Why are 5K monitors so hard?

[Arctic Moose]

$1,000 for the ASD is a not a realistic price. I feel $1,300 would be fair. While I watched the keynote I expected $1,500 immediately before they unveiled the $1,600 price.

I agree that $1000 is unrealistic, I just felt that considering the disappearing of the 5K iMac it would have been nice to have a $1800 replacement, fully aware that Apple doesn't do "nice" very often. I also agree that $1300 would have been fair, and I also thought to myself during the keynote that it looked like a $1500 Apple product.

 

[blairh]

I agree that $1000 is unrealistic, I just felt that considering the disappearing of the 5K iMac it would have been nice to have a $1800 replacement, fully aware that Apple doesn't do "nice" very often. I also agree that $1300 would have been fair, and I also thought to myself during the keynote that it looked like a $1500 Apple product.

The lack of a larger consumer iMac is very troubling. My hope is that a larger iMac will come perhaps in late 2023. I don't feel 24" is large enough for an AIO for everyone. I also don't think a Mini/Studio plus accessories is a proper larger iMac replacement cost-wise.

 

[Fishrrman]

Once again, I'd like to see a 32" display with native 5k resolution.
5k @ 27" in "looks like 1440p HiDPI mode" yields text (at regular font sizes) which is just too small for my old eyes.

But... nobody makes one, to my knowledge.

 

[Amethyst1]

But... nobody makes one, to my knowledge.

Correct.

 

[- rob -]

I was especially amazed to read member @- rob - 's prescient "theoretical press release" in Post #50, which was pretty spot-on for everything except (thankfully) the price!

Many thanks for the hat tip. I also desperately wanted something like the Studio Display and ultimately bought the XDR realizing Apple wouldn’t deliver, I had no idea it would take them this long.

My prediction work was aided by insights from others here but also iterating over time.

I also was wrong about apple building the Studio to accept a Pro Stand magnetic interface.

I actually suspect we could see this as an option at some point. It creates compatibility and the potential to “upgrade” from the Studio.

I think those who are storming toward Cupertino with torches and pitchforks over the pricing of the ASD forget that 5K displays are a low-volume, specialty item with limited competition.

People take for granted their macbook has retina and iPhone has pro motion. These are not your average displays!

I'm now in a bit of a conundrum over what to do about a second display for my Mac Studio. I initially was going to get a second ASD, but now we have the rumors of a 27" ProMotion HDR display set to be released in June. There is no doubt in my mind that this will be priced to not cannibalize the XDR, or possibly to replace it, so this means well north of $3,000. I'm leaning toward cancelling my order for the second ASD and waiting to see what happens in June.

I have my mini+BM hooked up to an XDR and an okay 4K. I vastly prefer the XDR!

I won’t be throwing down for another high end this year but do recommend you consider an XDR or this other monitor should it be delivered. The XDR is routinely underrated.

Purchasing the cheapest possible config Mac mini, Studio Display, Magic Mouse and Magic Keyboard comes to $2476, and that doesn't even include Touch ID on the keyboard.

For almost $700 more you get the same 256 GB of storage, the same RAM (arguably less since it is now shared with graphics,

This is at best a lateral movement from Intel to AS. Had a new 5K iMac been introduced with these specs and this price increase it would not have been well-received.

I’m not sure but I would be curious to compare pricing on Apple Silicon Mac studio versus the last Mac mini Intel machine maxed out w after market 64gb ram and the blackmagic Pro.

The mini studio can undoubtedly blow away the former, but does it do so while delivering the value?

You can easily drive the studio monitor off the regular black magic egpu.

I’m not sure that Apple Silicon has shown off compelling graphics performance at price point that competes with this four year old configuration.

 

[VideoFreek]

I won’t be throwing down for another high end this year but do recommend you consider an XDR or this other monitor should it be delivered. The XDR is routinely underrated.

Yes, I've been thinking that for me it might make more sense to go for a single 32-inch XDR panel rather than a dual ASD setup. Less screen real estate in total (22% less), but significantly better image quality. Of course, the XDR costs 50% more than the dual ASD, but I'm looking for displays to outlast at least a couple generations of computers.

As I mentioned, the rumored introduction of an updated XDR in June (possibly a 27-in HDR/ProMotion mini-LED display) clouds the picture. I do think that if this "grail" display ever gets launched, the price will be breathtaking. In high-density "retina" displays for MacOS, the amount of screen real estate comes down to pixels. Consider the following:

• The 6K Pro Display XDR (23.0 million pixels) is priced at $226/megapixel (mp) with VESA mount.
• The new 5K ASD (14.7 mp) is priced at $109/mp, less than half the XDR. This is appropriate due to the superior display tech in the XDR, with its 576 local dimming zones and 1000-nit sustained brightness.
• Interestingly the Dell UP3221Q, a 32-inch 4K60 HDR panel with over 2000 local dimming zones priced at $3,770, is frequently cited as "competition" for the XDR. It looks good on paper, until one realizes that it is only a 4K display with a pixel density of less than 140 ppi. It is priced at $454/mp! Of course, apples and oranges since the display resolution is so much lower, but interesting nonetheless. For me, this makes the XDR look like a bargain!
• So, how would a 27-inch 5K ProMotion mini-LED panel be priced? For me, it would have to be well above the $226/mp mark, given the advances in display tech. If is is priced at @$250-300/mp, this would put it at $3,700-4,400!! Now we see why this would be "paired" with the new ASi Mac Pro, while the ASD is paired with the Mac Studio.

Anyway, I will hold off on the purchase of a second ASD until we see how things shake out with Apple.

 

[Amethyst1]

In high-density "retina" displays for MacOS, the amount of screen real estate comes down to pixels. Consider the following: [...]

For the sake of completeness, the Dell UP3218K provides 7680 × 4320 = 33,177,600 pixels and 280 ppi for $3,769 at $114/mp.

 

[VideoFreek]

For the sake of completeness, the Dell UP3218K provides 7680 × 4320 = 33,177,600 pixels and 280 ppi for $3,769 at $114/mp.

Interesting. So this seems fairly consistent with ASD pricing given what it is: a non-HDR 400-nit, LED-backlit, 60 Hz display. Fantastic pixel density, though! I don't suppose there's any chance you could drive this sucker on a Mac, is there?

 

[Amethyst1]

I don't suppose there's any chance you could drive this sucker on a Mac, is there?

You can, at least on an Intel Mac.
You get 30 Hz using one DisplayPort 1.4 signal/cable.
For 60 Hz, you need two DisplayPort 1.4 signals/cables, each driving one half of the panel at 3840×4320 ("dual-link SST") (#266). In that mode, it appears as two separate displays in macOS, with no user-configurable way to make the halves behave like a single large display.
There's finally an .mtdd file (which describes how these dual-link SST monitors are laid out, so macOS can then make the halves behave like a single large display) for this display in macOS 12.3 (#264) but it's not doing its job, at least on Apple Silicon (#269).

 

[- rob -]

.

• The new 5K ASD (14.7 mp) is priced at $109/mp, less than half the XDR. This is appropriate due to the superior display tech in the XDR, with its 576 local dimming zones and 1000-nit sustained brightness.

I had thought that part of the reason these panels for the XDR were especially expensive was because the larger area meant more defects were possible that could fail QA.

So more “finished” display components would have to be tossed, lowering the yield.

IIRC, Some of the budget-minded offbrand displays in the past several years were believed to be rejected from the LG ultrafine manufacturing process. No idea if this is correct.

 

[Amethyst1]

IIRC, Some of the budget-minded offbrand displays in the past several years were believed to be rejected from the LG ultrafine manufacturing process. No idea if this is correct.

The Iiyama XB2779QQS and Planar IX2790 use rejected iMac panels.

 

[MikeDr206]

I had thought that part of the reason these panels for the XDR were especially expensive was because the larger area meant more defects were possible that could fail QA.

So more “finished” display components would have to be tossed, lowering the yield.

IIRC, Some of the budget-minded offbrand displays in the past several years were believed to be rejected from the LG ultrafine manufacturing process. No idea if this is correct.

I don’t know if this is still true or not, but when plasma TV’s first came out, they would make one very large panel, identify the defects, and the use an algorithm to figure out the optimal number and sizes of panels (42”, 60”, etc) to maximize profit.

 

[VideoFreek]

I had thought that part of the reason these panels for the XDR were especially expensive was because the larger area meant more defects were possible that could fail QA.

So more “finished” display components would have to be tossed, lowering the yield.

No doubt that is part of the story, but I'm equally sure that local dimming is more expensive to implement than conventional backlighting. Let's not lose sight of the fact, however, that Apple does not do "cost plus" pricing, where they simply mark up the cost of a unit's bill of materials (BOM). The high price of the XDR reflects the fact that it is a unique product in the world--a high-density, 6K resolution, factory-calibrated display with local dimming. Apple does very sophisticated marketing and knows precisely what its target market segment(s) will pay for such a feature set, and they price accordingly. I'm pretty sure their margins on the XDR are not thin.

I see many people here on MR arguing that Apple "ought to" be able to do a Mini-LED, ProMotion version of the ASD for an upcharge of $500 or so. This may or may not be correct from a BOM cost perspective, but there is no way in hell they would price such an attractive feature set this way! Selling it at $3-$4k sounds seems much more likely, at least to me.

 

[Amethyst1]

I had thought that part of the reason these panels for the XDR were especially expensive was because the larger area meant more defects were possible that could fail QA.

Why is Dell's 32" 7680×4320 monitor cheaper then? It has 63% more pixels than the XDR... 63% more pixels to potentially go bad.

 

[k995]

I've been researching how to get a 5K monitor onto an M1 Mac Mini for a user at work, and I just noticed that it's just... really, really hard?

There's no solid information about what works and what doesn't. All the solutions I see involve docks, multiple cables... It's a mess!

The only monitor on the market that seems to do 5K on Macs trouble-free is that LG one, which is apparently no longer manufactured and extremely expensive.

What the heck is the deal? Why is this so hard, and why has no other company put out 5K monitors which support Thunderbolt like the LG one does? You would think people wanting nice monitors on their Macs would be a decently big market, and that companies besides LG would come up with appropriate products. Some of the ultra-wide 5K+ monitors on the market look amazing but everything I read suggests it's a huge hassle to get them working right.

I would even understand if this were new tech, but the first 5K iMacs came out in 2014 and that LG display in 2016. This is old hat stuff and should be perfected commodity tech by now.

Cause it doesnt really bring a lot to a screen and its apple wierd way of implementing scaling.
Btw all 5k screens are compatible with an m1, you just plug them in. What people are talking about is the scaling on a mac, oh and that LG is still bieg made, no idea why you think its discontinued.

 

[CWallace]

One thing I'm hoping for is that now since Apple is moving away from the 27" iMac and has brought out a very capable machine that requires an external monitor, this will open up the market for some of the usual players (LG, Samsung, etc.) to bring out more 5K options for Macs.

Alas, I think the market may remain too small for anyone other than LG Display to play in it.

Once again, I'd like to see a 32" display with native 5k resolution.

To maintain Retina (~218ppi) at 32" it has to be 6K which is why the Pro Display XDR uses a 6K panel from LG Display.

LG is said to be working on a 32" 6K display and there are rumors Apple is working on a 36" display which would be 7K to maintain Retina. If both happen, that could mean the current Pro Display XDR is replaced with the 36-inch 7K model and LG releases a 32" LG UltraFine 6K at a cost below $5000 or this 32" 6K panel goes into a new iMac Pro.

 

[MikeDr206]

Why is Dell's 32" 7680×4320 monitor cheaper then? It has 63% more pixels than the XDR... 63% more pixels to potentially go bad.

Ummm, Apple?

 

[CWallace]

Why is Dell's 32" 7680×4320 monitor cheaper then? It has 63% more pixels than the XDR... 63% more pixels to potentially go bad.

The Dell UP3218K was $5000 when it launched, but it did come with a stand.

The main reason it is down to $3800 today is probably due to panel yields becoming better over the intervening years so Dell's BOM has dropped and they have passed the savings on.

 

[kwijbo]

LG is said to be working on a 32" 6K display and there are rumors Apple is working on a 36" display which would be 7K to maintain Retina. If both happen, that could mean the current Pro Display XDR is replaced with the 36-inch 7K model and LG releases a 32" LG UltraFine 6K at a cost below $5000 or this 32" 6K panel goes into a new iMac Pro.

dying to hear more info on this 32" LG display!