Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
i use 3 1440p monitors and 1 4k tv....but i have Classic mac pro with a gtx 980 while all the other bum macs struggle.
 
8K Retina display.
Hex-core i7@4GHz.
32GB 2100MHz RAM.
Dual nVidia GTX GPUs@4GB each.
5400RPM HDD.

More like 8GB DDR3, i5, and a single 2gb graphics card with a 5400RPM HDD

BUT

For only $1,500 more you can upgrade to 32gb DDR3, a 256GB SSD, and an i7! Now that's a bargain.
 
i use 3 1440p monitors and 1 4k tv....but i have Classic mac pro with a gtx 980 while all the other bum macs struggle.

Enjoy it while you can - that grater is dying a little more every day (aren't we all).

(Just kidding - I have 2 old iMacs that I still use for grid computing)
 
Last edited:
Unless another compression technology comes along, I can't see 8k being very useful. The bandwidth required is so massive that I'm sure iTunes won't carry it for years to come. There needs to be another technological breakthrough in order for this to catch on. Either that, or fiber optic Internet connections will have to become standard.

The point of higher resolutions isn't just to watch higher resolution content, it's to do work at a higher resolution. Video editing with 4k full resolution in a window (or multiple windows) with space available for the editing interface. Apps in general on a big monitor with a ton of detail to see what you're working on.
 
Can you even imagine a 40" iMac with 8K retina display? It would be completely ridiculous, but for some reason I want it.

Each 8K screenshot would be about 33 megapixels. As a web designer, this is really making me cringe. The web isn't ready for that kind of image resolution! Hell, most cameras aren't even ready for that kind of resolution! Haha.

I could almost fit a photo at 1:1 on that. :p

Actually who am I kidding, since the photos are 2:3 the display would be short by about 600 pixels. :D
 
Is 8K even really necessary? I mean there has to be a limit to the number of pixels & colors the human eye can distinguish. Plus most video cameras can't record higher than 4K at the moment, so I'll ask again, why is 8K needed?
 
There appears to be a fair amount of confusion here, albeit understandable (unless I'm the one completely out to sea). This article is not about DisplayPort 1.4--it's about Embedded DisplayPort 1.4. The former is the unspecified future successor to DP 1.3, which was the standard that was finalized last year and that will allow us to have external 5K displays at 60Hz with a single cable. Based on my admittedly limited understanding of the matter, the latter, eDP 1.4, is most easily conceptualized as the internal version of DP 1.3. This will allow us to have a 5K iMac without the current internal jiggery pokery that Apple has had to deploy and may permit us to witness the return of Target Display Mode. eDP 1.4 just brings the wholesome goodness of DP 1.3 to notebooks and all-in-ones, along with a super-sized serving of version number confusion.

The CW is that the first DP 1.3 cards will arrive in the middle of next year when Nvidia rolls out its successor to Maxwell. I wouldn't be surprised if eDP 1.4 appears shortly thereafter since it's basically the internally-formatted version of DP 1.3. The mid-2016 arrival cited in the article may not be too off.

Now, the question of when this will appear on Macs is a different beast. I imagine we will see eDP 1.4 (5K iMac) implemented before external DP 1.3 connections (the thing needed for external 5K displays with one cable). Since Apple and Intel made the questionable decision to multiplex DP and PCIe data in TB, and Apple made the decision to dump standalone mDP ports for TB ports, advances in display signal standards have been tied inextricably to advances in TB. DP 1.3 will not be rolled out in TB 3--you'll need to wait for TB 4, at the earliest, to see that. So, even if DP 1.3 appears in products by Nvidia in the middle of next year (and presumably AMD soon thereafter), as Mac owners we'll need to wait longer, perhaps much longer, before we see it. Given that TB 3 hasn't yet arrived on Mac, it's anybody's guess when we'll see TB 4.
 
Getting a retina-level external display on a Mac Pro is all I want to hear news about...
 
What I don't get is why does Apple think they are so "cool" to bring out 8k, 12k...or whatever future-k? Seriously. They can't even produce proper mac computers like iMac and mac pro to justify those eye power screen. Hey, Apple. Just because you like to make things look "beautiful" on the outside does not mean you make things look good on the inside. It's more like John Carpenter's movie, "They live." We can see through all your craps on the inside without those glasses.
Get real..and balance it out.
 
FAIL! I won't be happy until I get 16k displays. Also, make sure I get an 8-core CPU *just* to drive the display. You can give me a regular old 4-core CPU to handle my computing duties.

8k on my 15" display? Right..... I have 2k right now and I'd never pay a penny more to have anything higher. I can't see any pixels right now, why would I want to see no pixels later at a higher cost?
 
Can you even imagine a 40" iMac with 8K retina display? It would be completely ridiculous, but for some reason I want it.

Each 8K screenshot would be about 33 megapixels. As a web designer, this is really making me cringe. The web isn't ready for that kind of image resolution! Hell, most cameras aren't even ready for that kind of resolution! Haha.

Everything is going to be an SVG at this rate...
 
In Milwau
Most copper wire Internet can provide 1 Gbps so it's not like we need fiber. It's just that most ISPs are lazy to upgrade their copper networks to allow this greater transmission speed.

I have 175 Mbps down and 25 Mbps up. While I can see these speeds at speedtest.net, I rarely see them while downloading 2GB+ downloads from iTunes. It seems like iTunes is good for 25 Mbps. I hardly even see these speeds when downloading 4k 100GB movies for my TV. My point is that content providers need to catch up.
kee,
Most copper wire Internet can provide 1 Gbps so it's not like we need fiber. It's just that most ISPs are lazy to upgrade their copper networks to allow this greater transmission speed.

I have 175 Mbps down and 25 Mbps up. While I can see these speeds at speedtest.net, I rarely see them while downloading 2GB+ downloads from iTunes. It seems like iTunes is good for 25 Mbps. I hardly even see these speeds when downloading 4k 100GB movies for my TV. My point is that content providers need to catch up.

I am still maxed at 50Mbs down / 5 Mbs up with Time Warner Cable (and this is the highest residential speed they can provide) Tried to switch to ATT and the max they offer in my area is ... 24Mbs! I live downtown Milwaukee, WI a 700,000 city! The ISPs here are a total joke.
 
In Milwau

kee,


I am still maxed at 50Mbs down / 5 Mbs up with Time Warner Cable (and this is the highest residential speed they can provide) Tried to switch to ATT and the max they offer in my area is ... 24Mbs! I live downtown Milwaukee, WI a 700,000 city! The ISPs here are a total joke.

ISPs in most of the USA are a joke. It's because of monopolies and lousy infrastructure (because of monopolies).
 
  • Like
Reactions: satcomer
Think Adobe will ever update their apps to work with higher res monitors?? Have you tried to read any of their interfaces on a 4k or higher monitor??? Text is much too small. Weak Adobe, weak. Where's the "text size" slider in the preferences???
 
There appears to be a fair amount of confusion here, albeit understandable (unless I'm the one completely out to sea). This article is not about DisplayPort 1.4--it's about Embedded DisplayPort 1.4. The former is the unspecified future successor to DP 1.3, which was the standard that was finalized last year and that will allow us to have external 5K displays at 60Hz with a single cable. Based on my admittedly limited understanding of the matter, the latter, eDP 1.4, is most easily conceptualized as the internal version of DP 1.3. This will allow us to have a 5K iMac without the current internal jiggery pokery that Apple has had to deploy and may permit us to witness the return of Target Display Mode. eDP 1.4 just brings the wholesome goodness of DP 1.3 to notebooks and all-in-ones, along with a super-sized serving of version number confusion.

The CW is that the first DP 1.3 cards will arrive in the middle of next year when Nvidia rolls out its successor to Maxwell. I wouldn't be surprised if eDP 1.4 appears shortly thereafter since it's basically the internally-formatted version of DP 1.3. The mid-2016 arrival cited in the article may not be too off.

Now, the question of when this will appear on Macs is a different beast. I imagine we will see eDP 1.4 (5K iMac) implemented before external DP 1.3 connections (the thing needed for external 5K displays with one cable). Since Apple and Intel made the questionable decision to multiplex DP and PCIe data in TB, and Apple made the decision to dump standalone mDP ports for TB ports, advances in display signal standards have been tied inextricably to advances in TB. DP 1.3 will not be rolled out in TB 3--you'll need to wait for TB 4, at the earliest, to see that. So, even if DP 1.3 appears in products by Nvidia in the middle of next year (and presumably AMD soon thereafter), as Mac owners we'll need to wait longer, perhaps much longer, before we see it. Given that TB 3 hasn't yet arrived on Mac, it's anybody's guess when we'll see TB 4.

So no Target Display from rMB / rMBP to 5k iMac / 5k Thunderbolt display until they got TB 3.1 or TB 4, right?

I don't really get the thing of offering such monster resolutions if the hardware isn't yet ready to handle basic functions.
 
While I am still feeling astonishing about 1080P, Apple is moving to 8k.

The level I could only imagine. I could only imagine. Over.
 
I can't wait to tag along with our writers on assignment and shoot some SVGs!

I'll bet you it's coming! SVG pictures may look like 256 color pictures of yesteryear at first, but in theory, you could get SVG to make a pretty good picture someday. With enough colored dots, anything is possible!
 
I'll bet you it's coming! SVG pictures may look like 256 color pictures of yesteryear at first, but in theory, you could get SVG to make a pretty good picture someday. With enough colored dots, anything is possible!
…but…then…still pixelated when blown up? :(
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.