Apple Thunderbolt 4k Displays - Any News / Updates ?
Hi there,
I have had my Apple 30inch Cinema Display now for going on 10 years and when it bought it first it was the most expensive screen I ever purchased at €2,300 approx.... it has served me so well... and still does.... but I want to upgrade as my screen is now set ay 100% brightness and it just seems to dull and flat compared to the newer 27" displays.... I had made my mind up last week until there was a posting about 10.9.3 giving full compatibility with 4K displays.... that made me stand back and wonder if I should wait.
I'm a principally and old skool graphic designer using QuarkXPress, Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator... I'm not really involved in video... but if I invest in something I try and research it as best I can and buy the latest technology so that it will serve me well for the next 8-10 years.
I have a mid/late MacPro 12 Core with 512GB SSD Drive, QTY 3 x 3TB Internal Drives + 32GB RAM. I'm going to hold off buying the new MacPro until more apps take advantage of the new processor architecture, so a new monitor is really something I want.
Originally I said I couldn't justify the $3999 or €2900 price tag for a screen.... but with 4K becoming more and more popular with consumers... could Apple release a monitor close to what I paid for my original monitor all those years ago ($3299 or €2300)... as if so... maybe I would go for it to have the very best and to have a future proof piece of hardware that will work with my new MacPro also when I take the plunge on that next year.
Any advice or comments most welcome.
Regards,
Anthony MacCarthy
Irish MacUser and MacAddict
Comments
The display won't be backwards-proof though. For the old Mac Pros to drive a 4K display, it needs a particular GPU first of all but the display will probably be Thunderbolt only. They currently make a mini-displayport model and Thunderbolt model separately as the old MP didn't support Thunderbolt. Now that every Mac has Thunderbolt, they have no reason to make a mini-dp model. You'd have to get the new Mac Pro first and the display later.
You don't have to get the 12-core MP. Design work doesn't tax the CPU much, it's more the RAM, storage and the GPU for fast previews. The 6-core is about 65% of the 12-core.
I expect the next Thunderbolt display will be 4K 3840 x 2160, laminated with anti-glare coating like the rMBP, slim design like the iMac, USB 3, possibly bigger than 27" but no bigger than 32". Dell's 4K is under $2400:
http://www.amazon.com/Dell-Computer-UltraSharp-UP3214Q-31-5-Inch/dp/B00GVE7QEC
Apple was able to undercut Dell when they launched the 27". By the time they launch the next one, I expect they'll be able to manage $1999. This would require keeping the old one for sale though. It would be better if they found a way to maintain the $999 price point. It's really down to whatever deals they can get with suppliers. The good thing with the iOS devices is they make huge display orders so they should be able to get some better deals with suppliers.
I expect the next Thunderbolt display will be 4K 3840 x 2160, laminated with anti-glare coating like the rMBP, slim design like the iMac, USB 3, possibly bigger than 27" but no bigger than 32". Dell's 4K is under $2400:
http://www.amazon.com/Dell-Computer-UltraSharp-UP3214Q-31-5-Inch/dp/B00GVE7QEC
Apple was able to undercut Dell when they launched the 27". By the time they launch the next one, I expect they'll be able to manage $1999. This would require keeping the old one for sale though. It would be better if they found a way to maintain the $999 price point. It's really down to whatever deals they can get with suppliers. The good thing with the iOS devices is they make huge display orders so they should be able to get some better deals with suppliers.
I don't think they'll go for a 32". 24 - 27" is pretty close to ideal for a large number of users, including those involved in most media editing. Past a certain size it becomes difficult to take in most of the screen simultaneously and navigation becomes more awkward. If it was something cintiq like, the navigation aspect wouldn't be such an issue. I found the old 30" displays to be a bit awkward. Dell released a 24" at $1400. The price has already started to come down. They also had an $800 4k display using a TN panel.
As for the OP, buying maxed out specs is a waste of money. By the time any design work in those applications really strangles a quad MP with D300s, it will no longer be supported by the latest versions of those software packages. They always retire hardware support at some point. It's usually the same time as Apple.
You don't have to get the 12-core MP. Design work doesn't tax the CPU much, it's more the RAM, storage and the GPU for fast previews. The 6-core is about 65% of the 12-core.
Most modern gpus can handle this stuff with ease. Illustrator makes no explicit use. The same goes for Quark. Photoshop uses it for certain filters and OpenGL drawing overall, yet no one has seen noticeably faster previews between gpus. The only time you may have issues is if it's short on ram, and I don't think that should be a problem with 2GB. It's more frequently an issue if you're switching between Photoshop and a 3D paint app, as the paint app uses vram to store projected textures. As I mentioned, even the 6 core isn't going to be much of a boost. Some graphic designers would better off with a mini and a top quality display. NEC is a good choice. At 10 years of age, that 30" would have drifted way off its original profile whereas some modern displays can give you a fairly close approximation of many PMS swatches. The desire for a 12 core is just poor budgeting on his part.
The Dell ones don't look too bad in size. There's a video here with 3 hooked up to a new Mac Pro:
[VIDEO]
Here's an unboxing:
[VIDEO]
The Dell ones don't look too bad in size. There's a video here with 3 hooked up to a new Mac Pro:
Those do look quite nice. I'm skeptical that Apple would go for that size though. They've stuck to the one size product model for several years. The point of the current thunderbolt display is more of a dock for the notebook line with the inclusion of a display. You plug in one cable for all peripherals. Unless the new version has a different focus, I don't see it changing that much in size. Dell has 3 different versions. Their low end is a TN which retails somewhere around $700-800 as of today. The 24" IPS appears to have dropped under $1300. I originally expected Apple to come in somewhere around that size, but it might not really accommodate the imac internals. I suspect they'll stick to a similar size, but your predictions have been more accurate than mine lately.
They used to have 20", 24", 30". If they use the same panels in the higher-end iMac, 32" might be unsuitable for that but they can go above 27", they can have 24" and 28" iMacs. Eventually, the iMac will move to 4K but they might have to go standalone 4K first for the price to drop.
They used to have 20", 24", 30". If they use the same panels in the higher-end iMac, 32" might be unsuitable for that but they can go above 27", they can have 24" and 28" iMacs. Eventually, the iMac will move to 4K but they might have to go standalone 4K first for the price to drop.
That is entirely possible. I suspect they're somewhat cost sensitive. I expected them to update the thunderbolt display to match the imac update, but it has retained the older design. As I mentioned, your predictions have been more accurate than my own on the last few things. I don't intend to update displays until 4K is actually practical in a 24". Right now a 16:10 24" is typically 1920 x 1200 as it has been for the past several years. The difference in resolution is noticeable if you go from either an iPad, rmbp, or 17" mbp to looking at that. I still liked the 17". Even at the same resolution, the rmbp isn't the same, not that it's bad or anything.
I'd rather see a display have a "back rack" for a headless iMac, Mac Mini or even iPad to slot into out of sight behind the panel.
What is the need to have it visible? We have power buttons and no need for removable media these days. The display can expose the usb and sd slots easily enough, or have the iMac or mini slots positioned to be in reached easily when mounted. The mount can then be a docking station with display, usb, cards communicating through it.
This, IMHO, would differentiate the Apple displays.
Samsung has a 4k 60hz available for pre order.
Price has crept up from $700 to $850, so I'd wait until it after 14th April launch date
There are several 60hz types, but it has to be supported across the chain. The 2013 macbook pro and nMP support it on the Mac side. Nothing else supports it as of today.
WWDC?
Honestly what else do you expect to support 60HZ on these displays. An AIR? A Mini? I suppose that technically both machines could support 4K displays at this refresh rate but I'd hate to see what overall machine performance would be like. I would expect at the very least that the bandwidth to memory to support the display would negatively impact normal CPU performance. It would be nice to see Iris Pro in these machines but I kinda doubt that would happen, the only other option would be DDR 4 or using graphics memory as main memory. Last I knew Intel didn't support a APU that uses GDDR.
Apple could get AMD to do a APU with an advanced memory interface if they can live with the drop in CPU performance. I know many poo poo AMD but the GPUs in their APUs are still significantly better than Intels and a bit of OpenCL here and there means that the systems perform very well for normal users. Right now I don't see a better way to support 4K with an integrated GPU. So if it isn't t AMD we will likely have to wait until Intel delivers Broadwell to see 4k 60Hz on the AiR or Mini. Well at least 4K people would want to use.
Honestly what else do you expect to support 60HZ on these displays. An AIR? A Mini? I suppose that technically both machines could support 4K displays at this refresh rate but I'd hate to see what overall machine performance would be like. I would expect at the very least that the bandwidth to memory to support the display would negatively impact normal CPU performance. It would be nice to see Iris Pro in these machines but I kinda doubt that would happen, the only other option would be DDR 4 or using graphics memory as main memory. Last I knew Intel didn't support a APU that uses GDDR.
It's likely that you'll see support once those machines go to thunderbolt 2. The original thunderbolt doesn't fully support displayport 1.2.