iMac and TBD 4K

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Serban, Sep 6, 2013.

  1. Serban Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #1
  2. malvicus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2013
    #2
    You are comparing a monitor to an all-in-one computer. If I wanted to do a dual display setup, I could hook up that samsung monitor to the iMac. I could also take that same monitor and hook it up to a mac mini or a mac pro.
     
  3. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #3
    It is a samsung display for desktop so the imac has a display right? so....if they release only the TBD (Thunderbolt display) 4K they will kill the iMac sales...like me i would prefer the 4K display with a mac mini or mac pro or with a macbook.
    So they have to come along both
     
  4. malvicus macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2013
    #4
    It cannot kill iMac sales because they're not even competing in the same market. It's like comparing a 4TB External hard drive to an iMac. The monitor is just an accessory.

    Granted, the iMac is a beautiful display in its own right. Perhaps, sometime in the future we'll see screens even larger than 27" with higher resolutions. Right now, I'm looking at a 20 inch VGA monitor that is in dire need of replacement. Fortunately, that will happen when I grab my new iMac!
     
  5. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #5
    you dont understand me...apple need to release a 4K display. So that means a 4K thunderbolt display, but if apple only release the 4K TBD they will kill imac sells because everyone will want that 4K and for that they will buy the 4K TBD +mac mini/macbook/mac pro, instead of an 1080p(21.5")/1440p(27") iMac
     
  6. Tweak3D macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    #6
    I wouldn't want a 4k display at this point in time. You need a lot more power to drive that size display and the current top of the line graphics card has enough difficulty running modern graphics applications at the native resolution with a good framerate. 4k is overrated at this point and I really have no idea why everyone is making such a fuss.
     
  7. Outrigger macrumors 68000

    Outrigger

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    #7
    I think you're confusing your wants and needs w/ the market. And you also don't seem to know what kind of gpu power it takes to power a 4K display properly.
     
  8. jetjaguar macrumors 68030

    jetjaguar

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Location:
    somewhere
    #8
    man a 4k 32inch imac would be amazing lol with dual gpus :p
     
  9. Hoko222 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2013
    #9
    "Everyone would want a 4K display"

    First of all you should never use words like that, speaking for everyone is not wise. Lets take an iMac owner, my fiancé, she has a 2010 27" iMac, are you saying that she will want a 4K monitor when/if Apple releases it. She doesnt even know what 4K is nor would she care less about it. Who do you mean when you say "everyone"? do you mean all the people on this forum, or this thread or the State of California? I would bet the majority of people in the USA dont know what 4K is, and the I can only speak for the people I know, most dont care. You are projecting your wants on others, and not just a small amount of others. You are projecting your wants on "everyone".

    I love the idea of high resolution screens, and when you look how far we have come in the last 10 years, its interesting thinking where we would be 10 years from now. I think Apple may not follow the 4K bandwagon and do what they do best, Lead. They may use a higher resolution, like the Mavericks Wallpaper download, I believe that is 5K.
     
  10. Mac32 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    #10
    I'm sure Apple with deliver higher resolution displays within a year's time or so, but at present time these displays are just too expensive for the mainstream market. You also have to consider the fact how Apple uses the retina resolutions, and also 4K with a regular resolution at 31'' is really pushing the limit regarding a practical UI/text size.
     
  11. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #11
    dont forget that the market also before retina macbook said the same thing..too expensive etc...but apple provide rMBP with a higher price, and even so the sells were good enough. So...too expansive is not a reason NOT to do it

    Apple is still a premium brand, so we can see a 4K thunderbolt display at 1500$ and 4K iMacs starting around 1799$
     
  12. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #12
    21.5" imac display is so old..1080p is already used in 5" mobile devices
     
  13. HenryDJP macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Location:
    United States
    #13
    Well, I hope you get what you want, I don't need it. I will say this, IF they do that it won't be on the 21.5" model, they consider that to be the entry level Mac. The 27" has always had the premium feature set.
     
  14. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #14
    you don't need, maybe, so you can work on a 21.5" 1024X768p display too if you says that.
    Yes like in MBP ,they probably put retina imac into 27" as well into TBD and later probably in early/mid 2014 in the 21.5" too
     
  15. CWallace macrumors 603

    CWallace

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    #15
    Considering the cheapest 4K PC monitor is the Asus 31.5" at $3500, an Apple 4K Thunderbolt Display would be more like $4500 and a 4K iMac would be $6000.

    Not sure "everyone" will want to spend that. ;)
     
  16. FreakinEurekan macrumors 68040

    FreakinEurekan

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Eureka Springs, Arkansas
    #16
    Apple has never worried about new products killing old. iPhones took sales from iPods - iPads took sales from MacBooks. If 4K TBD + Mac Pro takes sales from the iMacs, I would expect Apple to view that as a success - not a problem.
     
  17. Kirihuna macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2013
    #17
    iMacs are currently using mobile GPUs in them.

    a GTX Titan has trouble running a 4K.

    This won't happen for at least another year, or more.
     
  18. iSayuSay macrumors 68030

    iSayuSay

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    #18
    How would you run a 4K display with current GPU? Maybe if you only use it for desktop environment and some UHD videos playback .. it's fine.

    How about gaming and 3D applications? Dual GPU barely runs for 1440p gaming, now 4K?
     
  19. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #19
    like in 15" retinaMBP, the user can use 1080 resolution but double the pixels,HDP
     
  20. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #20
    even that mobile gpu drives fluent now 5" 1080p like galaxy S4 and so on...and an powerful desktop cannot manage to run double of that
     
  21. iSayuSay macrumors 68030

    iSayuSay

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    #21
    Even low end GPU nowadays can run desktop environment of 4K resolution. The challenge comes when you do 3D and games. Not just Bad Piggies or Fruit Ninja kind of games.

    Something like BF4, or maybe GTA V when it comes to PC. Runs in 4K .. hmm, well maybe not.
    Sure you can downscale to 1080p but it defeats the purpose of owning 4K awesomeness.
     
  22. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #22
    you can run BF4 or GTA like you said on the 15" native resolution of 1800p ? no, but is still the best laptop out there on the market. For gamers you have razer blade pro let say with 1080p because they can run games over 30fps.

    Like apple said, they are thinking what the future of imac will be...and for start the 4K is a must. yes probably with the second generation 4K imac will be more performant, like every product...so it will and it must be the beginning. What apple implements, the others will copy the idea and do next year
     
  23. comatory macrumors 6502a

    comatory

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2012
    #23
    easy. you would still run it in 1440p.

    i remember the days when we used CRT displays with Pentium processors. Most of those CRTs could push 1200x1600 res, could I game on it? No, I used it for desktop only. I ran games usually in 800x600.

    so there you go - I dont hear people complaining on 50 inch TVs either.
     
  24. elithrar macrumors 6502

    elithrar

    Joined:
    May 31, 2007
    #24
    16:9 4K (which is what this thread is talking about) is 3840 × 2160, which is not pixel doubled from 1440p. You'll get quite a bit of "fuzziness"; similar to running 1080p on a 1440p display. CRTs didn't suffer this as much due to their design, but it was still apparent and it's not a valid solution.

    50" TV's have a resolution of 1080p, too.

    Try getting that mobile GPU to drive any modern PC game and see where that gets you :)
     
  25. rabidz7 macrumors 65816

    rabidz7

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2012
    Location:
    Ohio
    #25
    If they have any chance of me getting it, it better have 2880 cuda cores, or mabey 5760 cuda cores with 2xGK110 in SLI. It must also have be 3840x2400 4k, not some other, funny 4k.

    ----------

    My single 7970 manages 1600p pretty well.
     

Share This Page