Wow. Ok. Thanks for the clarity on this. I see after doing my own research that you are indeed correct. Bummer. I'm torn now. Get a non retina imac that I can use as a monitor down the road or a retina imac that I cannot. Both seem equal spec wise. Guess I'll wait to see the retina imac in person. Then do some serious thinking.
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.
Retina 5K iMac Will Not Act as External Display, Standalone Apple 5K Display Unlikely Soon
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow. Ok. Thanks for the clarity on this. I see after doing my own research that you are indeed correct. Bummer. I'm torn now. Get a non retina imac that I can use as a monitor down the road or a retina imac that I cannot. Both seem equal spec wise. Guess I'll wait to see the retina imac in person. Then do some serious thinking.
I See this as a gen1 problem. Great display, but not ready to be useful long-term. Can't be used as a display for other computers ever. The next version might. That's the one to get unless you gotta have it now.
In 2012, people didn't think it was possible to drive a 2048x1536 display (ipad3, remember?). Now, they expect to be able to drive the new imac display, but no existing Mac can. Not today. Not being sold. I assure you, apple is working on it. They are banking on it. It differentiates them from other PC companies.
Thunderbolt 3 is coming. Brace yourselves (and your wallets).
In 2012, people didn't think it was possible to drive a 2048x1536 display (ipad3, remember?). Now, they expect to be able to drive the new imac display, but no existing Mac can. Not today. Not being sold. I assure you, apple is working on it. They are banking on it. It differentiates them from other PC companies.
Thunderbolt 3 is coming. Brace yourselves (and your wallets).
Why can't they support both? They have billions in cash. Certainly wouldn't hurt their ROI.
I would think that most applications wouldn't have a bandwith limitation issue.
To be honest, I hadn't thought about using a PCI expansion box to give it a try.
I did a quick search to find some experiences with TB2 and came up empty.
If you have any "non-sales related" (since he can't believe people are trying to sell you something) reviews i'm curious to see what others have discovered
As I said, it works ok most of the time. Number 2 and 3 results searching for:
PCI expansion "graphic card" Thunderbolt
give: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/pci-express-graphics-thunderbolt,3263-8.html
and: http://www.journaldulapin.com/2013/08/24/a-thunderbolt-gpu-on-a-mac-how-to/
this is an amazing computer at an amazing price. too bad for you.
----------
you seem confused. ever since the Apple ][, apple has been a consumer-centric company.
it's great that they also offer some pro products, but thats never been their bread & butter.
----------
did you read the article? do you understand why it can't act as an external 5k monitor? there is *no cable that supports this*. it physically cannot be done.
a 5k monitor costs $2500-3000. this costs $2500, and comes w/ a computer. if you upgrade the CPU and SSD it performs almost as well as the MP for non-parrelel processing. tasks (what most of us do).
how anybody can complain about that is a ***** mystery to me -- but MR readers are able to do it...
----------
ah yes, the electronics company with the highest consumer satisfaction ratings is now, according to"roadbloc", anti-consumer. riiiight.
----------
lol
Read it and weep. I said the same thing on the other thread and 14 others said it was false.
I love how fatty Schiller introduced the Mac Pro after 5 yrs of letting it rot. And here we go again, the Mac Pro gets no display or support from Apple. Next Mac Pro update will probably be in 2017, major change will be shorter trashcan shape.
whats there to be confused about? DisplayPort 1.2 can't handle it. 1.2 is what existed when the MP was developed. what should apple have done, gone into the future and brought back 1.3?
i really dont understand some people and their expectations. such entitlement.
Oooor, maybe, just maybe, Apple could have released 4k displays with the hyped Mac Pro as one of the biggest points they made at the announcement was support for not 1, not 2, but 3 4k displays. Yet... um... where were they? Oh! They pushed out a few over priced displays from Sharp for $3595.00. More than the "new" iMac 5k.
They had a long time to produce their own 4k displays, yet skipped ahead to 5k, and failed to release 4k displays that would have sold well with their new Mac Pro. That's not only bad business, but a big FU to those (such as myself) who dished out big bucks.
Nothing on that page indicates that the iMac 5K can act as an external monitor.
what it says is that you can attach an external monitor to the iMac, with up to 3840 x 2160 resolution. And that is what "extended desktop" and "video mirroring" refer to.
Perfectly said. Hits the nail right on the head. Technology advances. I get that. They can do 5K now, that's great. But don't promote 4K on your most high-end product, only offer 3rd party ultra-expensive displays to work with it, and then just skip over supporting that standard less than a year after promoting it.
Well, this is frustratingly annoying news for me. I want a Mac Pro. I don't want laptop parts in a pro-use machine. I've watched laptops die of GPU heat defects and I'm not willing to invest my only computer savings on a machine that might as well be expected to die in under five years of heavy use.
I want a Mac Pro with a high PPI display. The current 4K third party displays are ridiculously expensive and questionably compatible with the Mac Pro. The current Mac Pro won't be compatible with a future 5K display from Apple. So why would I buy the current Mac Pro if I am going to use a generic display just to get some music work done, when I won't be able to upgrade to a future Apple retina display for photographic use?
FRUSTRATED. this technology is moving too slowly to get to the next generation of display standard! I've been waiting for this for over a decade. No other hardware makers bother pushing tech like Apple does, until they need to catch up to Apple. No one else can exceed Apple even if they wanted to, without Intel getting their complacent asses in gear on chipsets.
If i recall correctly, the original optical thunderbolt was superior to the electrical thunderbolt they've been trickling out... They should have just gone with an optical-electrical combo for data and power on version ONE.
I want a Mac Pro with a high PPI display. The current 4K third party displays are ridiculously expensive and questionably compatible with the Mac Pro. The current Mac Pro won't be compatible with a future 5K display from Apple. So why would I buy the current Mac Pro if I am going to use a generic display just to get some music work done, when I won't be able to upgrade to a future Apple retina display for photographic use?
FRUSTRATED. this technology is moving too slowly to get to the next generation of display standard! I've been waiting for this for over a decade. No other hardware makers bother pushing tech like Apple does, until they need to catch up to Apple. No one else can exceed Apple even if they wanted to, without Intel getting their complacent asses in gear on chipsets.
If i recall correctly, the original optical thunderbolt was superior to the electrical thunderbolt they've been trickling out... They should have just gone with an optical-electrical combo for data and power on version ONE.
I do purchasing at a broadcast facility.
We use Mac Pros in our motion graphics dept. C4D and Adobe are platform agnostic. When we update the render farm next year I will probably be reversing my previous decision to go with New Mac Pros and Minis. Yosemite is IOSX and it looks like the New Mac Pro was just throwing a bone to the Pros while they focus all their energy on consumers.
It's not just the lack of a UHD/4k display for the NMP.
There are a number of other pain points. All minor, but it adds up to why are we sticking with Apple? If it is just as annoying to work in OSX environment as Windows, I really can't justify the expense to the bean counters.
Without an Apple UHD or 4k display I cant use the 'color space' excuse. And Enterprise support for simple stuff like printing, mail and directory services still requires extra work, which huge corporates frown on.
We use Mac Pros in our motion graphics dept. C4D and Adobe are platform agnostic. When we update the render farm next year I will probably be reversing my previous decision to go with New Mac Pros and Minis. Yosemite is IOSX and it looks like the New Mac Pro was just throwing a bone to the Pros while they focus all their energy on consumers.
It's not just the lack of a UHD/4k display for the NMP.
There are a number of other pain points. All minor, but it adds up to why are we sticking with Apple? If it is just as annoying to work in OSX environment as Windows, I really can't justify the expense to the bean counters.
Without an Apple UHD or 4k display I cant use the 'color space' excuse. And Enterprise support for simple stuff like printing, mail and directory services still requires extra work, which huge corporates frown on.
Huh? There are many 4K displays (for example, from Dell) which cost less than $1000 and have been found to work fine with the Mac Pro.
Because of Thunderbolt 3 being needed yes? as to why u cannot use it on say a Mac Pro ...
If this is due to "bandwidth limitations" just replace TB 2 with TB 3 on Apple's external current displays. or do the same as they do with USB. (one port TB 2/3 depends what its plugged into at either end.)
If this is due to "bandwidth limitations" just replace TB 2 with TB 3 on Apple's external current displays. or do the same as they do with USB. (one port TB 2/3 depends what its plugged into at either end.)
Most of the quotes are from peoples guesses and opinions. The one main fact is that there are no Mac's that can output 5K due to the connections and the GPU's, not even the Mac Pro.
The only logical conclusion is that Mac Pro's and MacBook Pro's that have 5K capabilities (new Thunderbolt/HDMI specs and GPU's) are on their way, along with a 27" 5K display. I would expect a 4K Thunderbolt display available to support older models too.
4K tech has been here a while already, video editing, consumer video cameras, TV's, some phones, GoPro's (check out V4)..... Apple has finally entered with an amazing 5K iMac. To think more 5K or even 4K options are not just around the corner is crazy.
I'd even expect 4K video recording in iPhone 6S/7 too (see Galaxy Note 4 and Note 3).
Addition: One thing, the Mac Pro can support 2x4K using the two Thunderbolt ports. Maybe, just maybe, Apple would release a 5K screen taking in the two TB connections.... assuming the GPU could support it in some hack fashion.
The only logical conclusion is that Mac Pro's and MacBook Pro's that have 5K capabilities (new Thunderbolt/HDMI specs and GPU's) are on their way, along with a 27" 5K display. I would expect a 4K Thunderbolt display available to support older models too.
4K tech has been here a while already, video editing, consumer video cameras, TV's, some phones, GoPro's (check out V4)..... Apple has finally entered with an amazing 5K iMac. To think more 5K or even 4K options are not just around the corner is crazy.
I'd even expect 4K video recording in iPhone 6S/7 too (see Galaxy Note 4 and Note 3).
Addition: One thing, the Mac Pro can support 2x4K using the two Thunderbolt ports. Maybe, just maybe, Apple would release a 5K screen taking in the two TB connections.... assuming the GPU could support it in some hack fashion.
Last edited:
Why does 16GB of RAM cost $300 through Apple and less than $100 anywhere else?
It would cost more because it's is Apple. It would have to be marginally better than anything else, but massively more expensive.
While childish, low IQ, jabs are flying:
You didn't know that? Lay off the dope, kid.
So do I, and I agree that the panel itself is gorgeous. Dell's packaging leaves a lot to be desired though. I drool at the thought what Apple could have done with this panel...
I would be very amused (and not entirely shocked) if the iMac quietly supported some draft of DP 1.4. Then when the standard is formalized and starts shipping, Apple can apply a firmware update and *poof* magic.
So I just checked the GPU in this, and it STILL uses a Laptop GPU?!?!?! A 5K screen running on a laptop GPU, all be it the current top end AMD one, and only 4GB max VRAM.
Well I guess no one will want to play games at it's native resolution. IMO they should have kept a 4K resolution on this iMac, and made a 5K Thunderbolt external display.
Well I guess no one will want to play games at it's native resolution. IMO they should have kept a 4K resolution on this iMac, and made a 5K Thunderbolt external display.
I'm not a pro user yet..but i totally agree with you. I withheld nMP just to see where apple was going by the end of 2014. I don't know...will they get their acts together and focus on pros rather than focusing on consumers?
----------
this would mean nMP is still better.
TDM would actually make a HUGE amount of sense in this new iMac, even if it was limited to 4K with scaling or letterboxed.
If you use multiple computers, you'll have to remote-desktop in to them. However, uncompressed 4K video is just way too much to stream even over Ethernet. That means you're going to be limited to low resolutions (i.e. no retina quality), compression artefacts and poor frame rates when connecting to those other computers from your shiny new 5K iMac.
That said, TDM has been pretty useless since they made it thunderbolt-only anyway.
If you use multiple computers, you'll have to remote-desktop in to them. However, uncompressed 4K video is just way too much to stream even over Ethernet. That means you're going to be limited to low resolutions (i.e. no retina quality), compression artefacts and poor frame rates when connecting to those other computers from your shiny new 5K iMac.
That said, TDM has been pretty useless since they made it thunderbolt-only anyway.
I don't think so.
Dell do their 5K in that way, basically splitting the panel in half and treating it as 2x2.5K screens. Apple designed and built a new display controller which could do all 5K as one massive stream. That means it won't just be able to patch in half the display from one input and the other half from another.
Your best bet would probably be to use a couple of thunderbolt cables to network your MP and the iMac and use remote desktop. That's just theoretical, but two independent thunderbolt network links should be enough to support uncompressed 5K (assuming the system is smart enough to route all the packets properly), and will take the keyboard/mouse input from the iMac back to the MP to boot.
It's a hard knock life.
In 3 years 8K will be "The standard"... and you'll see 4K monitors at the local recycling centre. When does all this madness end? Until someone told you all 4K would one day come, everyone was bedazzled and more than happy with 1080p. Unless you're a Pro photographer or movie editor YOU DO NOT need this level of insanity.
Rubbish. Anyone working with text benefits greatly from >200dpi pixel spacing compared with the approximately 100dpi pixel spacing that was standard just a few years ago.
It took decades to go from 72dpi to over 100dpi and now we're quickly doubling that. Another doubling seems to be on the horizon, which will probably exceed the resolution of most human eyeballs. I doubt there will be any practical reason to go beyond 8K displays (at about 300 to 400dpi).