2016 nMP

[ManuelGomes]

What is strange in all this is that there was no update yet for TB3 to include DP1.3 which would make sense.
Is Intel working on it? Maybe with Apple's help, so that it is already supported in the soon to come Macs?
It is indeed a tricky situation.
If I was Apple, I'd be also be thinking what to do or hold on until all is ready.
With Polaris/Pascal doing DP1.3, not having support for it in TB3, new rTBD with high expectations (following 5K iMac and iPad display) this has to be a 5K 10b HDR panel, which could be a problem.

 

[Mago]

What is strange in all this is that there was no update yet for TB3 to include DP1.3 which would make sense.
Is Intel working on it? Maybe with Apple's help, so that it is already supported in the soon to come Macs?
It is indeed a tricky situation.
If I was Apple, I'd be also be thinking what to do or hold on until all is ready.
With Polaris/Pascal doing DP1.3, not having support for it in TB3, new rTBD with high expectations (following 5K iMac and iPad display) this has to be a 5K 10b HDR panel, which could be a problem.

No problem, apple either could drive a thunderbolt display on an external gpu attached to the display (as they patented), or use dual dp1.2 signals from a single tb cable on a known MST array, and a final option would be use HDMI 2 on a 5K cinema display (the one I'll pick), or just to include few USB-C with custom cable for dp1.3.

Rumours also account on a smaller 24" 4K USB-C Display as offic8alcompanion display for mini, iMac Mac Pro etc, and only way to get a 5K display will be on HDMI 2 or mst dual dp1.2 either from Apple or 3rd.

 

[Zarniwoop]

I was thinking the eGPU display too as an option some time ago. But then the display would join the three year usage cycle with iMac, Mac Pro, laptops and iToys... hey, maybe this is what Apple wants. Now even their keyboards and mouse/trackpads are using built-in batteries.. nearly every piece of HW has this three to four year of lifespan. And if the product is strong (like my iPad3, four years and battery still good) it had to be crippled with software.

Environmentally that is not sustainable.. that we dump a working product to the recycle bin just because it's designed that way. The only way Apple is green it's the piles of $$$ in unca Cooks money bin. I was happy with my iPad 3 until the updates for version 8 came and it started to stutter, keyboard turned slow.. and with 9 it started to crash every time I am updating more than one app at a time...

 

[Mago]

I was thinking the eGPU display too as an option some time ago. But then the display would join the three year usage cycle with iMac, Mac Pro, laptops and iToys... hey, maybe this is what Apple wants. Now even their keyboards and mouse/trackpads are using built-in batteries.. nearly every piece of HW has this three to four year of lifespan. And if the product is strong (like my iPad3, four years and battery still good) it had to be crippled with software.

Environmentally that is not sustainable.. that we dump a working product to the recycle bin just because it's designed that way. The only way Apple is green it's the piles of $$$ in unca Cooks money bin. I was happy with my iPad 3 until the updates for version 8 came and it started to stutter, keyboard turned slow.. and with 9 it started to crash every time I am updating more than one app at a time...

In case the upcoming lineup its confirmed (MacBook pro including Polaris baffin, and MacBook/mini with Intel Skull canyon (iris 380) as iGpu there is no real need for an eGPU thunderbolt display.

I believe Apple will ditch the thunderbolt display and sell us a tb3 4K 24" and a HDMI 2 sst /dual dp1.2 mst 5K 27" not properly a thunderbolt 5K anymore

 

[Zarniwoop]

24" 4k is not a retina anymore... so would Apple really do that? 4k 24" would be an excellent studio display with Freesync (running with native fps without tearing PAL/NTSC/24p... etc), but it wouldn't be retina anymore.

What if you're able to connect Mac Pro to the next gen iMac? You could use both on same screen (split screen like ipad) or jump between screens like with Parallels/other virual machine? And you could isolate the Mac Pro from Internet and use the iMac as your facebook machine..

 

[Mago]

24" 4k is not a retina anymore... so would Apple really do that? 4k 24" would be an excellent studio display with Freesync (running with native fps without tearing PAL/NTSC/24p... etc), but it wouldn't be retina anymore.

Yes still retina display since it doubles native 21" and allow being viewed 1 ft farther still a retina (which actually it's only a marketing gimmick, I use a 4K 32" display,and believe me its awesomely retina )

 

[AidenShaw]

24" 4k is not a retina anymore...

On what grounds do you say that? Do you think that there's an abrupt cutoff between retina and non-retina?

I would say that any monitor where you have to run pixel-doubling to make the text large enough to read is "retina".

 

[Zarniwoop]

Yes still retina display since it doubles native 21" and allow being viewed 1 ft farther still a retina (which actually it's only a marketing gimmick, I use a 4K 32" display,and believe me its awesomely retina )

Then it would be a retina display similarly as 1TB + 24GB SSD is Fusion Drive. Yet another way to mislead customers.

21.5" retina is 229ppi and 27" 5k retina is 228ppi. 4k 24" would go under 200ppi.. You couldn't double the pixel any more without making the text too big. It could run a HiDPI mode, but that's not retina anymore.

Marketing gimmick? Sure, as is everything that Apple releases under their brand. Metal, Fusion Drive, Super Drive...

 

[Mago]

Then it would be a retina display similarly as 1TB + 24GB SSD is Fusion Drive. Yet another way to mislead customers.

21.5" retina is 229ppi and 27" 5k retina is 228ppi. 4k 24" would go under 200ppi..

Still retina, check http://www.isthisretina.com the only difference is you need to be a bit away (apple marketing will convince you on this as an new safety comfort feature blah blah)

Edit:corrected link

 

[Zarniwoop]

If there's going to be 24" 4k display, Apple will rebrand it Apple Studio Display. No word of retina. It would be hiDPI display, and as you said, Apple would promote it to be the industry standard and what Studio people have asked.

 

[Mago]

If there's going to be 24" 4k display, Apple will rebrand it Apple Studio Display. No word of retina.

It's only 3 inches farther than iMac 21 "retina display", but Apple also could sell it on 21" to make happy those retina purist with hawkeyes

 

[Zarniwoop]

Well what do you know.. I have a retina TV at my living room.

21.5" iMac proves all this isthisretina websites and 24" 4k = retina assumptions false. Why on earth Apple put so much effort to make less-of-a-standard 4096 × 2304 display for 21.5" iMac to achieve their PPI goals? It would have been so much easier (and cheaper) to use standard 3840 x 2160 (still 205ppi). Because of this slightly-higher-than-standard resolution, Apple is using the custom timing controller from the 5K iMac to drive the display at its full resolution at 60Hz. Even with 27", you could use 4k and just look it 5cm further away and call it retina.

If 4k 24" Apple screen comes out, it is not advertised as a retina display.

 

[Mago]

Well what do you know.. I have a retina TV at my living room.

21.5" iMac proves all this isthisretina websites and 24" 4k = retina assumptions false. Why on earth Apple put so much effort to make less-of-a-standard 4096 × 2304 display for 21.5" iMac to achieve their PPI goals? It would have been so much easier (and cheaper) to use standard 3840 x 2160 (still 205ppi). Because of this slightly-higher-than-standard resolution, Apple is using the custom timing controller from the 5K iMac to drive the display at its full resolution at 60Hz. Even with 27", you could use 4k and just look it 5cm further away and call it retina.

If 4k 24" Apple screen comes, it is not advertised as a retina display.

Whatever I'll pick two and move my 32" to my home.

 

[Zarniwoop]

And this debate was anyway about the marketing & double (quadruple) pixel term. HiDPI mode works pretty well, no need to be RetinaTM.

If DP 1.3 is not an option, I think Apple stays with standard resolutions with external displays. So 4k with standard resolution is believable.

 

[ManuelGomes]

I don't think they'll go HDMI.
Dual DP1.2 and MST is ok but I don't think Apple would now go that route anymore, it was used internally for iMac but because there was no other way then.
Now with DP1.3 there has to be another way, even if they come up with something proprietary, like TB3 with DP1.3 unofficial support. Maybe they're secretly working on it with Intel, who knows?!
But you would still need 2 of those for 5K HDR @60Hz anyway.
I believe there is no going back on these specs for Apple, they have 5K already on the iMac, 60Hz is a must and HDR 10b is something for the future (and present really) that will keep the display going for the next 3/4 years to come, and that's something Apple would want to tout for the media people, to get them back. And with AMD betting on it a lot with Polaris, there's really no way that could be missed I guess.
Too bad the conditions are not yet really met, at least not in the best way.
[doublepost=1461937127][/doublepost]Apple doesn't seem to like standard resolutions, either on the Mac or the iToys anyway.
Even considering the patent, I'm not so sure about the integrated eGPU, too limiting. The required power supply would be silly.
[doublepost=1461937720][/doublepost]If DP1.4 was adopted in time (hardly since it was just published) with visually lossless compression it would do it.

 

[koyoot]

Well what do you know.. I have a retina TV at my living room.

21.5" iMac proves all this isthisretina websites and 24" 4k = retina assumptions false. Why on earth Apple put so much effort to make less-of-a-standard 4096 × 2304 display for 21.5" iMac to achieve their PPI goals? It would have been so much easier (and cheaper) to use standard 3840 x 2160 (still 205ppi). Because of this slightly-higher-than-standard resolution, Apple is using the custom timing controller from the 5K iMac to drive the display at its full resolution at 60Hz. Even with 27", you could use 4k and just look it 5cm further away and call it retina.

If 4k 24" Apple screen comes out, it is not advertised as a retina display.

21.5 inch with 4096x2304 resolution iMac 4K is not without a reason there.

 

[Mago]

I don't think they'll go HDMI.
Dual DP1.2 and MST is ok but I don't think Apple would now go that route anymore, it was used internally for iMac but because there was no other way then.
Now with DP1.3 there has to be another way, even if they come up with something proprietary, like TB3 with DP1.3 unofficial support. Maybe they're secretly working on it with Intel, who knows?!
But you would still need 2 of those for 5K HDR @60Hz anyway.
I believe there is no going back on these specs for Apple, they have 5K already on the iMac, 60Hz is a must and HDR 10b is something for the future (and present really) that will keep the display going for the next 3/4 years to come, and that's something Apple would want to tout for the media people, to get them back. And with AMD betting on it a lot with Polaris, there's really no way that could be missed I guess.
Too bad the conditions are not yet really met, at least not in the best way.
[doublepost=1461937127][/doublepost]Apple doesn't seem to like standard resolutions, either on the Mac or the iToys anyway.
Even considering the patent, I'm not so sure about the integrated eGPU, too limiting. The required power supply would be silly.

The only drawback on driving a 5K on mst is your monitor its a bit more expensive, the issues (flickering) are due relatively underpowered GPU not derived from mst, if you don't see this issues on sst its because you're driving an smaller panel, I've seen mst arrangement (very popular on simulation) with 6 displays and very hot action, no issues, so its psychological not so technical (the display has to be ready to act aw two separate display and the gpu drivers to split the rendering along).

The practical drawback are (5K on tb3 mst):
* need to use a dedicated expensive tb3 cable.
* no daisy chain peripherals
* no peripherals on board (webcam audio USB Ethernet)

But 4k on sst tb3 allows either a USB3 hub or half bandwidth pci tb3 peripherals or daisy chain a 2nd display.

That's why I prefer Apple to going on HDMI 2 for 5K retina display, until tb4 it has little practical sense a 5K tb display.

I miss: no iris pro iGpu supports 5K at any rate, so Mac w/o dGpu are stll banned from 5K Retina.

 

[Stacc]

The only drawback on driving a 5K on mst is your monitor its a bit more expensive, the issues (flickering) are due relatively underpowered GPU not derived from mst, if you don't see this issues on sst its because you're driving an smaller panel, I've seen mst arrangement (very popular on simulation) with 6 displays and very hot action, no issues, so its psychological not so technical (the display has to be ready to act aw two separate display and the gpu drivers to split the rendering along).

The practical drawback are (5K on tb3 mst):
* need to use a dedicated expensive tb3 cable.
* no daisy chain peripherals
* no peripherals on board (webcam audio USB Ethernet)

But 4k on sst tb3 allows either a USB3 hub or half bandwidth pci tb3 peripherals or daisy chain a 2nd display.

That's why I prefer Apple to going on HDMI 2 for 5K retina display, until tb4 it has little practical sense a 5K tb display.

I miss: no iris pro iGpu supports 5K at any rate, so Mac w/o dGpu are stll banned from 5K Retina.

Very little of this is true. You can daisy chain peripherals in a 5k over thunderbolt 3 setup. You simply are limited to the bandwidth left over after the two displayport 1.2 streams. I suggest you read this before you keep saying things over and over that are not true.

If the retina display is implemented with thunderbolt 3 and displayport 1.2 with MST there is no reason skylake Iris Pro based graphics can't drive it. They support 3 displayport 1.2 streams. This means a skylake based mac could drive a 5k and a 4k display.

I don't think they'll go HDMI.
Dual DP1.2 and MST is ok but I don't think Apple would now go that route anymore, it was used internally for iMac but because there was no other way then.
Now with DP1.3 there has to be another way, even if they come up with something proprietary, like TB3 with DP1.3 unofficial support. Maybe they're secretly working on it with Intel, who knows?!
But you would still need 2 of those for 5K HDR @60Hz anyway.
I believe there is no going back on these specs for Apple, they have 5K already on the iMac, 60Hz is a must and HDR 10b is something for the future (and present really) that will keep the display going for the next 3/4 years to come, and that's something Apple would want to tout for the media people, to get them back. And with AMD betting on it a lot with Polaris, there's really no way that could be missed I guess.
Too bad the conditions are not yet really met, at least not in the best way.
[doublepost=1461937127][/doublepost]Apple doesn't seem to like standard resolutions, either on the Mac or the iToys anyway.
Even considering the patent, I'm not so sure about the integrated eGPU, too limiting. The required power supply would be silly.
[doublepost=1461937720][/doublepost]If DP1.4 was adopted in time (hardly since it was just published) with visually lossless compression it would do it.

My opinion is that Apple will release a retina thunderbolt display that is 27" at 5k. It will be driven via dual displayport 1.2 streams over thunderbolt 3. There was a time a couple years ago that macs did not work very well with MST setups but support has improved. I bet its partially driven by the release of the iMac 5k (which uses a proprietary MST like setup) and the pending release of the external display. For instance any mac with external graphics (including the 15" macbook pro w/AMD) supports the Dell 5k display using 2 displayport cables.

 

[SaxPlayer]

Apologies if someone's already mentioned this. I've been dipping in and out of this thread and can't claim to have read what everyone has to say.

Apple appear to have updated their Mac Pro page to state that you can connect "up to 3 5K displays". I'm sure it used to say 4K. Then again, I don't look at it very often.

I'm using a 31" true 4K display on my nMP here and I love the crisp text on it. Looks "retina" to me... even with my glasses on.

 

[fuchsdh]

I was thinking the eGPU display too as an option some time ago. But then the display would join the three year usage cycle with iMac, Mac Pro, laptops and iToys... hey, maybe this is what Apple wants. Now even their keyboards and mouse/trackpads are using built-in batteries.. nearly every piece of HW has this three to four year of lifespan. And if the product is strong (like my iPad3, four years and battery still good) it had to be crippled with software.

Environmentally that is not sustainable.. that we dump a working product to the recycle bin just because it's designed that way. The only way Apple is green it's the piles of $$$ in unca Cooks money bin. I was happy with my iPad 3 until the updates for version 8 came and it started to stutter, keyboard turned slow.. and with 9 it started to crash every time I am updating more than one app at a time...

If it was an internal GPU on the monitor why would that create a limited lifespan for the monitor? The only way that would happen is if you couldn't use a more powerful input or eGPU with it.

To me the issue is that you're essentially packing in cost for a utility that would diminish rapidly over time. Yeah, it'd help MacBooks and the like currently coming out with driving the display, but two or three years from now no machine probably won't be able to output a 5k@60Hz signal. Given that Apple doesn't upgrade it's peripherals on regular timetables I would think they'd just go with a MST TB3 option and call it a day; more elegant since it's one cable, will work going forward on presumably all Macs in a year or two, and comes with the docking benefits of Thunderbolt over HDMI.

 

[Zarniwoop]

If it was an internal GPU on the monitor why would that create a limited lifespan for the monitor? The only way that would happen is if you couldn't use a more powerful input or eGPU with it.

If you can't change the GPU inside monitor, the next gen of GPU's will make it old. To change the GPU you'd have to change the whole monitor.

 

[Stacc]

If you can't change the GPU inside monitor, the next gen of GPU's will make it old. To change the GPU you'd have to change the whole monitor.

Yeah, a discrete GPU in the monitor is a neat idea but it adds more problems than it solves. To add to this if you add a GPU to the monitor it adds cost as its basically a full computer minus a CPU, which in that case you might as well just get an iMac.

 

[Hank Carter]

I don't think that we would ever see a GPU in a monitor from Apple for the simple reason that their new motto is 'Form over Function". You will never see an Apple display thick enough to dissipate the heat generated by a high end GPU.

 

[Synchro3]

I don't think that we would ever see a GPU in a monitor from Apple for the simple reason that their new motto is 'Form over Function". You will never see an Apple display thick enough to dissipate the heat generated by a high end GPU.

Another reason: With Thunderbolt 3, the fastest 40 Gbps connections are only available with 0.5m cables. Longer lengths result in a speed drop to 20 Gbps.

https://thunderbolttechnology.net/blog/thunderbolt-3-takes-ces-2016-by-storm

 

[Mago]

Another reason: With Thunderbolt 3, the fastest 40 Gbps connections are only available with 0.5m cables. Longer lengths result in a speed drop to 20 Gbps.

https://thunderbolttechnology.net/blog/thunderbolt-3-takes-ces-2016-by-storm

Not true, with active cables you can go 2m(7ft) or up to 60m (optic fiber) at full 40GBps.

https://blog.startech.com/post/thunderbolt-3-the-basics/