel and M1/M2 etc). But USB 2.0 speeds when connected to earlier Macs than that.

I've used a bunch of displays that employ DSC and I cannot tell a difference between it off (at 60Hz) and on (at 138Hz). Looks identical to me color-wise.

 

[theorist9]

I've used a bunch of displays that employ DSC and I cannot tell a difference between it off (at 60Hz) and on (at 138Hz). Looks identical to me color-wise.

The amount of compression matters--the higher the compression, the more potential for artifacts. I'm guessing that's a 4k display, and you'd need 2.1x as much compression to run 2 x XDR's @ 60 Hz vs. 1 x 4k @ 138 Hz:

6016 x 3384 x 60 x 2/(3840 x 2160 x 138) = 2.1

The Pro Display XDR 6K actually already uses DSC and it has several modes to be more compatible with a connected Mac. For example the USB ports on the back of the display run at USB 3.0 speeds when connected to 2019+ Macs (Late Intel and M1/M2 etc). But USB 2.0 speeds when connected to earlier Macs than that.

I was aware the XDR used DSC, but didn't know it had different video bandwidth modes. I'm actually a bit confused by what you wrote in that regard. Looking at the list I screenshotted below from Apple's website, I'd say the least powerful Mac that can drive an XDR is the 2016 13" MBP. But that devices's TB ports offer USB 3 (see 2nd screenshot) and, in any event, they would be driving the XDR using the TB/DP protocol rather than 10 Gbps USB 3 (and certainly not USB 2.0, which is only 480 Mbps).

 

[Quu]

The amount of compression matters--the higher the compression, the more potential for artifacts. I'm guessing that's a 4k display, and you'd need 2.1x as much compression to run 2 x XDR's @ 60 Hz vs. 1 x 4k @ 138 Hz:

6016 x 3384 x 60 x 2/(3840 x 2160 x 138) = 2.1

I was aware the XDR used DSC, but didn't know it had different video bandwidth modes. I'm actually a bit confused by what you wrote in that regard. Looking at the list I screenshotted below from Apple's website, I'd say the least powerful Mac that can drive an XDR is the 2016 13" MBP. But that devices's TB ports offer USB 3 (see 2nd screenshot) and, in any event, they would be driving the XDR using the TB/DP protocol rather than 10 Gbps USB 3 (and certainly not USB 2.0, which is only 480 Mbps).
View attachment 2157226

View attachment 2157227

That dock I believe is not further increasing the DSC compression level but I don't know that for certain. What I do know is DSC has a bottom boundary of a 3 to 1 compression ratio where they claim it's not noticeable when compared to fully uncompressed video. It does not have any further compression ratios available beyond 3:1, within the spec.

I don't believe the dock is able to influence what compression ratios the 6K display is willing to work with. I think Apple put a couple in there and the dock simply chooses one of those and Apple is maintaining the same visual fidelity on all of them, after all they don't want you to run it at 6K if it's going to look bad. If you don't have a DSC-capable thunderbolt device it'll run at 5K 60Hz maximum. People on the forums here have experimented with various hubs, docks, interface cards and GPU's to get the display working at native resolution in Windows with a lot of success, certain Thunderbolt chipsets are required on the host system etc

Regarding the USB speed, this is determined by the monitor with relation to the connecting devices thunderbolt capability, not the connecting devices USB ports. Basically, the monitor is itself a Thunderbolt dock which has several USB ports and a display port monitor connected to it. If there is not enough bandwidth from the connected device (via Thunderbolt) it runs those back USB ports at only 2.0 speed instead of 3.0 speed.

You can look up some reviews of this, for example, MaxTech on YouTube which tested the display with every Mac available at the time it was released and they found the ports only negotiate at 3.0 on the newer Macs and 2.0 on the older Macs.

The differentiating factor is the Thunderbolt chipset on the Mac.

EDIT:// Also I forgot to mention, the 4K 138Hz display I was using was a 12-bit OLED with HDR enabled. So there was quite a bit of data. But I've also seen and used the Pro Display XDR with DSC. Looks great.

 

[theorist9]

Regarding the USB speed, this is determined by the monitor with relation to the connecting devices thunderbolt capability, not the connecting devices USB ports. Basically, the monitor is itself a Thunderbolt dock which has several USB ports and a display port monitor connected to it. If there is not enough bandwidth from the connected device (via Thunderbolt) it runs those back USB ports at only 2.0 speed instead of 3.0 speed.

Ah, I see the confusion. Since we were talking about the bandwidth to drive the XDR, when you said the XDR has lower-bandwidth USB options for older Macs, I thought you were somehow talking about driving it via USB. But instread you were talking about the USB outputs on the XDR.

If you don't have a DSC-capable thunderbolt device it'll run at 5K 60Hz maximum.

By "device" are you referring to the Mac or the dock? I agree with you that the compression is probably done in the Mac itself -- the Mac reads the video bandwidth, and determines the compression accordingly. I'd be surprised if it happens in the dock.

I didn't think DSC was introduced to the Mac until about 2020. You're saying older Macs (without DSC), when running the XDR, will be running it at lower resolution. However, the following post says that they do maintain 6k res even without DSC:

A 5700 iMac uses a single DisplayPort 1.4 HBR2 with DSC signal (6016x3384) to drive an XDR display so it can drive two of them no problem.
Other Macs that support DisplayPort 1.4 but not DSC use dual HBR3 (each 3008x3384) to drive an XDR display at 6K.

That dock I believe is not further increasing the DSC compression level but I don't know that for certain. What I do know is DSC has a bottom boundary of a 3 to 1 compression ratio where they claim it's not noticeable when compared to fully uncompressed video. It does not have any further compression ratios available beyond 3:1, within the spec.

I don't believe the dock is able to influence what compression ratios the 6K display is willing to work with. I think Apple put a couple in there and the dock simply chooses one of those and Apple is maintaining the same visual fidelity on all of them, after all they don't want you to run it at 6K if it's going to look bad. If you don't have a DSC-capable thunderbolt device it'll run at 5K 60Hz maximum. People on the forums here have experimented with various hubs, docks, interface cards and GPU's to get the display working at native resolution in Windows with a lot of success, certain Thunderbolt chipsets are required on the host system etc

Two 6k XDR's at 60 Hz would require (at 30 bps/pixel) 6016 x 3384 x 60 x 2 x 30/10^9 = 73.3 Gbps uncompressed bandwidth. I recall reading the video bandwidth of TB4 is ~26 Gbps, in which case you'd need pretty close to the max 3:1 compression to drive them.

 

[Quu]

Ah, I see the confusion. Since we were talking about the bandwidth to drive the XDR, when you said the XDR has lower-bandwidth USB options for older Macs, I thought you were somehow talking about driving it via USB. But instread you were talking about the USB outputs on the XDR.

That's correct yes, I mean the output USB ports on the monitor, the USB hub if you will

By "device" are you referring to the Mac or the dock? I agree with you that the compression is probably done in the Mac itself -- the Mac reads the video bandwidth, and determines the compression accordingly. I'd be surprised if it happens in the dock.

I believe the negotiation is likely happening between the Mac and the Display even when the dock is put into place. So I suspect the 3:1 ratio is in play whether the dock is there or not.

I didn't think DSC was introduced to the Mac until about 2020. Does that mean all those older Macs, when running the XDR, will be running it at lower resolution?

DSC on Mac for third-party displays is a bit of a contentious issue haha Apple actually broke it with Big Sur for third-party panels. I think some still have it working but it's a big thing. We've had alt-mode on Thunderbolt and the ability to send two thunderbolt signals through one cable for a long time which is separate to DSC but it's part of how the 6K display works.

For example, the 10 year old 27" 1440p Thunderbolt displays you could daisy chain them. Put one cable between the monitors and then one cable from one of those into a Mac and both displays would work. This is a feature that even though Display Port can do it, Apples implementation on their Macs do not support it, but they made it work with their own Thunderbolt panels etc

They tend to do custom things. There is stuff in the Thunderbolt spec that allows you to use almost all the bandwidth (40Gb/ps) which is usually only 20Gb/s in either direction for 35Gb/s in a single direction (perfect for a Display). This is something Apple could utilise.

Another thing to note is Apples use of going above and beyond the Thunderbolt spec. Their Thunderbolt 3 ports were already doing things that Thunderbolt 4 was meant to do long before it came out as a ratified spec so for most Mac users it was really just a ticking of boxes from a validation perspective and not actually providing new features.

I think a good example of them doing something custom is the fact the 2 x 6K monitor thing on that dock only works with the new M1/M2 Pro/Max/Ultra machines and not for instance the Intel 16" MacBook Pro which used the latest Thunderbolt chip from Intel as opposed to the custom Thunderbolt circuit Apple has included in their SoC's.

Two 6k XDR's at 60 Hz would require (at 30 bps/pixel) 6016 x 3384 x 60 x 2 x 30/10^9 = 73.3 Gbps uncompressed bandwidth. I recall reading the video bandwidth of TB4 is ~26 Gbps, in which case you'd need pretty close to the max 3:1 compression to drive them.

I suspect it's always using the highest compression ratio of 3 to 1 especially when you consider it has USB 3 ports on the back that you can use simultaneously and as yet I've seen no complaints about image quality from users of these displays.