3200 x 1800 usable screen real estate? Can I see a photo of your monitor in action?, that sounds awesome.
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.
Evidence of Upcoming Retina iMacs Showing Up in OS X Yosemite Beta
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
3200 x 1800 usable screen real estate? Can I see a photo of your monitor in action?, that sounds awesome.
I thought the numbers showed that even DP1.2 and Thunderbolt 2 didn’t have the bandwidth to support resolutions much higher than 4K ones (such as UltraHD, 3840 x 2160 @ 60Hz), so that ~5K (doubled 2560 x 1440 displays a la the current 27” ones) would have to wait for DP1.3 (the standard is not even complete, the earliest this could happen would be sometime in 2015) and a future Thunderbolt interface. And even Intel’s announced plans for the Alpine Ridge Thunderbolt controller that’d support 40Gbit/s speed has no announced timeline and (according to Wikipedia, anyway) does not support DP1.3, just DP1.2 (HDMI 2.0 is similarly limited to sub-5K resolutions for 60Hz display modes). Perhaps that’s merely because the DP1.3 spec isn’t finished yet, and Alpine Ridge will support it once it’s finalized.
In any case, I think if we see desktop Retina displays, they’ll be limited to 4K (whether UltraHD or wider-screen cinema 4K standards) and will use retina scaling modes to approximate a doubled 2560 x 1440 (or higher) resolution, a la how the current 15” Retina displays in the MBP work. The technology just isn’t there for larger panels yet.
In any case, I think if we see desktop Retina displays, they’ll be limited to 4K (whether UltraHD or wider-screen cinema 4K standards) and will use retina scaling modes to approximate a doubled 2560 x 1440 (or higher) resolution, a la how the current 15” Retina displays in the MBP work. The technology just isn’t there for larger panels yet.
Last edited:
Good luck pushing this with a mobile GPU
Basically all GPU's, mobile or not, can push 4K or even 5K very easily. I think you mean gaming at that resolution, which is kind of hard atm for AAA games.
I don't think it's in Apple's interest to make the iMac as unaffordable as the Mac Pro so I can see them trying to achieve a Retina iMac with a reasonable price tag.
I think the GTX880M will suffice for general use and even some 4K video rendering and photoshop. Everyone talks about 4K gaming but thats still far off and we won't see anything close to a mobile equivalent to a titan black for the next 3-4 years, simply down res to 1440 or 1080. I mean the 15" retina MBP has a GT750M and runs quite well for standard use so I don't see major caveats. Be positive, lets be surprised, we're not obliged to buy them anyways
3200 x 1800 usable screen real estate? Can I see a photo of your monitor in action?, that sounds awesome.
I can post pic tonight as the screen is at home. Just connect 4k screen to thunderbolt 2 mac and use app Display Menu to select retina resolution 3200x1800. Then About this Mac->More info...->Displays and you will see 6400x3600.
Retina creates graphic issues for designers.
Graphical tools that don't allow adjustments to dpi will display graphics twice as large as intended. This causes layout issues in web pages, emails and other areas where graphics where captured on retina screens without dpi adjustments.
While it's good to hear they're working on retina, software developers really need to resolve this issue.
Graphical tools that don't allow adjustments to dpi will display graphics twice as large as intended. This causes layout issues in web pages, emails and other areas where graphics where captured on retina screens without dpi adjustments.
While it's good to hear they're working on retina, software developers really need to resolve this issue.
This could be like the late 2012 iMac and 2013 Mac Pro.
"Initial supplies severely constrained..."
"Initial supplies severely constrained..."
More exactly, whenever Intel actually ships suitable chips. This especially if Apple wants to avoid discreet GPUs. However it is unknown if Intels Broadwell solutions can even successfully drive a retina display, so a discreet GPU may be a requirement. Unless Apple enrolls a new generation of discreet GPUs it still might be difficult to get acceptable performance.
As for Mac Book Air I'm very much wait and see on this one. The reason is simple integrated GPUs are the only option here and as such they really need a huge boost in performance at the power levels acceptable in the Air. It is unknown if Broadwell can deliver the performance customers expect when driving a retina display. Beyond that I'd rather just see a better display in the Air instead of retina, especially if they have to compromise performance.
I still don't understand why they don't create an ultra thin monitor with a high spec mac mini that hooks to the back rather than wasting a monitor.
The monitor life far outlives the life of its computer parts, I have two iMacs that prove this...
The monitor life far outlives the life of its computer parts, I have two iMacs that prove this...
If OS X switches from OpenGL to "Metal", then this should be no problem with Iris Pro (the 2nd generation in Broadwell).
I'm so in for this. My early 2009 24" iMac C2D is still rocking strong (with SSD), but I so want a 27" in retina!
Won't happen. For example, Retina MacBook Pros did not simply take over the existing MacBook Pro pricing. They were marked up hundreds.
