EugW
macrumors P6
Incorrect. The MacBook Pro 15” supports 25.92/32.4 Gbps with HBR3, which is DisplayPort 1.4. This is in Alt Mode. However, it is paired with 10 Gbps USB 3.1.
BTW, DisplayPort 1.2 supports 17 Gbps anyway.
Last edited:
LG's New UltraFine 5K Display Limited to 4K Resolution When Used With 2018 iPad Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
BTW, DisplayPort 1.2 supports 17 Gbps anyway.
Its actually not crazy. You are looking at it from the wrong angle.
How many other monitors can you find on Apple's store? (except from the XDR PRO)
The monitor is expensive, its promoted by Apple and it looks like this. The first generation was plagued with so many issues that one would hope that Apple would release their own. All they really needed to do was to take the panel and stick it to the old Thunderbolt enclosure and that would be the bare minimum and it would still look better and more elegant than this.
The issue is not necessarily the monitor itself. There are tons of monitors and no one really cares. The issue is that Apple promotes such junk when they are the ones who set the industry on the design path. Its really insulting to be honest because this monstrosity is not something most Apple users (that care about design) want on their desks.
Its like buying a luxury car but put awful wheel covers/tires on it. Sure, it might do the job but its heck ugly.
(sorry for the bad analogy but you get the idea)
Timemaster
Suspended
Well usb-c can carry the signal. That not the issue. The graphic driver in those other devices on the other hand can not drive 5k worth of pixels.
theluggage
macrumors G3
Nope.
In DP Alt mode a USB-C connector is physically using VESA DisplayPort electrical signalling protocols on some or all of its 4 high-speed data lanes. The USB-C/DP alt mode specification has included DP 1.4 since day one. USB 3.1 etc. simply doesn't come into it.
As for the electrical capacity of the connectors, even DisplayPort 1.3/1.4 is only 8.1 Gbps per lane - less than the 10Gbps needed by USB 3.1 gen 2 - it gets the 30Gbps+ speed by using 4 lanes.
Although a USB-C cable physically has 4 high-speed data pairs/lanes, USB 3.1 gen 1 & 2 can only use two of those - one 'up', one 'down'. USB 3.2 doesn't change the max 10Gbps-per-lane bandwidth - but it can run two USB streams down the same cable giving a max 20Gbps (USB 3.2 gen 2x2). DisplayPort and Thunderbolt alt modes have been able to do that since the beginning, but not USB data.
You're probably getting confused with Thunderbolt, that actually re-encodes DisplayPort data using the Thunderbolt protocol so it can send multiple DP and PCIe streams down the same physical wires - in which case the total DP bandwidth is limited by the max TB3 bandwidth of 40Gbps (...so no dual 5k@60Hz displays on a single TB connection just yet...)
As for why the iPad Pro doesn't support DP1.4 and 5k - most likely reason is that the iPad's GPU doesn't support DP1.4 and/or 5k, whether or not the iPad's USB-C port controller does. There's also no evidence that the LG Ultrafine can support DP1.4 either.
[AUT] Thomas
macrumors 6502a
So, iPadOS actually adapts to other screen sizes than its own? Because having black bars has always been an issue with iOS.
If that problem has been solved: How abut 5K 30Hz. My Mac Mini from 2011 also doesn't support my 34" screen officially, but it does so very well practically at 3440x1440@30Hz
30Hz is still enough for a lot of tasks...
Sure, releasing a new display with TB2 would be such a great idea. If Apple released a new display, they would need to add TB3 dock features. They cannot tout that the TB3 ports on all of their laptops are such great universal ports and then release a display that cannot make use of the versatility of the TB3.
theluggage
macrumors G3
Depends on how you're using it, what mode etc.
I've got a 28" 4k display next to a 5k iMac and there is a difference if (as I said in another post) your workflow involves climbing on the desk with a jeweller's loupe and doing A/B comparisons.
The real issue is that for MacOS with its non-scalable UI, the "sweet spot" for a 27-30" display that gives the optimum UI size is (for many people) "looks like 2560x1440" - which is exactly 2x scaling for a 5k display, but needs non-integer scaling for 4k. 2x scaling on 4k gives "looks like 1920x1080" which makes the UI a bit chunky at 27"+
Now, I think some people have an irrational objection to non-integer scaled modes (they really are very good - nothing like the mess you get on a non-retina display at non-native resolution) and I'd be perfectly happy using a 27" 4k display at "looks like 1440p" but it can't be denied that they're slightly 'soft' looking c.f. a 2x mode and the GPU load could be an issue if you are relying on an integrated GPU. So 5k is the optimum for a Mac at that size range.
To complicate things further - my 28" 4k is just usable for me in 1:1 'native' mode - 27"@5k not so much. So if you want to work in 1:1 mode then 30" @4k is probably going to be more sensible than 30"@5k. On the other hand, 5k@17" can deliver a perfectly credible "looks like 3200x1800" scaled mode...
TLDNR: complicated and subjective issue is complicated and subjective.
Glockworkorange
Suspended
I get it. Really. But would you rather have: 1) that 5K display; 2) no external display or 3) a prettier exterior monitor with an inferior screen?Its actually not crazy. You are looking at it from the wrong angle.
How many other monitors can you find on Apple's store? (except from the XDR PRO)
The monitor is expensive, its promoted by Apple and it looks like this. The first generation was plagued with so many issues that one would hope that Apple would release their own. All they really needed to do was to take the panel and stick it to the old Thunderbolt enclosure and that would be the bare minimum and it would still look better and more elegant than this.
The issue is not necessarily the monitor itself. There are tons of monitors and no one really cares. The issue is that Apple promotes such junk when they are the ones who set the industry on the design path. Its really insulting to be honest because this monstrosity is not something most Apple users (that care about design) want on their desks.
Its like buying a luxury car but put awful wheel covers/tires on it. Sure, it might do the job but its heck ugly.
(sorry for the bad analogy but you get the idea)
If the argument is: ugly by Apple' standards, then you have a fair point. If the argument is: so ugly I'd rather not have an external monitor or so ugly I would use an inferior display, then I think it's crazy.
I care about design, but I use it because it is the best 5k display available and works seemlessly with my 5k iMac.
loby
macrumors 68000
Its actually not crazy. You are looking at it from the wrong angle.
How many other monitors can you find on Apple's store? (except from the XDR PRO)
The monitor is expensive, its promoted by Apple and it looks like this. The first generation was plagued with so many issues that one would hope that Apple would release their own. All they really needed to do was to take the panel and stick it to the old Thunderbolt enclosure and that would be the bare minimum and it would still look better and more elegant than this.
The issue is not necessarily the monitor itself. There are tons of monitors and no one really cares. The issue is that Apple promotes such junk when they are the ones who set the industry on the design path. Its really insulting to be honest because this monstrosity is not something most Apple users (that care about design) want on their desks.
Its like buying a luxury car but put awful wheel covers/tires on it. Sure, it might do the job but its heck ugly.
(sorry for the bad analogy but you get the idea)
True....and totally agree...but...
Apple has made it clear that they are "thinking different-ly" then they use too. Including how they see integrating products into their deteriorating "closed" before ecosystem etc. Not all will agree on their choices (I included), but others will (stock holders mainly)...and many I guess like it (or don't care so much) or their stock and value would not be so high.
Remember, Steve Jobs gave the keys to Tim Cook and said to make it "his"...well...he made it "his"...overall, "good" for apple depending on your definition of "good"...including making apple more political, ideological (border-line alternative spiritual) more so focused then before, and other things than what was not apple's focus before...before it was just mainly to make "great products" and the rest of the "stuff" that we see now with Tim Cook...was to just keep it minimal... Again, others like the current direction, others (like myself) do not care so much for it..
Apple today gets it direction from someone from the supply chain generally and not design or the technology side. Tim Cook's job was before becoming C.E.O. the guy who tried to max profits, save on manufacturing costs etc. and make deals with manufacturing companies so apple can increase profit vs. costs etc. If I am wrong, then please correct me.
Why do people "magically" believe with that type of training and career background (Compaq etc.) Tim Cook would change his ideology and "Think Differently" than what he was trained to originally perform and see his job differently than what he did best before...
Tim Cook has taken the company now to the incredible money generating, profit machine that it is now...good job for stockholders, not good for those who prefer "the old apple" mentality for pride in ecstatics, design style, tech, or Apple only, close ecosystem with efficiency over sometimes profit or costs. Apple "Pride" has taken more so now a different focus than just pride in making "great" products.
Tim Cook would not cancel launching products days before just because he did not like something or could not take pride in "his" product being out in the market like the former C.E.O. would do...EVEN it it meant losing "lots" of money due to the delays like the former C.E.O. would do... This type of thinking is not acceptable to a person who has been trained to reduce costs for profits etc. and probably Tim as a "bean counter"...and a good one...did not approve of that kind of behavior, but had too since he was not the C.E.O. That is not "good business" in someone like Tim Cook. Steve Jobs approved Tim Cook..so even Steve Jobs thought that Tim's thinking was what apple needed for the future to be successful.
All of this said is the background as to why we see "ugly" monitors instead of a a 5k iMac style "Cinema Display" monitor today for the same price as a thunderbolt monitor of the past. "Just take the shell off an iMac or thunderbolt monitor and put a iMac display in it and call it a day...does not fit in the business model of today's Tim Cook's apple. Not worth the trouble in manufacturing costs vs. profit "bottom line" to a "bean-counter". People may think it is easy to "just" slap an iMac display into something...but it takes more effort for a "bean counter" to even desire or even to think about to do so verses looking at his spread sheet for such and such % profit...sweet spot selling price etc. so he can report good things to stockholders...
I wanted desperately for JUST a new thunderbolt style apple designed or just an upgraded monitor with a 4k or 5k display slapped into a shell of a thunderbolt monitor or iMac and call it a day...take my money...and I would be fine. But that did nor will probably happen anymore in today's Tim apple. Those days are over...ugly third party (that does not match your other products) that can save you a buck to max out profits for the stock market is now the new norm. We have to get use to it, or go somewhere else. It is what it is...
Last edited:
I hear you. Yep, makes sense and I feel that too. Unfortunately
In this specific case, the only solution for my individual scenario would be to get an iMac. I have 15" MBP which would benefit with external screen but I'm not getting something this expensive, ugly and flawed with issues (hopefully they fixed them with this revision).
So I would rather get an iMac and iPad Pro for any external needs
I simply refuse to pay almost $2000CAD for such screen. Its not crazy, to me, its called standards!
[doublepost=1564675517][/doublepost]
I would rather have nothing. I am not willing to compromise on my sense of design especially with such a price tag. I'm a visual person and I always consider design as very important when making a decision. I don't compromise on certain things.
In this specific case, the only solution for my individual scenario would be to get an iMac. I have 15" MBP which would benefit with external screen but I'm not getting something this expensive, ugly and flawed with issues (hopefully they fixed them with this revision).
So I would rather get an iMac and iPad Pro for any external needs
I simply refuse to pay almost $2000CAD for such screen. Its not crazy, to me, its called standards!
Zdigital2015
macrumors 601
If you desire true 2560x1440@2x resolution on your Mac to have the absolute sharpest picture possible as opposed to selecting an interpolated resolution of 2560x1440 with the 4K display then you are going to want 5K. Unfortunately, 4K at true Retina is going to be 1920x1080@2x, which makes for a crisp screen at 27", but does not leave a lot of room for content.
Zdigital2015
macrumors 601
I hear you. Yep, makes sense and I feel that too. Unfortunately
[doublepost=1564675517][/doublepost]
I would rather have nothing. I am not willing to compromise on my sense of design especially with such a price tag. I'm a visual person and I always consider design as very important when making a decision. I don't compromise on certain things.
In this specific case, the only solution for my individual scenario would be to get an iMac. I have 15" MBP which would benefit with external screen but I'm not getting something this expensive, ugly and flawed with issues (hopefully they fixed them with this revision).
So I would rather get an iMac and iPad Pro for any external needs
I simply refuse to pay almost $2000CAD for such screen. Its not crazy, to me, its called standards!
Take a look at a BenQ SW271. It's 4K, and it's black plastic, but the industrial design is a bit nicer than the UltraFine 5K. Also, perhaps an ASUS ProArt PA32UC is more your style. Good luck.
Thank you, looked at both and my eyes hurt.
BenQ is super ugly, Asus looks a bit better but who the hell designed the stand? Way to kill it.
I would rather get the LG one than either of those.
I used to have the 30" ACD and that thing was so gorgeous. Miss those days.
dannys1
macrumors 68040
Well obviously the connector "USB-C" can as it runs Thunderbolt 3, but the iPad is nothing more than a USB 3.1 device. It does not have the bandwidth to shift 5k at 60hz
EugW
macrumors P6
You’re missing the point. While this particular iPad can’t do 5Kp60 over USB-C, USB-C itself definitely can, without the need for Thunderbolt.
As we’ve discussed before, if the entire chain (including the monitor) supports DisplayPort 1.4, then 5Kp60 will work just fine over USB-C, without any need for a Thunderbolt connection. The problem up to recently was that the devices were not DP 1.4. They were DP 1.2, which cannot do 5Kp60.
IOW, DisplayPort 1.4 can coexist with USB 3.1 on the same port, without being restricted to USB 3.1’s bandwidth limitations, even if there is no Thunderbolt support.
Last edited:
What are you trying to plug in there? Just buy new USB-C to whatever cables. No dongles needed.
Zdigital2015
macrumors 601
One of them is a Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter plugged into a USB-C port, one is a USB-C to USB-A adapter and the other one is a USB-C Digital AV Muliport Adapter, so he's either just bitter and being a smartass or he has absolutely no clue what he's doing. Either way, I can't figure out if he needs technical help or just wants to rant.
Apple should be listing (as part of their tech specs) any changed resolution output from tablet, phone, or mac products can output from USB(C) port(s) to what's used nationally on display (if lower res at all where applicable)
give users more informative info "instead of" a support document that's hidden from view and most likely will only prompt users to ask Apple live chat anyway.
give users more informative info "instead of" a support document that's hidden from view and most likely will only prompt users to ask Apple live chat anyway.
LordVic
Cancelled
What I don't get about this industrial design is LG makes much nicer displays. why this giant black plastic. I don't find it ugly or anything outright, but it looks dated, chunky and I KNOW they can do better.
versus
Why the recesessed screen instead of flush. why the large head bezel? the cheap looking plastic stand. the glare / gloss reflectiveness..
i'm sure the display quality is probably LG and up to excellence. but it's just not LG's typical quality of overall Look.
It’s a very cynical rant. Just frustrated at Apple’s approach to external displays. The TB display was a well-designed product - everything built in, a good range of ports and the customary great Apple design.
[doublepost=1564719273][/doublepost]
USB-C -> Ethernet?
USB-C -> Bose external speakers?
Adapters needed, no?
Zdigital2015
macrumors 601
Wow...I hate the Thunderbolt Display....had a whole bunch of them on a lease and constantly had issues with the USB ports and GbE ports that randomly stopped working on them. The one I chose for myself, especially, every damn week for about two or three days, just gave me the proverbial finger. Took it in to the Apple Store and, of course, the ports all worked perfectly.
When I read the love and adoration for these things, I ask myself if we just got a cursed production run or what... the horrible reflections any time I was forced to use overhead lights of any kind, God forbid I aimed the screen at a window with blinds...it was like having a surveillance mirror of everyone who randomly walked past the big windows in the office. It taught me never to buy Apple Displays ever again, bought Thunderbolt 2 docks, Dell P2715Qs and never looked back. Of course, Apple never updated it for TB2 and that ridiculous $999 price tag. Just complete crap on Apple’s part, especially since the Apple Cinema Displays were such gorgeous, long lasting and bulletproof, it was a huge letdown.
dannys1
macrumors 68040
That's fair enough but not even my iMac Pro supports DisplayPort 1.4, so there's no way i'd assume an iPad could.
EugW
macrumors P6
The MacBook Pro 15" has supported DisplayPort 1.4 since last year.
The new 2019/2020 iPad Pro isn't even out yet, so it wouldn't come as a complete shock if it supported DisplayPort 1.4 too.
dannys1
macrumors 68040
Yeah it came with Intel updating the Thunderbolt controller. Unfortunately the iMac Pro still has the previous Thunderbolt controller.