I'd say that the biggest flaw of this display is that it doesn't have TB passthrough. Or even TB hub.
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.
LG UltraFine 5K Display Now Ships in Quicker 3-5 Business Days
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes, Toke it does show it (they) are working in native 5120 x 2880 resolution. I see you asked me this question on another related thread so I am hopefully answering both questions here. I am using a Mac Pro 2013 with D700 GPUs. The Mac Pro has three TB buses (two TB ports per bus). I have each of the monitors plugged into separate TB buses using the TB3 to TB2 connectors. I do not get any of the glitches others have reported using the MacBook Pro. The displays are stunning and color accurately match prints. What I see on the monitors is exactly what comes out on my Epson 4900 Printer...something I have been plagued with using Thunderbolt Displays for years even with near weekly calibration. These monitors have required no calibration to date (two weeks). The other great news is everything running on the other TB bus is working as well (Promise Technology R8 Pegasus 2 24TB RAID, OWC 12 TB RAID, OWC 4TB SSD RAID, OWC Blue Ray box, and an OWC TB Connector Box. At least half of the USB ports are also being used for printers, scanners, card readers, etc. Everything is working as hoped. I keep thinking I will find I have maxed out something but so far....I ordered them on a Tuesday and they arrived on a Friday. I also do no see the issue others report with the esthetics of the monitors themselves. The displays are breathtaking and they work at an eye popping resolution. I am still speechless at how well they work. It is like getting the computer I hoped I bought back in 2013.
Well, I guess you aren't running them at their native resolution and seems to be that you don't need to, they look great to you anyways...
Sooo, pics or didn't happen, please?
Last edited:
Trouble is: 5120px x 2880px x 32bpp x 60 frames/sec = ~28Gbps bandwidth: a significant proportion of TB3's maximum 40Gbps capacity. It also uses both of the two DisplayPort streams that it TB3 can carry.
So, a TB3 passthrough port on a 5k display would have severe limitations: only TB1-like speeds (or less if you want to have a couple of USB-3s on the display) and with no support for downstream displays. Since all the compatible Macs have at least 2 full-fat TB3 ports, I suspect most users would suffer the indignity of having to plug a second cable into their Mac for the sake of getting full TB3 functionality.
(...and that's assuming that there is no technical barrier to putting a passthrough on a device that is already using both TB channels - since they've left it off, I rather suspect that there is).
(I wonder if you can run the display from the Thru port on another TB3 device?)
What would have been nice on the display is a USB-A port or two and ethernet, rather than three USB-C ports that only offer USB3 anyway. I guess someone just loves dongles...
Toke, please explain what your definition is of native resolution. We must be talking apples and oranges or we have a different meaning for native resolution or something. These are 5K monitors. They are both displaying with 5K resolution. Not sure what else you are looking for to achieve native resolution.
We might be on something. Post this window:
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachments/img_2587-jpg.683019/
(System Information->Graphics/Displays)
[doublepost=1485867661][/doublepost]
One correction: monitors have 3 colors, no alpha, so it's 30bpp.
So 5k@10b@60Hz is 26.5 Gbp. That is 13.5 Gbps for other devices. More than TB1 can offer. More than usb3.1gen2. For vast majority that is plenty of enough. Most people use usb3.0 @5Gbps (and usually share that with hub).
Very few cases are that you significantly gain something from over 10Gbps speeds. And even in those caseses people usually prefer to get devices connected with less than 100% speed than not to connect at all. Or having connecting multiple wires every time they bring their computer to their monitor. That is just the simple idealogy behind daisy chaining. Maybe Apple doesn't like daisy chaining any more? Multiple tb3 ports on a mac allow to forget about daisy chaining and start selling hubs?
[doublepost=1485867778][/doublepost]
You could with tb2. All tb chips have dp output. Why would they have removed that?
Probably spurious precision by the time you've added overheads, like control signals.
...which is just enough to supply USB 3.1g1 to the 3 x USB-C ports on the back of the display.
Also, what is the performance of TB3 actually like when you try and divvy up the full 40Gbps bandwidth between multiple devices and protocols? Just because it maxes out at 40Gbps in perfect conditions doesn't necessarily mean it won't start having latency or other problems when you try and connect a 26Gbps display plus a bunch of other devices that add up close to the maximum, each adding a bit of overhead. (Anybody know?) Certainly, other packet-based interfaces like ethernet go to hell if you start getting close to 100% utilisation.
The question is, why bother with limited passthrough when the rMBPs are well (if not over-) endowed with TB3 ports? If you've got a 13" MBP with limited PCIe bandwidth to 2 of the 4 ports, then those limited ports are the ideal place to hang displays (which don't use PCIe) - and I'm pretty sure that if the 15" ever found itself serving 40Gbps to all 4 ports, the CPU would drastically throttle to avoid melting.
...in that case, even less reason to have TB through on the display - just make it the last display in the chain.
[doublepost=1485902322][/doublepost]
Btw, usb3.1g1 is 5Gbps. g2 is 10.
The last display on daisy chain is - of course - the display you already own, which have only dp port. This was the original selling tip from Apple.
Just one model out of 6 mac lines has so many tb3 ports that daisy chaining is not so important any more. We have got some hints that the 5k is o-kay with tb2. So it would have been easy to put that one missing port to it, so all users would be happy.
...anyway, Apple gets 9% of its revenue from macs, so why would they really care?
Tell that to a user that plans to use this display with tb2 mac for a year or 2, before buying a new mac. Or that dude who bought an über expensive raid enclosure with tb2 and has to use his mac's second tb2 port to something else, like existing 4k monitor.
Btw, usb3.1g1 is 5Gbps. g2 is 10.
This was the initial problem with tb device makers. Every device was designed to be the last. Just to save few bucks.
The last display on daisy chain is - of course - the display you already own, which have only dp port. This was the original selling tip from Apple.
Just one model out of 6 mac lines has so many tb3 ports that daisy chaining is not so important any more. We have got some hints that the 5k is o-kay with tb2. So it would have been easy to put that one missing port to it, so all users would be happy.
...anyway, Apple gets 9% of its revenue from macs, so why would they really care?
Last edited:
Yes, and the LG display has 3 USB-C ports offering USB3.1gen1 speeds only. 3 x 5 = 15 which is more than the 13Gbps we're estimating (possibly over-estimating) is available.
Yes, that was a cheap move - in this case, though, a thru port on the back of the display would be a 3rd class port. The 5k display is a huge bandwidth hog that needs to be the only display in the chain and, frankly, is best off being the only device in the chain.
Well that won't work with a 5k display which has consumed both of the DisplayPort 1.2 channels that Thunderbolt provides, so you couldn't have any sort of display further down the chain. Sorry, but you're not going to be chaining your existing DP monitor off the back of any 5k TB display.
Well, don't do that then.
A tb2 Mac won't drive it at 5k, for starters. https://www.macrumors.com/2016/12/20/lg-5k-display-works-with-older-macs/
...and if you're not going to be getting the full benefit of 5k right away, I'd wait to see what develops in displays over the next 1-2 years. Hopefully, DisplayPort 1.3 or 1.4 will get adopted (and maybe supported by the next version of Thunderbolt) - the USB-C spec already supports 1.3, or maybe eGPUs will be the next big thing...
And if you have a raid or something else that have tb and usb3, you loose at least half of potential speed or need to connect several cables.
Both neglects the two main reasons TB does exist (enough bandwidth for daisy chaining and convinience to use just one cable..
Meaning, a mac with few usb-c's not hindered by TB, would work better.
You could drive them in dp1.4 if needed and otherwise usb3.1gen2.
Alternate mode supports 4 lanes, so I can't see any reason why there couldn't be 4 dp signals carried in usb-c cable, if the spec is fully implemented.
https://www.macrumors.com/2016/12/20/lg-5k-display-works-with-older-macs/
And yet, we have here MountainHunter, who claims to have full 5k for both Ultrafines from mp's tb2's.
Could D700 and Ultrafine (undocumentedly) support "Display Stream Compression" or some other compression tech?
I'd prefer 32" 4k over 27" 5k...
Yes, but a full DisplayPort interface also has 4 "lanes", and v1.2 needs all of them to drive a 4k@60Hz display, so USB-C alt mode is still only equivalent to a single DisplayPort cable. That's why, if you read the spec for the LG 4k ultrafine (non-Thunderbolt), you'll see that its USB ports only support USB 2 speeds - and it can only do that because USB-C also has a low-speed 5th lane for USB 2 legacy. DisplayPort 1.2 can't do 5k@60Hz on a single cable even though it has 4 lanes - hence existing 5k displays have needed two DisplayPort cables.
However, the LG 4k, TB3 display doesn't use USB-C's "Display Port Alternate Mode" - it uses Thunderbolt's ability to carry two "virtual" DisplayPort connections - which don't correspond to the physical lanes in the cable - along with TB3's higher 40Gbps bandwidth. It still needs both its virtual DisplayPort connections to drive 5k (and, hence, both of the 2 physical DP connections from the GPU to the Mac's thunderbolt controller).
DisplayPort 1.3 ups the data rate and will be able to daisy-chain 2 4k 60Hz displays or run a single 5k on just 4 lanes - the spec for USB-C alternate mode supports this (but I don't think its been implemented) but the Thunderbolt 3 spec is pegged at DisplayPort 1.2a (and Intel doesn't make any DP1.3 GPUs, so go figure...).
Oh, and I've just found this at https://thunderbolttechnology.net/sites/default/files/HBD16235_Thunderbolt_TB_r05.pdf
...which suggest that a 5k Thunderbolt 3 display can't have a TB thru port, because it has consumed both DP1.2 interfaces.
Let's wait until MountainHunter posts the picture of his Displays Preferences panel to show that those displays are actually showing 5
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/01/apple-lg-5k-display-issues/
LG 5K display must be kept at least 2 meters away from Wi-Fi routers.
New 5K monitor sold by Apple apparently lacks EM shielding, has other issues.
'when placed within two metres (6.5ft) of a wireless router, the display starts to flicker; move it really close, and the monitor goes black and becomes unusable.'
LG 5K display must be kept at least 2 meters away from Wi-Fi routers.
New 5K monitor sold by Apple apparently lacks EM shielding, has other issues.
'when placed within two metres (6.5ft) of a wireless router, the display starts to flicker; move it really close, and the monitor goes black and becomes unusable.'
Last edited:
Just want to confirm how you've connected these to the mac. Assume using the tb2 - tb3 adaptor on the monitor end - or have you plugged these into some kind of breakout box. I was naively under the impression that at the display couldn't send out 5k on single stream to the mac?
Either way just a clarification on your connection setup would be appreciated.
I've been through 3 makes on display - and currently on a 5k Dell - which if i run in any other resolution (so 4k in single stream and 5k in dual stream) i get glitches, anything through the display settings (Scaled) doesn't work properly.
So, to clarify my connection setup, I am using a Mac Pro 2013 with dual 700 GPUs. The Mac Pro has 6 TB ports using 3 TB buses. Top left and middle left are on bus 1. Top right and middle right are on bus 2 and the remaining two TB ports are on bus 3. I connect one LG 5K Ultrafine monitor to the top left TB port with the second LG 5K Ultrafine monitor to the top left TB port. This places them on spare TB buses. No other devices are connect to those ports or buses. To the bottom TB bus I have connected a Pegasus 2 R8 24TB RAID and serially connect to an OWC 12TB RAID and serially connected to an OWC 4TB SSD RAID and serially connect to an OWC TB breakout box and serially connected to an OWC Blueray reader/writer with additional eSATA, HDMI, audio, ethernet, and USB 3.0 ports. I am using the USB 3.0 ports and the eSATA ports. Both monitors are showing full 5K resolution as indicated in the screen capture I posted last week in this thread. I do not have any of the interference issues (screen glitches or black screens) others have pointed to.
I am connected to at least two of the USB-C ports on the back of the monitors using converter/connectors to USB 3.0. They in turn are connected to a printer and to a scanner. Everything works perfectly.
I see in a separate thread that LG/Apple have recognized the EMI issue related to these monitors. I probably have not experienced it because my wireless routers are far away from my monitors. I expect to contact Apple soon to see if I can take these monitors in for a "fix" using some kind of shielding, even though I do not have any issues at this time. If I decide to change my setup in the future and have a wireless router nearby, I want to ensure I do not have the EMI issues.
I am an electrical engineer by trade and I see where others are saying my setup is impossible due to the math involved in the TB3 to TB 2 throughput. I recognize I am probably operating at the edge of what is possible with this Mac Pro and the monitors. However, it works and I am very happy with the performance to date. Maybe the extra performance from the D700s makes a difference compared to what one may experience from D500s or D300s.
Sorry, but no.
You posted a capture that shows what resolution your monitor has. Not the resolution you're driving it.
Why don't you post that grab I told you to?
System Report -> Graphics/Displays.
Toke, I started a new thread for the same question with screen grabs of System Report -> Graphics/Displays. URL:
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ng-in-display-preferences-is-it-30hz.2034429/
I am not sure if the Mac Pro is outputting 5K at 30Hz or 60Hz. Theoretically, DP1.2 does not have enough bandwidth for 5K at 60Hz on a single channel. You mentioned "Display Stream Compression". Could that be the case?
