What are you on? I would have tremendous use for it. This way I can get rid of my iMac and just stick with a maxed out Air. Then when a large external display is required for some work/gaming/whatever, I can just thunderbolt to it. This way I dont have 2x the hardware and OS laying around the house as I don't need it.
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.
No 4K Thunderbolt Display?
- Thread starter djtech42
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What are you on? I would have tremendous use for it. This way I can get rid of my iMac and just stick with a maxed out Air. Then when a large external display is required for some work/gaming/whatever, I can just thunderbolt to it. This way I dont have 2x the hardware and OS laying around the house as I don't need it.
Yep. I want to use my MBP when out and about, but when I'm in my home office I want to plug it into a decent monitor, full size keyboard and mouse.
I'm assuming with TB2 the new 13" could drive a 4k display? Should I be getting the 15" with the dGPU to be sure...?
I'm assuming with TB2 the new 13" could drive a 4k display? Should I be getting the 15" with the dGPU to be sure...?
4K on a 27" display is useless. The human eye can't see the difference between 1080P and 4K on a screen that small, even at a two to three foot distance. 4K becomes practical on larger screens, 60" plus and even that can be argued.
I'd like to see a new TBD with the form factor of the iMac with USB3 and TB2.
I'd like to see a new TBD with the form factor of the iMac with USB3 and TB2.
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/1...-your-computer-isnt-powerful-enough-to-use-it
"In a roundabout way, we have ultimately just put our finger on the nub of the 4K problem: As it stands, 4K is out of the reach of mobile users and gamers, with the only valid use being professional graphics work. Intel’s Haswell contains a GPU that apparently supports 4K resolution, which should help out future laptops, but it certainly won’t do more than display your desktop or videos at that resolution.Would Mavericks or the latest rMBP change the results?"
Would Mavericks or 2013 rMBP change the above conclusions?
"In a roundabout way, we have ultimately just put our finger on the nub of the 4K problem: As it stands, 4K is out of the reach of mobile users and gamers, with the only valid use being professional graphics work. Intel’s Haswell contains a GPU that apparently supports 4K resolution, which should help out future laptops, but it certainly won’t do more than display your desktop or videos at that resolution.Would Mavericks or the latest rMBP change the results?"
Would Mavericks or 2013 rMBP change the above conclusions?
Take it away, Bob Mansfield!
Last edited:
That can't possibly be true. I can see a difference between 720p and 1080p on a 4" screen.
A 4K display that is backwards compatible (make 4px 1) to display things beautifully that are not retina optimized... now that would be great, and I think that's just what we can expect.
Keep in mind very little is optimized for these hi-px-dense displays. Im frequently disappointed browsing the web on my retina Pro...
Keep in mind very little is optimized for these hi-px-dense displays. Im frequently disappointed browsing the web on my retina Pro...
This thread is about a 4K thunderbolt display, not changing the current 27" thunderbolt display to 4K...regardless, I think most humans can see the difference at even smaller sizes, however, the 4K monitor in Apple's event videos associated with the Mac Pro, were likely a 32" sharp igzo 4K monitor. A couple of these and a new Mac Pro would make a great video editing combo.
Sorry but your facts don't check out. The angular pixel density formula gives a result of 32 inches for it to become 'retina,' plus the definition of retina is only for 20/20 vision which is considered average.
18 inches is a more realistic viewing distance. Take out a ruler.
I don't see a 4k display coming out of Apple and for more than one good reason.
First of all, 4k with anything other than the new mac pro would sacrifice way too much performance.
2nd, limited usage for 4k video- you wouldn't typically utilize the full 4k except for the final rendering.. you certainly wouldn't render 4k previews into your buffer while editing.. if the performance isn't a issue, the UI would get in the way.
3rd, 4k doesn't really sit neatly in line with OSX's retina-scaling solution; the pixel-density with 2x scaling would be too low on a 27" monitor(better suited for 21.5"), and too high at it's native resolution (even at 32"). They would need to default to some non-integer scaling solution - not something I see Apple doing.
Lastly, thunderbolt's 1-cable solution doesn't have the same appeal to the professional using a mac-pro "desktop" since they won't be unplugging their display all the time.
A 3rd-party non-thunderbolt 4k display makes much more sense to have.
A WQHD x4(retina) display would make a little more sense than a 4k display for Apple to make as it would address issues 2&3, but would also be ludicrously expensive. If they did do that, also interesting is the prospect of including additional processing power to manage the retina scaling - that way, it might appeal to people wanting to hook up their MBA or MBP for some extra eye-candy.
Like many people, a updated 27" WQHD TBD is more exciting to me.
A updated slimmer chassis, the full-laminated glass, usb3, tb2, and updated magsafe is more than enough features to justify a updated model. Highly unlikely, but a hdmi input or at least compatibility with display-port would put icing on the cake. I don't know why they haven't released this yet unless they're still having trouble with the supply-chain.
First of all, 4k with anything other than the new mac pro would sacrifice way too much performance.
2nd, limited usage for 4k video- you wouldn't typically utilize the full 4k except for the final rendering.. you certainly wouldn't render 4k previews into your buffer while editing.. if the performance isn't a issue, the UI would get in the way.
3rd, 4k doesn't really sit neatly in line with OSX's retina-scaling solution; the pixel-density with 2x scaling would be too low on a 27" monitor(better suited for 21.5"), and too high at it's native resolution (even at 32"). They would need to default to some non-integer scaling solution - not something I see Apple doing.
Lastly, thunderbolt's 1-cable solution doesn't have the same appeal to the professional using a mac-pro "desktop" since they won't be unplugging their display all the time.
A 3rd-party non-thunderbolt 4k display makes much more sense to have.
A WQHD x4(retina) display would make a little more sense than a 4k display for Apple to make as it would address issues 2&3, but would also be ludicrously expensive. If they did do that, also interesting is the prospect of including additional processing power to manage the retina scaling - that way, it might appeal to people wanting to hook up their MBA or MBP for some extra eye-candy.
Like many people, a updated 27" WQHD TBD is more exciting to me.
A updated slimmer chassis, the full-laminated glass, usb3, tb2, and updated magsafe is more than enough features to justify a updated model. Highly unlikely, but a hdmi input or at least compatibility with display-port would put icing on the cake. I don't know why they haven't released this yet unless they're still having trouble with the supply-chain.