The latest Intel TB3 controller (Titan Ridge) allows two DisplayPort 1.4 streams to be encapsulated into the TB3 connection.
Technically yes, but pragmatically no. DisplayPort 1.4 maxes out at 25.92Gb/s So two 1.4 streams is 51.84 Gb/s. Thunderbolt v3 isn't going to carry > 40Gb/s.
If you happen to put a 2K (or 4K) screen worth of data into a DP 1.4 protocol stream then it can carry two of those. Pragmatically the first Thunderbolt v3 were limited to two DP 1.2 stream (effective data rate 17.28). 2*17.28Gb/s = 34.56Gb/s. Adding the DP 1.4 might help close the ~4-5Gb/s amount of headroom you had left (depending if also want to drive USB in the monitor also).
DP 1.4 should get you better support for compression (with a decent implementation) and some other goodies. But it isn't 'buying' a whole lot of more bandwidth over Thunderbolt v3. Two "maxed out" DP 1.4 streams won't fit.
So a single cable can now support uncompressed 5K at 60fps or 8K at 30fps and 5K at 120fps / 8K at 60fps when using Display Stream Compression 1.2.
The quirky part there is whether Apple is going to buy into Display Stream Compression or not.
That said this is far more likely a 6144x3072 ( an "Ultra wide" style) Display 6k3k is a 2:1 ratio. If Apple worked backwards from the dual 1.2 max limit 34.59 Gb/s then that Ultra wide fits the bill
6144x3072x60x30 = 33.97Gb/s. .
I highly doubt Apple would try to cut the 2017-2018 Macs with discrete GPUs and TBv3 (with Alpine Ridge) off from this new Thunderbolt display docking station. A premise that only a Mac Pro will be able to drive this is probably flawed.
Titan Ridge would be highly useful in a new Mac Pro for non-Apple displays (that are primarily displays. ). DPv1.4 native mode to non Thunderbolt displays.
[doublepost=1550618097][/doublepost]
Hmm strange one on the 6k display resolution. Wonder why Apple didn’t go direct to 8k.
1. More affordable.
2. HDR matters at least as much right now as more pixels ( so perhaps more cost put into better backlight than more pixels. more localized lighting is required to high the highest HDR certifications. )
3. Easier on bandwidth. Can work with existing TBv3 systems with at least a "good" discrete GPU behind it is an "Utlra wide" focus there.)
4. In editing mode then content plus timelines and palettes and tools. Like 16:10 would give folks more room for timeline at the bottom, an UltraWide set up allows for palettes tools to the side. In short, folks want "room for tools".
(still may get folks going for multiple monitors but can get more folks onto one wider one. )
[ Also if just got to 8K with no room for tools & timeline .... are editing folks going to be happy? ]
Slight tangent to Mac Pro ... it might help the iMac Pro if it was wider and could use more spacing between hottest components. [ if can more CPU closer to the middle then perhaps could get the RAM door back. Which means moving the GPU further out on its "half" of the iMac Pro. if screen is wider then that "half" is wider; so more room to move. ]
[doublepost=1550618472][/doublepost]
Exactly. Kuo's contacts are in the supply chain so he generally has a good track record of the components that will go into an Apple product, but when he tries and predicts pricing, delivery dates or markets his track record is significantly worse.
Pricing and markets perhaps but delivery? Not sure he is that far off. Apple is certainly sharing calendar deadlines with the suppliers. So if Apple tells the supplier to have 200K parts ready by April 15th then that is a pretty big clue. There is some variance if there is a goof up by Apple ( Apple's design is cluster screwed ...e.g. AirPower or some vendor drops the ball. ). Plus or minus a Quarter or so his record isn't too bad.
It is more which parts of the supply chain tapped into. For some products he doesn't have firm grip on the major supplier.
