Rumour : New iMac to have 5K Display & AMD Graphics

[PlayfulPhoenix]

I think the aggressive pricepoint is indicitive of a need to get the facilities and the partners that make these ramped up to full capacity as quickly as possible for whatever's coming down the pipeline next.

I don't think thats how the supply chain works. If Apple wants lots of production capacity for the displays of a future device... They pay an advance for an order of those displays. There's no "priming" a manufacturer by submitting an order for something else, with the expectation that it will "prepare" them for higher future demand. Plus, none of these displays across devices are even the same PPI, and they don't share many of the technologies and processes that are used for them, so they're entirely different anyway.

Lastly, the quantity of Retina screens Apple needs for the tens of millions of iPhones and iPads they are selling make the number of iMac screens a drop in the bucket comparatively. So this reasoning makes no sense no matter how you look at it.

Thunderbolt 3 will have native support for DP 1.3, and it's coming with Intel's Skylake, hopefully next year. There's also some speculation that Apple could drive a 5K display off 2x Thunderbolt 2 ports, and if that's the case, we could see a new display in the first half of 2015.

It's not speculation that Apple could sell a 5k display that uses two Thunderbolt ports, it's the only known way for them to do it currently. But if they wanted to launch such a display before Thunderbolt 3 and DP 1.3, why would they then give the iMac just one TCON, and create the iMac so as to use just one interface (a clear engineering struggle)? They'd be doubling the development work and cost for no reason. I think the most realistic explanation is that Apple is happy to wait for DisplayPort to catch up before launching a display in a nascent market.

There's also the possibility that whatever Apple is doing with their next-gen TV product involves displays like this as well and they're using the iMac as a catalyst to ramp up production capacity as quickly as possible.

There's almost no 4K content in the entire world! Let alone 5K or much beyond that - why would Apple need or want this sort of display density for a TV? I don't think anyone has made a solid case for why they should make a TV to begin with.

Most importantly, I think the pricepoint is Apple's attempt at capturing as many buyers as possible who want this kind of display, even if they wouldn't normally consider a Mac. As you and others have said, it really is like you are getting a free Mac when you buy the 5K display, at least when you weigh it against the other limited options on the market.

I see your point, but I suppose I am not convinced that this will attract people other than videographers, photographers, developers, and creative professionals, all of whom disproportionately use Macs already.

...Then again, what an easy upgrade to justify, right? Still, for "traditional" or non-pro users, $700 more is a big ask no matter how nice the screen is.

Does increased production capacity for 27" displays result in increased production capacity for displays of much greater sizes?

No. That's just now how it works, and a company would approach computer display technology and TV display technology in a fundamentally different way since the viewing distance and usage patterns are so different.

 

[AVT]

I hope you're joking.

LOL??

No, but my background is not in engineering or operations research, so please forgive me for speculating about things I do not know.

Apple underwent a very long slog, starting back in 2005 with OS X 10.4, to fully implement resolution independence, both in the system itself and by application developers.

It is now paying off. The issues you see with Windows on resolutions this high do not exist on OS X. You can set any resolution you want, and scale the UI to be any size you want or use pixel doubling, and it all looks good.

You can run the thing at "Best for Retina" settings which means it will just look like a really crisp 2560x1440 display. Personally I run a couple notches away from that so that I can have some more space on my desktop. Bootcamping windows will look ridiculous on this thing but running a VM seems to scale quite nicely on a retina display.

That's what I'm saying though. Given the same scale, my eyes are not good enough to tell the difference between a "crisp" 2560x1440 [really 5120x2880] and "regular" 2560x1440.

The size of a non-retina pixel is already small enough for everything to appear smooth with no perceived pixellation. In fact, if anything, regular displays are slightly blurry, and making the pixels even a bit bigger would not make the display look bad to my eyes.

This is totally different from mobile phones, where a non-retina display is quite pixellated because I am looking at it from a much closer distance.

 

[NetJunkie]

The size of a non-retina pixel is already small enough for everything to appear smooth with no perceived pixellation. In fact, if anything, regular displays are slightly blurry, and making the pixels even a bit bigger would not make the display look bad to my eyes.

This is totally different from mobile phones, where a non-retina display is quite pixellated because I am looking at it from a much closer distance.

That's what people said before they actually started using rMBPs. Then they get it. Also, it's not just about how awesome it looks..it's about the flexibility. Scale it however you want. Often I'll scale it so I have a lot more desktop space..then at night if my eyes are tired I go the other way and make things larger. On both ends of that spectrum everything is perfectly clear.

Been waiting 3 years on a Retina iMac. Hoping mine ships ASAP.

 

[mope54]

text is noticeably crisper on a retina display. it's mild enough that it's difficult to pinpoint but significant enough that over time non-retina screens look blurry and I don't like them. whenever it comes between watching a video on my retina versus my partner's Air my retina always wins.

 

[QwertyJuan]

No, but my background is not in engineering or operations research, so please forgive me for speculating about things I do not know.

Yeah.... Apple's panels are TOTALLY different from each other... an iPad panel compared to a Macbook Air panel for instance. Matter of fact you COULD buy two iPad's on the same shelf and get one with an LCD made by Samsung and another one with a panel made by LG or Sharp.

Retina is just marketing... nothing more.... it was a way for Steve Jobs to try to explain to someone that doesn't understand PPI, that the device they are holding has an incredible screen and you can't see the pixels at a reasonable viewing distance.

Saying that... Apple (IMO) needs to change it up a bit... the iPhone 6 (haven't seen a Plus yet) has a SEVERE (IMO anyhow) PPI deficit... compared to a Note 4?? It's a joke... the pixels are VERY visible upon close inspection on the iPhone.

 

[Snowdog]

Saying that... Apple (IMO) needs to change it up a bit... the iPhone 6 (haven't seen a Plus yet) has a SEVERE (IMO anyhow) PPI deficit... compared to a Note 4?? It's a joke... the pixels are VERY visible upon close inspection on the iPhone.

Absurd nonsense.

Almost no one will see the difference beyond 300 dpi at reasonable viewing distance. If you want to hold it 3 inches from your eye to make a mountain out of a molehill, go nuts, but don't pretend this is some real issue that really matters more than on paper.

Also Pentile displays (Samsung phones) reduce effective dpi by about 30%.

 

[QwertyJuan]

Absurd nonsense.

Almost no one will see the difference beyond 300 dpi at reasonable viewing distance. If you want to hold it 3 inches from your eye to make a mountain out of a molehill, go nuts, but don't pretend this is some real issue that really matters more than on paper.

Also Pentile displays (Samsung phones) reduce effective dpi by about 30%.

Nonsense?? Go grab a iPhone 6 and a Note 4 and tell me you can't tell the difference...

If you can't see the difference... you are either A) Delusional or B) Have poor eye sight.

 

[evilsofa]

...Still, what confuses me is how Apple did this with the Tonga GPU that's in the computer, since Im pretty sure that it only supports DP1.2. The only way that's possible without aforementioned ridiculous hacks would be to overclock the DP interface, which as far as I know is just plain unheard of for something like this.

Apple has confirmed that they are driving the display with a single TCON (if I understand correctly, that means it's SST, not MST). They're almost certainly doing exactly what you propose because there really isn't any other way. Apple can get away with building their own specialized overclocked TCON because it's in an AIO computer and will not be connected to anything else - Apple has also confirmed you can't use it as an external display.

http://anandtech.com/show/8623/hands-on-apples-imac-with-retina-display

 

[brentsg]

Nonsense?? Go grab a iPhone 6 and a Note 4 and tell me you can't tell the difference...

If you can't see the difference... you are either A) Delusional or B) Have poor eye sight.

You can see the difference if you study the phones up close looking for a difference. Nobody would see the difference through normal usage.

 

[QwertyJuan]

You can see the difference if you study the phones up close looking for a difference. Nobody would see the difference through normal usage.

You are wrong... (unless I am "nobody"... that is debatable ) because I for one noticed. Friend has brand new iPhone 6 (would it really matter WHAT iPhone unless it was a 6 Plus?? They all have 326ppi)... I played with Note 4 right before looking at his iPhone 6. The lack of resolution was very apparent. Note 4 was noticeably brighter, AND sharper.

You don't have to believe me... why would you?? But you DO owe it to yourself to go to Best Buy and pick up a Note 4 and look at the screen. I am guessing you'll be more surprised than you think.

 

[JayJapanB]

Nonsense?? Go grab a iPhone 6 and a Note 4 and tell me you can't tell the difference...

If you can't see the difference... you are either A) Delusional or B) Have poor eye sight.

I'd like to see your fanboy goggles come off for a double blind test.

What do all you people do on your 400+ ppi phones? They can't run photoshop or decent games so who gives two shits?
Your point is as dumb as Apple saying "Check it out! You can show people pictures on your Apple Watch!" Who cares....?

I'd personally care a lot more about going from QHD to 5k on a desktop than 720p to whatever on a phone.

 

[Megalith]

I just think the Note is superior because it uses AMOLED.

 

[QwertyJuan]

I'd like to see your fanboy goggles come off for a double blind test.

What do all you people do on your 400+ ppi phones? They can't run photoshop or decent games so who gives two shits?
Your point is as dumb as Apple saying "Check it out! You can show people pictures on your Apple Watch!" Who cares....?

I'd personally care a lot more about going from QHD to 5k on a desktop than 720p to whatever on a phone.

I can PROMISE you I can tell the difference. I have a 4s sitting in front of me now... I can see jaggies. Is it bad? No. Can I still see them? Yes.

 

[brentsg]

I can PROMISE you I can tell the difference. I have a 4s sitting in front of me now... I can see jaggies. Is it bad? No. Can I still see them? Yes.

Snowdog said it properly, with "almost no one". I have a 6 Plus and a 6 sitting in front of me. Yeah there's a difference if I choose to study it, but it's not noticeable to me and it wouldn't sway me one way or the other in regard to which I'd prefer to use.

 

[JayJapanB]

I can PROMISE you I can tell the difference. I have a 4s sitting in front of me now... I can see jaggies. Is it bad? No. Can I still see them? Yes.

Fair enough.
Go buy a QHD phone and stare at it all day. If fancy phones are what interests you, have fun, bro.

 

[QwertyJuan]

Fair enough.
Go buy a QHD phone and stare at it all day. If fancy phones are what interests you, have fun, bro.

I just think Apple needs to "up the ante" and bring a screen with higher resolution to the table. The 6 Plus is a good start... but really... there was no reason I can think that the 6 (non-plus) shouldn't have had a full-HD screen itself. It would have been absolutely stunning.

 

[AVT]

That's what people said before they actually started using rMBPs. Then they get it. Also, it's not just about how awesome it looks..it's about the flexibility. Scale it however you want. Often I'll scale it so I have a lot more desktop space..then at night if my eyes are tired I go the other way and make things larger. On both ends of that spectrum everything is perfectly clear.

Been waiting 3 years on a Retina iMac. Hoping mine ships ASAP.

You probably have much better vision than I do. I've seen the rMPBs, they look the same as regular MBPs to me. Probably much better for younger folks whose eyes are better than mine.

Yeah.... Apple's panels are TOTALLY different from each other... an iPad panel compared to a Macbook Air panel for instance. Matter of fact you COULD buy two iPad's on the same shelf and get one with an LCD made by Samsung and another one with a panel made by LG or Sharp.

Retina is just marketing... nothing more.... it was a way for Steve Jobs to try to explain to someone that doesn't understand PPI, that the device they are holding has an incredible screen and you can't see the pixels at a reasonable viewing distance.

Saying that... Apple (IMO) needs to change it up a bit... the iPhone 6 (haven't seen a Plus yet) has a SEVERE (IMO anyhow) PPI deficit... compared to a Note 4?? It's a joke... the pixels are VERY visible upon close inspection on the iPhone.

You're poking fun at me me for not knowing how some company I don't work for manufactures their shit. Somehow, I don't think this is so bad.

 

[Snowdog]

I just think Apple needs to "up the ante" ....

I bet if we mounted 300 dpi and 400 dpi screens in a box where you couldn't get closer than 10" from them, 99.9% of people could not discern a difference. Sure if you hold it 3" from your eye you can, but that is just completely irrelevant for normal usage. Normal people just don't obsess over this kind of pointless minutia.

But if you do want to obsess, note that Samsung uses pentile screens, and they drastically reduce the effective resolution and increase visible pixelation/jaggies.

I was looking at a 360 dpi pentile screen samsung tablet (Galaxy S 8.4") and it had much more visible jaggies/pixelation than a 323 dpi iPad Mini Retina. In fact the "360 dpi" Pentile screen was more comparable with the 264 dpi iPad Air screen.

Samsung needs crazy high dpi just to compensate for the problems with Pentile.

I have hypothesized that effective dpi of Pentile screen is (stated dpi)*2/3 = effective dpi. From my observations that actaully holds up.

So by my calculation:

Galaxy Note 4: 518 dpi (pentile) *2/3 = 345 effective dpi.
iPhone 6 plus: 401 dpi (full RGB stripe) = 401 effective dpi.

Since you obsess over this kind of thing, I think you owe it to yourself to check it out. Maybe bring your reading glasses/magnifying glass...

 

[PlayfulPhoenix]

Retina is just marketing... nothing more.... it was a way for Steve Jobs to try to explain to someone that doesn't understand PPI, that the device they are holding has an incredible screen and you can't see the pixels at a reasonable viewing distance.

I think calling the Retina moniker "just marketing" is a bit disingenuous, since that implies that any other marketing is more... But yes, it's a simplified way of communicating greatly increased clarity. Are you suggesting that Apple is misleading customers with the use of such a label?

Saying that... Apple (IMO) needs to change it up a bit... the iPhone 6 (haven't seen a Plus yet) has a SEVERE (IMO anyhow) PPI deficit... compared to a Note 4?? It's a joke... the pixels are VERY visible upon close inspection on the iPhone.

Every feature of every electronic device can be "better" after increases on one particular axis, but you're not taking into account the marginal benefit of such increases.

On paper, the Galaxy Note 4 (which isn't even the same class of device as the iPhone 6, but I digress) has a higher PPI, but it also uses an RGBG Pentile screen that is fundamentally a poorer technology to use in such a display for various reasons. That additional resolution also increases the demand (and power consumption) on the silicon driving it, reducing fluidity and lowering battery life. And it probably costs more than a lower-resolution RGB LCD panel on par with the 6 or 6 Plus, which is less money for Samsung to spend on improving things like the build materials or silicon.

Is that delta in display performance worth all the "costs" associated with it? Samsung certainly thinks so as a seller of the gadget, but reasonable people can agree or disagree either way.

A similar debate occurs whenever Apple makes a device thinner. Should the iPad Air 2 really be 18% thinner, if they could get much more battery life by increasing the battery size? Is there only one right answer to this question? Is that "right" answer highly dependent on who is asking, and what they value most in a mobile device?

You're poking fun at me me for not knowing how some company I don't work for manufactures their shit. Somehow, I don't think this is so bad.

You're the only person admitting what's true for everyone here

I just think Apple needs to "up the ante" and bring a screen with higher resolution to the table. The 6 Plus is a good start... but really... there was no reason I can think that the 6 (non-plus) shouldn't have had a full-HD screen itself. It would have been absolutely stunning.

If the only way you think Apple could "up the ante" in mobile phone tech is to marginally increase display resolution, I don't know what to tell you. The camera and SoC by themselves (especially with use of Metal and SpriteKit) are without comparison in mobile, excluding devices that make gargantuan compromises.

I'll also mention that users have reported less-than-fluid animations on the 6 Plus, but that everything is buttery-smooth on the 6. I have noticed this anecdotally. I reiterate the point I made earlier about choosing which compromises to make.

 

[QwertyJuan]

I bet if we mounted 300 dpi and 400 dpi screens in a box where you couldn't get closer than 10" from them, 99.9% of people could not discern a difference. Sure if you hold it 3" from your eye you can, but that is just completely irrelevant for normal usage. Normal people just don't obsess over this kind of pointless minutia.

But if you do want to obsess, note that Samsung uses pentile screens, and they drastically reduce the effective resolution and increase visible pixelation/jaggies.

I was looking at a 360 dpi pentile screen samsung tablet (Galaxy S 8.4") and it had much more visible jaggies/pixelation than a 323 dpi iPad Mini Retina. In fact the "360 dpi" Pentile screen was more comparable with the 264 dpi iPad Air screen.

Samsung needs crazy high dpi just to compensate for the problems with Pentile.

I have hypothesized that effective dpi of Pentile screen is (stated dpi)*2/3 = effective dpi. From my observations that actaully holds up.

So by my calculation:

Galaxy Note 4: 518 dpi (pentile) *2/3 = 345 effective dpi.
iPhone 6 plus: 401 dpi (full RGB stripe) = 401 effective dpi.

Since you obsess over this kind of thing, I think you owe it to yourself to check it out. Maybe bring your reading glasses/magnifying glass...

I have yet to see an iPhone 6 Plus screen.... my boss has one on order. I am looking VERY forward to playing with it.

 

[PlayfulPhoenix]

iFixit has done a teardown of the Retina iMac, and has found that the TCON is a modified Parade Technologies DP665. I'm not sure where else that controller has been used, though - a casual Google search doesn't pull up other displays or all-in-ones, but you don't tend to know anyway since they aren't advertised.

Since there seems to be no additional specialty silicon driving things, I'm going out on a limb and guessing that Apple is indeed overclocking the DP interface to pull this off. I do wonder what the refresh rate is, has that been confirmed anywhere?

Other things of note: the display is LG made (not surprising), and the layout of all the other components is essentially unchanged from the previous version (a little surprising). And one more thing I first missed: The iMac looks to be assembled in the USA, so it seems that Apple is onshoring final assembly of desktops beyond the Mac Pro.

 

[Aurelius]

Folks, I don't think we need to squabble over the particulars of pixel densities. To me, it's simple: higher resolutions are great when you can implement them without penalty, but they're not the be-all, end-all of the experience. There is such a thing as "good enough."

In my case: I'd love to see a normal iPhone 6 with 1080p, or an iPhone 6 Plus with 1440p. However, neither of them looks bad -- and the upshot of that tradeoff is pretty solid battery life in a thin design. The Galaxy Note 4 should have both resolution and good battery life, of course, but it's also thicker than what Apple's doing. I'm hoping Apple doesn't wait two years to up its resolution, but I'm not griping about what it has right now.

As for the 5K iMac? Well, simply speaking, this is something you're going to notice. Unless you already have a 4K display (in which case, why are you looking at this?), it's a night-and-day difference in terms of pixel fidelity. You're only sitting a couple of feet or so in front of the screen, so it's like standing in front of a giant 5K TV. And if you're a video editing pro, 5K means you see perfect detail in 4K clips while you're working.

 

[QwertyJuan]

I think calling the Retina moniker "just marketing" is a bit disingenuous, since that implies that any other marketing is more... But yes, it's a simplified way of communicating greatly increased clarity. Are you suggesting that Apple is misleading customers with the use of such a label?

Absolutely not... it's called marketing. It's no more misleading than HTC's "Boomsound" or Nokia's "Pureview". It's a "buzzword" that companies use to get people talking. It worked well!

 

[StryderxX]

I just picked up a 5K iMac. It's pretty amazing. If you own a rMBP then this is a 27" version of that. The colors, black level, viewing angles etc. have to be seen to be believed and the text on websites using Safari are lazer sharp. I've really loving it so far!

 

[QwertyJuan]

I would like to comment on what I said about iPhone 6 Plus... finally got to play with one and I can't see any pixelation whatsoever.... the increased DPI makes it much sharper (to my eyes) than the iPhone 6.

 

[synergyo1]

Ditto on the 5k iMac. Received mine two weeks ago. Side by side with the other iMacs in the office (every generation since Mid 2010), the screen is clearly a huge improvement. The text sharpness is very apparent and a joy to work with (I do a lot of coding and photography). Only problem is my two external monitors are not high DPI, so going back and forth between those with the iMac display is yuck

 

[Megalith]

I just picked up a 5K iMac. It's pretty amazing. If you own a rMBP then this is a 27" version of that. The colors, black level, viewing angles etc. have to be seen to be believed and the text on websites using Safari are lazer sharp. I've really loving it so far!

I dare anyone to post a photo of the display with an all-black background in a completely dark room.

 

[StryderxX]

Ditto on the 5k iMac. Received mine two weeks ago. Side by side with the other iMacs in the office (every generation since Mid 2010), the screen is clearly a huge improvement. The text sharpness is very apparent and a joy to work with (I do a lot of coding and photography). Only problem is my two external monitors are not high DPI, so going back and forth between those with the iMac display is yuck

I complete agree... this 5K iMac is ruining my opinion of other monitors. Damn you Apple!!!

I dare anyone to post a photo of the display with an all-black background in a completely dark room.

I will definitely do that today when I get home. the display is really that good. Best on the market right now hands down.

 

[StryderxX]

Sorry for the quality of the images. I used my phone. Here's my 5K iMac screen:

And a quick youtube video:

http://youtu.be/_a9i8eUpt8c

 

[mope54]

hopefully I didn't mess up by ordering a thunderbolt display last month

 

[elleana]

Anyone pair this up with an external display? What should I be looking for size / resolution wise so they are at least similar and the external display can be run by the GPU in the iMac?

 

[DrinkTea]

I am running it with an old T221. I think that's about as close as you're going to get these days. UP2414Q might be a good option too but the pixel density isn't as high.

 

[mi7chy]

See backlight bleed, uniformity is off and black is more like grey. LG 55" 1080p OLED display is down to ~$2100 so hopefully 4K OLED will be less than $3K.

 

[mope54]

oh man, this troll

 

[Yakk]

This is really a nice setup to work with! Congrats for those who got one. I fiddled with one for a while, then went back to my own setup... and that was a bad idea, my screens look like crap now.

oh man, this troll

LoL... Made me laugh though

 

[StryderxX]

oh man, this troll

You have to laugh at people like mi7chy! He wants a 4K OLED computer display and expects to pay $3000... now THAT's a laugh!!

Those pictures I posted don't do the screen justice. If you check out the Youtube video you can tell that with a black background there is zero back light bleed and the screen is uniform. Haters are gonna hate, nothing you can do about that.

 

[odoe]

Considering this along with Air for end of year purchase. I keep getting nagged to do some native iOS stuff and that display sure is pretty.

 

[jbltecnicspro]

You have to laugh at people like mi7chy! He wants a 4K OLED computer display and expects to pay $3000... now THAT's a laugh!!

Those pictures I posted don't do the screen justice. If you check out the Youtube video you can tell that with a black background there is zero back light bleed and the screen is uniform. Haters are gonna hate, nothing you can do about that.

Have to admit that it does look nice. Course I'd rather have the monitor and not the computer it comes with.