MP 7,1 The Pro Display XDR buyers thread

[joevt]

Thanks for this explanation, it is really helpful. I was also surprised to see that a Vega duo would not be able to handle 3 XDR displays! It seems two separate Vega II scan handle it easily due to more pcie connections being used.

What is Vega Duo? You are confusing the Vega II and the Vega II Duo.

Displays use DisplayPort connections and GPU bandwidth, not PCIe.

The Vega II can handle two XDR or three 5K or six 4K. deconstruct60 says it can't handle three XDR because of bandwidth inside the GPU even though there are enough DisplayPort connections.

The W5700X can handle three XDR (because it has more GPU bandwidth than the Vega II).

The Vega II Duo can handle four XDR displays (two connected to the Vega II Duo, one connected to the top of the Mac Pro, and one connected to the I/O card). The only issue with the Vega II Duo is that it has only 8 outputs instead of the expected 12 (6 per GPU).

Two Vega II can handle four XDR displays, six 5K displays, or twelve 4K displays.

Two Vega II Duos or W5700X can handle six XDR displays, six 5K displays, or twelve 4K displays.

 

[joevt]

I have a question that I have not seen answered elsewhere yet, would it be possible to buy the Mac Pro with a Vega duo and then add a Vega II solo and still use the infinity fabric link?

Apple mentions this with two solos and two duos but not with one solo and one duo. If anyone with more technical understanding could explain this, it would be greatly appreciated!

Infinity Fabric Link connects two GPUs (Duo or Solo x 2). Not three (Duo + Solo). And not four (Duo x 2).

The picture of the Infinity Fabric Link connectors on the Duo and solo shows that the connector is located in a different spot on the Duo and Solo.

What I don't understand is why the Infinity Fabric Link connectors are the same size on the Duo and Solo if the Duo has two GPUs and the solo only has one? Maybe the duo has an internal connection and the external connection is to complete the link.

 

[rkuo]

For me, I control the lighting in my environment and don't need to accept the compromises of the nano, so glossy is the one for me.

I like that the matte monitor option exists, but it's certainly nonsensical to spend this much money on a monitor and be in an area where lighting and glare can't be controlled. It feels like the matte option exists for people who are buying this monitor as a status symbol.
[automerge]1578195099[/automerge]

Hoping to hear from anyone else who will get an xDR and use in a music studio environment with studio monitors speakers, some kind of sound interface, etc, and see if they get the sound interference I'm getting when the display is connected.

This really sounds like a ground loop issue. Do you get the noise with standalone headphones and not the studio monitors? Are you able to ground loop isolate the speakers and/or external audio interface in someway?

 

[Adult80HD]

I like that the matte monitor option exists, but it's certainly nonsensical to spend this much money on a monitor and be in an area where lighting and glare can't be controlled. It feels like the matte option exists for people who are buying this monitor as a status symbol.
[automerge]1578195099[/automerge]

What a bizarre statement. The average person seeing a ProDisplay XDR will not know what it cost and if they guess it's expensive, there's still absolutely no reason for them to know or even assume that an anti-reflective version versions would cost more.

I got the nano version because I hate any glare or reflection on my screen and always have. I have a window on my office and I like it--I don't want to close it off to control all light coming in. Since I don't want to close my window and I can't control the sun, having an anti-reflective screen is a perfect solution.

 

[rkuo]

What a bizarre statement. The average person seeing a ProDisplay XDR will not know what it cost and if they guess it's expensive, there's still absolutely no reason for them to know or even assume that an anti-reflective version versions would cost more.

I got the nano version because I hate any glare or reflection on my screen and always have. I have a window on my office and I like it--I don't want to close it off to control all light coming in. Since I don't want to close my window and I can't control the sun, having an anti-reflective screen is a perfect solution.

How is that bizarre? The monitor costs several thousand dollars and the benefits of such a monitor such as low black levels from FALD, HDR, etc ... are not justifiable from a monetary perspective unless you use it in a light controlled environment. What exactly do you need the Pro Display XDR for that can't be done with a cheaper monitor?

 

[Eyezestful]

What is Vega Duo? You are confusing the Vega II and the Vega II Duo.

Displays use DisplayPort connections and GPU bandwidth, not PCIe.

The Vega II can handle two XDR or three 5K or six 4K. deconstruct60 says it can't handle three XDR because of bandwidth inside the GPU even though there are enough DisplayPort connections.

The W5700X can handle three XDR (because it has more GPU bandwidth than the Vega II).

The Vega II Duo can handle four XDR displays (two connected to the Vega II Duo, one connected to the top of the Mac Pro, and one connected to the I/O card). The only issue with the Vega II Duo is that it has only 8 outputs instead of the expected 12 (6 per GPU).

Two Vega II can handle four XDR displays, six 5K displays, or twelve 4K displays.

Two Vega II Duos or W5700X can handle six XDR displays, six 5K displays, or twelve 4K displays.

Thanks for your reply and sorry for the terminology, I definitely meant Vega II Duo but said Vega Duo for simplicity.

I am not sure that information is correct though, the Apple support page below clearly states that the Vega II Duo only can do two 6k xdr displays. You can add two 5k displays to this but apparently not additional 6k displays. It might still be a bandwidth issue. This is different from what it says in the Mac Pro specs page but might be the most update info.

similarly, the support page says that two Vega II duos can only support four 6k xdr and not six as initially expected. They also removed that from the tech specs page.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210392

In another thread someone said that Three 6k xdr might work but it might affect performance so Apple decided to avoid recommending that option. I think I will go with two separate Vega II solo to make sure there is enough bandwidth for the displays.

 

[chfilm]

How is that bizarre? The monitor costs several thousand dollars and the benefits of such a monitor such as low black levels from FALD, HDR, etc ... are not justifiable from a monetary perspective unless you use it in a light controlled environment. What exactly do you need the Pro Display XDR for that can't be done with a cheaper monitor?

Of course the display is about color accuracy, but still it also is just a perfect size and resolution really.
i don’t want an HD Resolution 21:9 Display, I feel my ui is cramped on a 27” Retina display, but that retina 32” should be perfect.
And I’ll take the calibrated colors as a Bonus and can always control the light when I have to do some light color grading or more Intense image editing. Heck my dell 5ks with adobe rgb surely are capable of doing good color work on them but for me it’s just about the size and resolution upgrade.

 

[Adult80HD]

How is that bizarre? The monitor costs several thousand dollars and the benefits of such a monitor such as low black levels from FALD, HDR, etc ... are not justifiable from a monetary perspective unless you use it in a light controlled environment. What exactly do you need the Pro Display XDR for that can't be done with a cheaper monitor?

The work I do requires the best color accuracy I can justify/afford, and large/high resolution is crucial as well. Show me another display with the color accuracy, dynamic range, size and resolution of the ProDisplay XDR that also costs less. Also explain why perfectly controlling the light is so crucial? Sure, it's an expensive monitor, but there are much, much more expensive monitors. Given what the XDR is capable of, it's actually relatively inexpensive.

 

[joevt]

I am not sure that information is correct though, the Apple support page below clearly states that the Vega II Duo only can do two 6k xdr displays. You can add two 5k displays to this but apparently not additional 6k displays. It might still be a bandwidth issue. This is different from what it says in the Mac Pro specs page but might be the most update info.

similarly, the support page says that two Vega II duos can only support four 6k xdr and not six as initially expected. They also removed that from the tech specs page.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210392

In another thread someone said that Three 6k xdr might work but it might affect performance so Apple decided to avoid recommending that option. I think I will go with two separate Vega II solo to make sure there is enough bandwidth for the displays.

That's strange. Like you said, the Mac Pro tech spec pages say 4 XDRs:

Mac Pro - Technical Specifications

See all the technical specifications for Mac Pro with the M2 Ultra chip.

www.apple.com

Mac Pro (2019) - Technical Specifications - Apple Support (CA)

support.apple.com

The page you link at https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210392 suggests that the Duo can't send DisplayPort 1.4 signals to the top or I/O card Thunderbolt ports. But that doesn't make sense because the RX580 MPX module can? A bandwidth issue doesn't make sense either. The solo can support two so the duo should be able to support 4 unless they wired the DisplayPorts inefficiently.

Ignoring the HDMI port (because we don't know how that's wired), the Duo has 8 DisplayPorts. If they connected six from one GPU and only two from the other, then that would allow three XDRs. But that would be dumb. They should have wired 4 DisplayPorts from one GPU and 4 from the other, so that each can support 2 XDR displays (not exceeding the 2 XDR limit of the Solo or single GPU of the Duo).

No-one has verified DisplayPort distribution yet with multiple displays and AGDCDiagnose.

 

[Eyezestful]

That's strange. Like you said, the Mac Pro tech spec pages say 4 XDRs:

Mac Pro - Technical Specifications

See all the technical specifications for Mac Pro with the M2 Ultra chip.

www.apple.com

Mac Pro (2019) - Technical Specifications - Apple Support (CA)

support.apple.com

The page you link at https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT210392 suggests that the Duo can't send DisplayPort 1.4 signals to the top or I/O card Thunderbolt ports. But that doesn't make sense because the RX580 MPX module can? A bandwidth issue doesn't make sense either. The solo can support two so the duo should be able to support 4 unless they wired the DisplayPorts inefficiently.

Ignoring the HDMI port (because we don't know how that's wired), the Duo has 8 DisplayPorts. If they connected six from one GPU and only two from the other, then that would allow three XDRs. But that would be dumb. They should have wired 4 DisplayPorts from one GPU and 4 from the other, so that each can support 2 XDR displays (not exceeding the 2 XDR limit of the Solo or single GPU of the Duo).

No-one has verified DisplayPort distribution yet with multiple displays and AGDCDiagnose.

Thanks for the thorough reply, really appreciated. It is indeed a mystery why Apple has conflicting information about this. I will try to contact their support this week and see if I can gather some official explanation! I will post back if I hear from them! If anyone has already done this, then it would be great to share here.

Although it does not make sense, it seems your explanation that the duo cannot send DisplayPort 1.4 to the top or I/O card might be the reason!

It is even stranger given that in June Apple boasted about the fact that two Vega II Duos would be able to drive six xdr displays for a maximum total of 120 megapixels of combined real estate. They clearly showed this up in the developers conference announcement. Now, the support page says that two Vega II Duo can only drive four xdr displays and not six. It seems that upon further testing they might have found performance issues!

 

[rkuo]

Of course the display is about color accuracy, but still it also is just a perfect size and resolution really.
i don’t want an HD Resolution 21:9 Display, I feel my ui is cramped on a 27” Retina display, but that retina 32” should be perfect.
And I’ll take the calibrated colors as a Bonus and can always control the light when I have to do some light color grading or more Intense image editing. Heck my dell 5ks with adobe rgb surely are capable of doing good color work on them but for me it’s just about the size and resolution upgrade.

Yes, the size and resolution are nice. I also have the dell 5k's and I do plenty of good work on them. I'm sick of the dual cable shenanigans, but otherwise they are fantastic.

The work I do requires the best color accuracy I can justify/afford, and large/high resolution is crucial as well. Show me another display with the color accuracy, dynamic range, size and resolution of the ProDisplay XDR that also costs less. Also explain why perfectly controlling the light is so crucial? Sure, it's an expensive monitor, but there are much, much more expensive monitors. Given what the XDR is capable of, it's actually relatively inexpensive.

The XDR is a great monitor for what it is, don't get me wrong. It really pushes the boundaries on full sustained HDR display support as well as insanely low black levels. What I'm saying is that most of what justifies the XDR's cost over lesser monitors on the market is the new technology enabling this high contrast and accuracy.

Color accuracy is degraded both by the matte texture itself as well as the fact that if the matte finish is needed in the first place, the monitor is in a uncontrolled environment. On the one hand, you've got a very expensive monitor whose existence is justified by all this fancy high contrast color accurate display technology. And then on the other hand, you've got that nanotexture finish which is designed to mitigate issues arising from bad lighting conditions. And if you care enough to spend all that money on a cutting edge color accurate monitor, why are you putting it in an area with bad lighting conditions?

I'm not saying there isn't some bit of middle ground here where someone is wheeling the monitor around an office and taking it back to work in a darkroom, or they work in a sunny office all day but happen to do all their photoshopping and color grading at night. But on balance, the problems the nanotexture matte finish is designed to solve are at odds with the XDR display's raison d'etre. And also, let's be clear ... if you are 100% dead serious about color accuracy then you absolutely have to be using a monitor like this in a light controlled environment.

 

[blackadde]

All color / tone is a matter of contrast and proportion. Bright walls / reflected daylight / interior lights will greatly affect your perception of color regardless of how accurate your monitor may be, and you can’t fix that with a brighter screen or wider gamut. It’s just how the human visual system works.

Environmental light control is paramount to any color critical workflow. Buying one for the screen real estate or to watch HDR content casually in a bright environment is perfectly reasonable, but buying an XDR for color grading and then putting it in daylight without a hood is like buying a guitar and forgetting the strings. You still have a nice guitar, but you’ll have a hard time playing any music.

 

[chfilm]

All color / tone is a matter of contrast and proportion. Bright walls / reflected daylight / interior lights will greatly affect your perception of color regardless of how accurate your monitor may be, and you can’t fix that with a brighter screen or wider gamut. It’s just how the human visual system works.

Environmental light control is paramount to any color critical workflow. Buying one for the screen real estate or to watch HDR content casually in a bright environment is perfectly reasonable, but buying an XDR for color grading and then putting it in daylight without a hood is like buying a guitar and forgetting the strings. You still have a nice guitar, but you’ll have a hard time playing any music.

Of course, but everyone who’s a professional color grader knows that they have to work in a dark environment anyways, so...
I’m a director who needs to judge results being sent to me, also sometimes editing stuff and occasionally need to do some laughable color correction myself, but for me it’s more about judging stuff that’s being given to me by a grader.
You’re right, basically if I would be in a dark environment I could just get the glossy one, but since I’m sitting in my living room... really hard decision.
I never minded the glare at all on my dells, in fact got them even specifically because I hate matte displays in general. But on this one the look is just so astonishing, you have to see it in person. Did you?

 

[blackadde]

I didn’t say anything about gloss or matte ... ? I’m just saying that controlling your environment goes hand in hand with your output device to achieve any semblance of accuracy.

 

[Adult80HD]

I'm not a professional colorist. However, I DO want to get the absolute best color I can get in my monitor, within the conditions I prefer to work--an office that has a window. All of your protestations are a meaningless attempt to justify a cynical attitude about why someone would choose to buy this monitor.

Is a Porsche best appreciated on a racetrack? Of course, but that doesn't stop people from buying them to drive in LA freeway traffic. Why do you care?

For the money, there's no better monitor I can get for what I want to do. The cost is nothing compared to the time and value my business derives from it as a tool. Just because I don't want to live in a dark room doesn't mean that the color fidelity of the monitor is not worth it. Maybe it's not worth it to you, great, don't buy it, but you have zero basis for judging my needs and the value I derive from it for my business use cases.

 

[blackadde]

Maybe you’re mistaking me for someone else? I wrote:

Buying one for the screen real estate or to watch HDR content casually in a bright environment is perfectly reasonable ...

 

[Adult80HD]

Maybe you’re mistaking me for someone else? I wrote:

I was replying to the one above you, not you, sorry for any confusion.

 

[rkuo]

Of course, but everyone who’s a professional color grader knows that they have to work in a dark environment anyways, so...
I’m a director who needs to judge results being sent to me, also sometimes editing stuff and occasionally need to do some laughable color correction myself, but for me it’s more about judging stuff that’s being given to me by a grader.
You’re right, basically if I would be in a dark environment I could just get the glossy one, but since I’m sitting in my living room... really hard decision.
I never minded the glare at all on my dells, in fact got them even specifically because I hate matte displays in general. But on this one the look is just so astonishing, you have to see it in person. Did you?

I did see it in the SF store and both versions of the display are great, but the glossy version clearly has better contrast and sharpness as you would expect. The nanotextured matte version appeared to be insanely good at cutting glare and I’m curious just how much better it is than traditional matte solutions. It’s not something I could quantify by sight.

Like you, I don’t need exact results but calibrate to be somewhere in the ballpark. But by the same token that’s why I don’t need the XDR ... the Dell’s are the same panels as the iMac and excellent already relative to where the XDR gets me. And I’m in a non glare environment for the most part.

 

[rkuo]

I'm not a professional colorist. However, I DO want to get the absolute best color I can get in my monitor, within the conditions I prefer to work--an office that has a window. All of your protestations are a meaningless attempt to justify a cynical attitude about why someone would choose to buy this monitor.

I didn't address my initial reply to you, so I don't know why you are taking this so personally. And I'm not protesting anything, I'm just stating facts.

Is a Porsche best appreciated on a racetrack? Of course, but that doesn't stop people from buying them to drive in LA freeway traffic. Why do you care?

And that's because the Porsche is a status symbol on the road, not the most efficient or economical tool for getting from point A to B. Which is exactly what I said about the matte version ... using a monitor that justifies its price with its color gamut and accuracy in poor lighting conditions is just like driving the Porsche on a road instead of a racetrack. You can do it and it can be fun, but don't pretend like you have to do it or that it makes complete sense.

For the money, there's no better monitor I can get for what I want to do. The cost is nothing compared to the time and value my business derives from it as a tool. Just because I don't want to live in a dark room doesn't mean that the color fidelity of the monitor is not worth it. Maybe it's not worth it to you, great, don't buy it, but you have zero basis for judging my needs and the value I derive from it for my business use cases.

You replied to my initial post about this, I didn't reply to yours. Defend your purchases to someone else. If you make millions a year and couldn't give a flip about how much you spend on a monitor, then good for you. I say the matte version of the XDR is a bit of a self-contradiction, and I stand by that statement.

 

[Adult80HD]

I realize *you* might think that the nano version is pointless, but clearly Apple doesn't agree nor do the droves of folks picking them up. The world isn't perfect, and we can't always perfectly control our lighting, nor do we want to. That doesn't mean that the anti-glare feature is pointless or a self-contradiction--you just don't see the same value others do.

 

[chfilm]

Meantime I still can’t decide which one to chose.
I think I want the nano because I prefer the look, but 1000€ if the glare on my screens never bothered me before...? The problem is since I’ve seen it it started to actually bother me a bit..
The other issue I have is that there’s gonna be a glossy dell next to the XDR for at least a few months before I can maybe afford a second one. I’m afraid I’m gonna hate it to have two different surfaces..

 

[rkuo]

Meantime I still can’t decide which one to chose.
I think I want the nano because I prefer the look, but 1000€ if the glare on my screens never bothered me before...? The problem is since I’ve seen it it started to actually bother me a bit..
The other issue I have is that there’s gonna be a glossy dell next to the XDR for at least a few months before I can maybe afford a second one. I’m afraid I’m gonna hate it to have two different surfaces..

The glossy indisputably looks better. I'd never be able to do the matte version without thinking about the standard glossy display quality. The matte version is expensive and, while nice, is still ultimately a compromise between your ambient lighting conditions and the native image quality.

I think if you go matte, you need to do so knowing that you don't have any other ways to control the reflectivity on the screen or that you have a reasonable fear that you'll be unable to control it in some future placement of your desk. In some ways, it's like insurance to make sure you don't have a 6000 dollar paperweight in the future just because the lighting at your new desk is terrible.

I have sort of a similar issue with the Nintendo Switch I carry around. I put a matte film on it because of the wide range of lighting conditions a portable device goes. And also, the screen is not laminated, so the glare from it is completely horrendous. Any time I have my matte version side by side with another stock Switch, I'm always a little surprised at how much better the screen looks without the film. We are of course talking about completely different products, but the moral is the same.

 

[OkiRun]

I have an editor who back lights his monitor and another who has a black hood around his monitor.
This shows you all the personal variables that are at play.

 

[paulchiu]

I did see it in the SF store and both versions of the display are great, but the glossy version clearly has better contrast and sharpness as you would expect. The nanotextured matte version appeared to be insanely good at cutting glare and I’m curious just how much better it is than traditional matte solutions. It’s not something I could quantify by sight.

Like you, I don’t need exact results but calibrate to be somewhere in the ballpark. But by the same token that’s why I don’t need the XDR ... the Dell’s are the same panels as the iMac and excellent already relative to where the XDR gets me. And I’m in a non glare environment for the most part.

How did poor quality videos (1080p) looked on the Pro Display XDR? Sadly, no New York city stores had any on display as of Jan 3, 2020. My mid December 2019 order is still stuck at Feb 4 - Feb 17 delivery.

Thanks.

 

[OkiRun]

How did poor quality videos (1080p) looked on the Pro Display XDR? Sadly, no New York city stores had any on display as of Jan 3, 2020. My mid December 2019 order is still stuck at Feb 4 - Feb 17 delivery.

Thanks.

Mine is mid to late February.