Studio Display with Mac Pro 2013?

[joevt]

I heard that running your 4K upscaled on a 5K monitor looks fugly.

Some people have used 5K displays at 4K without even knowing it. I guess if you don't know how good 5K can look, then the fugliness won't matter?
Certainly option 3: 5K scaled down to 4K then scaled up to 5K cannot be as good as option 2: 5K scaled down to 4k. But maybe you won't notice it. At least it should appear better than option 1: 1440p?

 

[Killerbob]

It's visibly and annoyingly blurry, especially once you've seen native 5K and know how crystal-clear and pin-sharp it's supposed to be. I wouldn't recommend doing it and will never do it again.

I haven't seen it myself, but I can believe it. Running 2K on a 4K monitor does not look good. However, if you don't know any better...

It stands to reason that 4K native on a 4K monitor would look better than 4K upscaled to a 5K monitor.

 

[SpotOnT]

Some people have used 5K displays at 4K without even knowing it. I guess if you don't know how good 5K can look, then the fugliness won't matter?
Certainly option 3: 5K scaled down to 4K then scaled up to 5K cannot be as good as option 2: 5K scaled down to 4k. But maybe you won't notice it. At least it should appear better than option 1: 1440p?

Ya I think that is the main thing I am wondering about. Would both option 2 and 3 look better than option 1 (native 1440p).

Wouldn't the best setup be a 27" 4K monitor running in 3860x2160?

I heard that running your 4K upscaled on a 5K monitor looks fugly.

Yes absolutely! But a 4k monitor in 4k resolution results in tiny tiny elements, while in HiDPI mode you only get 1080p of “real-estate” to work with.

In terms of image quality, that is definitely the way to go. In terms of productivity, neither native 4k or HiDPI 4k is particularly useful.

 

[Amethyst1]

Would both option 2 and 3 look better than option 1 (native 1440p).

In my opinion, option 2 (which is what I'm using right now: a 3840×2560 monitor scaled to "looks like 2560×1707", i.e. a 5120×3414 framebuffer is scaled down to 3840×2560) looks substantially better than option 1 as far as text rendering is concerned. It also looks better than option 3. But everyone is different so YMMV.

 

[joevt]

I have 5K, 4K, and 2.5K displays. I don't mind using any of them. I mostly use the 2.5K because it's the largest or because it's on a VESA mounted arm or because habit. Been using it since 2005... It is the Apple 30" Cinema HD Display. I think I remember using it at 1280x800 since my GPU didn't support DVI dual link at the time. Actually, it was for a Power Mac Quad G5 which had dual link DVI support but the G5 wouldn't arrive for a few weeks so I was using it with a B&W G3. The price was $2,549 CAD. I upgraded to a Mac Pro 2008 a few years later. I don't think I've spent more on a display since. Actually, the Dell UP2715K 5K was $2800 in 2016 when I got a hackintosh. I don't know why I still use the Mac Pro 2008 when the hackintosh is much faster. Even the Mac mini 2018 with i3 is faster...
$2000 CAD for the Studio Display isn't so bad when compared to those earlier display prices...

 

[heeroyuigo]

Here my results with my Mac Pro 2013 (D700) and a LG Ultrafine 5K

Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter (55€) without external GPU + Apple Thunderbolt 2 cable (0.5m) (35€)

POSSIBLE in :

- 5120x2880 full (72ppi)

screenshot : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBlcexONKcbK-sLWw
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBg4ydcsHbEn-FnXQ

- 2560x1440 retina (5120x2880 - 144ppi)

screenshot : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBf9Vtr7rrv-TGySw
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBiY1Ej33X3dHRBKQ

and the list of possible resolutions (white squares for Retina)
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBhsGo4Jyd7t8C_JA

Mac Pro : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBjSYLLF4xuoeK5hg
monitor : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBkJnP13GHoFDsxTw

http://whatismyscreenresolution.net 5120x2880

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBmC8Snj9fJAgtIhA

 

[Killerbob]

I don’t understand… Are you saying you can run 5K on only 1 cable? And, when you are running at 5K, what Hz is that at?

Also, could you try and run your Mac Pro at 4K retina (3840 x 2160), and show us how that looks on your 5K monitor?

 

[SpotOnT]

Here my results with my Mac Pro 2013 (D700) and a LG Ultrafine 5K

Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter (55€) without external GPU + Apple Thunderbolt 2 cable (0.5m) (35€)

POSSIBLE in :

- 5120x2880 full (72ppi)

screenshot : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBlcexONKcbK-sLWw
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBg4ydcsHbEn-FnXQ

- 2560x1440 retina (5120x2880 - 144ppi)

screenshot : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBf9Vtr7rrv-TGySw
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBiY1Ej33X3dHRBKQ

and the list of possible resolutions (white squares for Retina)
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBhsGo4Jyd7t8C_JA

Mac Pro : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBjSYLLF4xuoeK5hg
monitor : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBkJnP13GHoFDsxTw

http://whatismyscreenresolution.net 5120x2880

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBmC8Snj9fJAgtIhA

Thank you for sharing the screenshots!

What I think is happening here is that the Mac Pro is rendering everything at 5k, then sending the signal over TB2 in 4k, and the monitor is then upscaling the 4k signal into 5k.

So your GPU is rendering everything in 5k. So all your screenshots will be at true 5k. Anything that detects your resolution (whatismyscreenresolution) will report 5k. But what you are actually seeing with your eyes on the monitor is upscaled 4k. That is because a single Thunderbolt 2 cable can't carry anything higher than 4k.

To get true 5k to display on a monitor from your Mac Pro you need to run 2 x Thunderbolt 2 lines to the monitor. Unfortunately, there are only a few monitors that can run with 2 x Thunderbolt 2 lines, and none are still in production.

 

[Amethyst1]

What I think is happening here is that the Mac Pro is rendering everything at 5k, then sending the signal over TB2 in 4k, and the monitor is then upscaling the 4k signal into 5k.

Correct. The Mac Pro is not actually outputting a 5120×2880 signal to the monitor... because it cannot.

Here my results with my Mac Pro 2013 (D700) and a LG Ultrafine 5K

These don't really prove anything. @SpotOnT's explanation of what's going on is correct: you're getting what is known as "fake 5120×2880". The difference between "fake 5120×2880" and actual 5120×2880, on a 5120×2880 monitor, is like night and day. Been there, done that.

Are you saying you can run 5K on only 1 cable? And, when you are running at 5K, what Hz is that at?

You cannot run 5120×2880 at 60 Hz and 8 or 10 bpc via a single DisplayPort 1.2 connection, which is what the 2013 Mac Pro provides. Even if that were possible, the AMD FirePro D300/D500/D700 GPU in the 2013 Mac Pro cannot display resolutions wider than 4096 pixels in macOS (I don't know what the state of affairs is on Linux or Windows): The image on the screen is so heavily corrupted that it's unusable.

 

[joevt]

Here my results with my Mac Pro 2013 (D700) and a LG Ultrafine 5K

Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter (55€) without external GPU + Apple Thunderbolt 2 cable (0.5m) (35€)

POSSIBLE in :

- 5120x2880 full (72ppi)

screenshot : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBlcexONKcbK-sLWw
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBg4ydcsHbEn-FnXQ

- 2560x1440 retina (5120x2880 - 144ppi)

screenshot : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBf9Vtr7rrv-TGySw
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBiY1Ej33X3dHRBKQ

and the list of possible resolutions (white squares for Retina)
https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBhsGo4Jyd7t8C_JA

Mac Pro : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBjSYLLF4xuoeK5hg
monitor : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBkJnP13GHoFDsxTw

http://whatismyscreenresolution.net 5120x2880

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLBmC8Snj9fJAgtIhA

Use SwitchResX. Double click the currently selected resolution in the Current Resolutions tab. It will show the pixel clock as something like 500+MHz and the active pixels is 3840x2160 or 4096x2304. If it were outputting 5K, it would have a pixel clock of 900+MHz and active pixels would be 5120x2880.

 

[Killerbob]

I wonder if all of these limitations will be tru for a 2013 Mac Pro as well:

https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/apple-studio-display-will-work-fine-with-your-windows-pc-4216101

 

[joevt]

I wonder if all of these limitations will be tru for a 2013 Mac Pro as well:

https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/apple-studio-display-will-work-fine-with-your-windows-pc-4216101

Maybe not, since the 2013 Mac Pro can connect to the display using Thunderbolt and can run macOS which has the software to use the features of the display. The issue is whether that software will work or not on the 2013 Mac Pro.

 

[Killerbob]

Apple Support is absolutely worthless. One person says all is possible, including 5K (which I know it is not). Another says nothing will work, because the 2013 Mac Pro is not listed as compatible (even though Apple themselves are now saying a Windows PC can indeed use the display). A third person says it will work, but only at 4K, and possibly not Center Stage.

Guess we have to wait for confirmation until someone actually tries it out.

 

[heeroyuigo]

Use SwitchResX. Double click the currently selected resolution in the Current Resolutions tab. It will show the pixel clock as something like 500+MHz and the active pixels is 3840x2160 or 4096x2304. If it were outputting 5K, it would have a pixel clock of 900+MHz and active pixels would be 5120x2880.

Yes it's 500+MHz and 4K active pixel on SwitchResX ;-/

This friday I have my Studio Display I will test with my MacBook Pro 16" (2019) & my MacPro (2014)

 

[Killerbob]

This friday I have my Studio Display I will test with my MacBook Pro 16" (2019) & my MacPro (2014)

I am looking forward to seeing what you find. Also, how glossy the display is...

 

[Amethyst1]

I am looking forward to seeing what you find. [...]

Just don't expect to get full 5K resolution.

 

[Killerbob]

I think we all understand that by now, even if Apple support still seem confused. I have no doubt that it will be a 4K on a 5K monitor experience.

What I am looking for is confirmation that the 2013 Mac Pro can connect with the monitor using a TB2/TB3/USB-C cable, and that this cable will also carry the Webcam/Audio/IO. Also, if Center Stage, Spatial Audio, Siri, and screen controls will work...

 

[SpotOnT]

Yes, some way to adjust brightness (and volume if the speakers work) are key. I am not sure I am optimistic on that front though. Especially if using older versions of Mac OS.

 

[Amethyst1]

Yes, some way to adjust brightness (and volume if the speakers work) are key. I am not sure I am optimistic on that front though. Especially if using older versions of Mac OS.

If the speakers work like on the LG UltraFine displays (I'm not sure because of Spatial Audio though), they're "simple" USB audio devices and should™ work fine, including volume adjustment since macOS has supported USB audio devices for ages. Brightness adjustment might work via DDC commands via e.g. MonitorControl, even when using older versions of macOS. This is all speculation until someone tests it of course.

 

[RGunner]

Waiting for any results - we have a 2013 Mac Pro and would like a new Studio Display!

 

[heeroyuigo]

Hey

Here the resolutions for a MacPro (2013) with the Apple Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter :

list of possible resolutions (white squares for Retina) (15.3) : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLE3x70H_3J1E47bew
about (15.3): https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLE6LHATp3QantQH7g
about tech (15.3) : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLE4lZl-NriFBOnhow

switchresx : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLE50ZX2AeWigKmPgw

✅ webcam
✅ usb-c
✅ audio (perfect ??)

capture : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLE7rZWoeN9GC9yoQA
info : https://1drv.ms/u/s!Aqkb49o00oLpjLE8orbo8wL5KEGwfQ

but Apple doesn't have the money to ask J. Ive to design a Studio Display icon ? (oups new icon with macos 12.3 ;-) )

⚡️ The EU energy sheet : https://eprel.ec.europa.eu/screen/product/electronicdisplays/1053323

21 kWh/1000h (0.5 in standby)

update to 15.4 in progress...

 

[Killerbob]

@heeroyuigo - did you not post about how the new display works with your Mac Pro just a little while ago? I can't find the post now, did you take it down?

 

[bundokbiker]

EDIT: Updated the Studio Display to 15.4 and the trashcan lives!

Just to update everyone, 2013 Mac Pro (2.7GHz 12C, 64GB RAM, Dual AMD D700) does not work with Studio Display. I just connected it using the Apple TB2 to TB3 adapter with an Apple TB2 cable and no dice . I initially connected it through my CalDigit TS3+ thunderbolt dock thinking it was that, but after directly connecting the Mac Pro it doesn't show any signs of life.

I connected it to my 14" MacBook Pro (M1 Max 10C, 32C GPU, 64GB Memory) and works as expected.

 

[heeroyuigo]

The display update 15.3 to 15.4 crashed. At the Store now for a new display. And to update the new display at the store ?

 

[Amethyst1]

I just connected it using the Apple TB2 to TB3 adapter with an Apple TB2 cable and no dice .

Are the adapter and Thunderbolt cable known to be working? Are you sure it’s a Thunderbolt cable, not a DisplayPort one? (Sorry for asking these basic questions…)
Does the Mac Pro recognise that something is plugged in? Check System Profiler’s output under PCIe, Thunderbolt and USB.