32 ms·

iMac with Retina 5K display

615 points by davidbarker 12y ago

Fuzzwah 12y ago
I'm normally firmly in the "I hate websites that mess with the normal scrolling of a page" crowd. The scrolling transition at the top of this page really impressed me.
- bshimmin 12y ago
  Interestingly done - the huge image is broken up into 15 separate canvas elements and then the containing DIV is scaled with CSS transforms as you scroll. Not immensely clever, but a solution which performs pretty well in Chrome on my Mac, at least.
- zaroth 12y ago
  Zoom out the whole page to 33% shows an interesting perspective on the design. Monitors keep getting wider, web pages keep getting narrower and longer :-)
  - ryanSrich 12y ago
    This is because your eyes never get wider. So it makes sense that the content would never get wider either. I feel like web apps are the only real use case (aside from experimentations) where using a fluid-width (the content grows with the screen) is appropriate.
- century19 12y ago
  Very impressed too, pretty stunning design. Really memorable.
- mikeash 12y ago
  I agree, this is the first one I've seen that didn't annoy me, including some of Apple's past efforts (e.g. the Mac Pro page).
- colordrops 12y ago
  You'll probably like this then: http://acko.net/ http://acko.net/
  - Fuzzwah 12y ago
    You were correct. That is really fun to play with.
- calinet6 12y ago
  It actually has meaning, unlike most scroll captures. I also like how (about 3/4 down the page) they capture the background iMac image on the left and keep it "sticky" during scroll, but not completely stationary -- it still responds and gives slight feedback, which makes it 99% less annoying. Nice.
bsimpson 12y ago
FWIW, the only other 5k monitor I can find is from Dell. It's also $2500.[1] In other words, buy a Retina Cinema Display, get the computer to power it for free. [1]: http://www.maximumpc.com/dells_5k_monitor_pre_reviewed_2014 http://www.maximumpc.com/dells_5k_monitor_pre_reviewed_2014
- ceejayoz 12y ago
  I can't imagine it'll stay that way for long. 4k displays are already down to $300-500 at Amazon.
  - Tloewald 12y ago
    Shitty 4k displays have been cheap for a while. It's not a reasonable comparison. (My no-name brand Korean 27" IPS display was great until it frizzed out after 9 months.)
    - Audiophilip 12y ago
      Dell's 24" UP2414Q is an IPS 4K monitor with 99% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB coverage, and it has a 185 PPI panel that I'd argue is already in the "retina" range. Although with its ~€555 price it's not exactly in the $300-$500 range, but it's a close call, so I wouldn't call all 4K monitors around this price range "shitty" at all. Update: it works in 60Hz @ 4K.
      - _broody 12y ago
        It was twice as expensive at launch, though. I suspect the new Dell model will follow suit.
      - Tloewald 12y ago
        You can buy a good 24" display for a lot less than a similar 27" display. That's a whole different discussion.
        12y ago
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- ceejayoz 12y ago
  Whatever it is, my 2011 Macbook Pro despises it.
lprez 12y ago
As much as I'd love that display, I can not believe that a $2500 computer is shipping with 8GB of RAM in almost-2015.
- burntcookie90 12y ago
  Think of it a a $2500 5k monitor shipping with a computer for free
  - izacus 12y ago
    Unfortunately you can't hook up a powerful workstation to that monitor :/
    - jpb0104 12y ago
      If this holds true you should be able to: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3924#12 http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3924#12
      - jsheard 12y ago
        I don't think that will work here - TB2 is derived from DP1.2, which only goes up to 4K@60hz. You'll have to wait for TB3 to drive an external 5K monitor from a Mac.
        gambiting 12y ago
        Like I have posted elsewhere already: 5120x2880 = 14745600 pixels 14745600pixels x 3 colours, 1 byte each = 44236800 bytes 44236800/1024/1024 = 42.19MB each frame 42.19MB per frame x 60 frames a second = 2531.25MB. TB2 has a bandwidth of 20Gbps = 2560MB/s So yeah, theoretically TB2 has enough bandwidth. But it's a very tight fit.
        jsheard 12y ago
        Doesn't TB2 have two interleaved streams, one carrying DP1.2 and the other carrying 20Gbps PCI-E? Even if the PCI-E stream has enough bandwidth for 5K in theory, the ecosystem isn't in place to use it as a display output. That's what the DP part is for.
pptr1 12y ago
I am really curious about the technology behind the 5k iMac. I am not sure if there is any off the shelf GPU out there that can drive that display using retina type rendering. It's interesting they did a custom controller for the display timing (Timing Controller (TCON)) . They must have had to do deep customizations to use the AMD R9 M290X (comparable to the Radeon HD 7870) to drive it. If this is not innovative I am not sure what is, in terms of an engineering standpoint.
- slantyyz 12y ago
  Couldn't they do basically what is being done with current 4K monitors? I.e. treat the monitor like a dual screen using two connections?
  - slg 12y ago
    Most 4k displays do that due to bandwidth restrictions of current display cables. There is unlikely to be any GPU benefit to treating it as two separate displays since you still have to push the same number of pixels.
    - jacquesm 12y ago
      Except of course that both outputs could come from their own separate GPU. Plenty of dual GPU cards.
- slg 12y ago
  That was my first thought as well. I wonder if Apple has limited the refresh rate to something like 30hz or if they are banking on most apps simply using the downsized resolution instead of the full 5k. I can't imagine that card trying to play any modern game at anything close to that resolution for example.
  - nknighthb 12y ago
    Of course not. You don't even run recent graphics-intensive games at full resolution on the highest-end MBP with 1/3rd the pixels. We're still some ways from any consumer system taking full advantage of retina displays for high-end gaming.
call 12y ago
I can really FEEL the retina with this page. http://cl.ly/image/3L1b250W0o1r http://cl.ly/image/3L1b250W0o1r http://cl.ly/image/1C421h22391Z http://cl.ly/image/1C421h22391Z
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
gmays 12y ago
Hopefully they'll release an updated 5K version of the Thunderbolt Display. They haven't updated it in years, I was really hoping for it today.
- broabprobe 12y ago
  This seems like a rather large oversight.
  - alexgaribay 12y ago
    It's a technical limitation, not an oversight. No current Mac can output that much data over a single port.
  - n42 12y ago
    I think they might be waiting for a bigger refresh of the Mac Mini to power it
  - oddevan 12y ago
    With the amount of custom chips they needed for the display, it wouldn't surprise me if there are issues getting it to work as an external display that they haven't solved yet.
  - barumrho 12y ago
    They have to update their notebooks with Thunderbolt 3 before they can release 5K Thunderbolt Display. Thunderbolt 2 doesn't have enough bandwidth to push the pixels.
- milen 12y ago
  As I mentioned in the other thread, there's just not enough bandwidth to drive at 60fps over a single bus / single cable with DisplayPort 1.2 without compression (DP v1.2 gives about 17.3Gbps usable bandwidth which is just not enough). The iMac allows them to bypass that bottleneck by interfacing directly with the graphics card. My predication is that once we see Apple deploy Thunderbolt 3 / DisplayPort 1.3 (capable of 25.9Gbps usable bandwidth [1]), we'll see the Apple Cinema Display Retina. [1] http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/190130-displayport-1-3-unveiled-32-4-gbps-bandwidth-support-for-4k-60-fps-5k-and-8k http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/190130-displayport-1-...
fuzzythinker 12y ago
Very nice presentation of background image transforming into image on monitor.
- wehadfun 12y ago
  Yes i agree it was awesome
- zaroth 12y ago
  I'm not seeing it. Is it disabled for Chrome / Windows / Win7?
  - fuzzythinker 12y ago
    I'm on Chrome on OSX, scroll down to see effect. Chrome on win7 shouldn't be much different.
    - STRML 12y ago
      I'm not seeing it anymore on Chrome/OSX/MBPr, but I see it in Safari. They must have disabled it for performance reasons on some configurations.
ChikkaChiChi 12y ago
Thank you, Apple! They put the "Retina" display in the iMac. This means people will buy it. Higher volume means whoever (LG, I think?) is manufacturing the screens will have to produce more, driving the cost down. That means they will sell variants. Then their competition will also sell competitive options because nobody will want 1080p on a computer screen anymore. Monitor technology has been stalled for years. This is going to be a gigantic kick in the pants to the industry!
- w1ntermute 12y ago
  I can't wait to see these available from off-brand Korean resellers. I wonder how much cheaper they'll be.
  - RussianCow 12y ago
    The problem is, most GPUs can't drive that many pixels, which wasn't the case with the 1440p ones. So there is now a new set of issues with displays like these being used standalone.
  - danboarder 12y ago
    Similar sized 4K UHD 60hz monitors have been available between $500-$600 for a while now, Monoprice for example: http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=1130703&p_id=12156&seq=1&format=2 http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=...
    - elif 12y ago
      Or if you want one from a more reputable manufacturer and retailer: http://www.amazon.com/Philips-28-Inch-Monitor-resolution-288P6LJEB/dp/B00K15LQZM/ http://www.amazon.com/Philips-28-Inch-Monitor-resolution-288...
      - brownbat 12y ago
        Is monoprice considered disreputable? I've been using them for years for inexpensive yet high quality cables, I thought their reputation was pretty well established. Maybe I missed a scandal out there somewhere.
fuzzythinker 12y ago
Spec doesn't show what resolutions are supported...
sremani 12y ago
I have Lenovo Y50 4K and use Seiki 50-inch TV 4k TV which I sometimes use it as a monitor for my machine. 4K resolution is amazing but there is definitely diminishing returns. I am sure 5K would be definitely amazing but do not expect a lot if you are power user or a programmer. Designer and other artistic folks may have more to mine here.
- ctdonath 12y ago
  The 5K is a result of the Mac having an aspect ratio other than 4K & HD's 16:9, and resolving that difference with using a simple "retina" multiplier. Kicking 4K's butt when it's barely out the gate probably helped.
  - hollerith 12y ago
    >The 5K is a result of the Mac having an aspect ratio other than . . . 16:9 Huh? The aspect ratio of the 27-inch iMac is 16:9.
    - ctdonath 12y ago
      Sorry, mighta confused it with another Apple screen. Thought it was 16:10. Anyway, point is the 5K was the result of finding the sweet spot among several pixel-count factors.
Xcelerate 12y ago
Wow. I've been waiting for a screen like that for a decade now. My first Mac purchase (retina display Macbook) was made only on the basis of the screen, and I don't regret it at all. I hope they come out with a standalone display soon, but I'll have to upgrade my laptop I guess to power it. I don't think the current MBPR's can even drive a 5K screen?
autism_hurts 12y ago
God DAMN Apple's product pages are unparalleled.
kbutler 12y ago
I am far from an Apple fan boy, but I am so glad they are pushing the move for resolutions higher than 1920x1080, where monitors were stuck for far too long.
activeplum 12y ago
Can anyone tell me please will my 2013 Mac Pro handle two such new iMacs just as external displays at 60 Hz? Thanks.
- aet 12y ago
  Why would you do that?
  - activeplum 12y ago
    Well, because I need high-ppi displays:) That's the main reason I changed my 2011 iMac to the 2013 Mac Pro. Now it's weird: either a single 5k-screen with the new iMac, or two worse 4k-screens on Mac Pro.
- milen 12y ago
  Most likely, your 2013 Mac Pro won't be able to do that because a single cable / single bus DisplayPort v1.2 cannot provide the bandwidth for 5k (DP v1.2 provides about 17.3Gbps which is insufficient). Unless Apple provide a multi-cable solution for the 2013 Mac Pro when the 5k Thunderbolt display comes out, you won't be able to take advantage of 5k displays on it. My prediction is that we'll see an updated Mac Pro that also uses the Haswell Xeons (2013 Mac Pro uses last gen Ivy Bridge) and also DP v1.3 (which can support 5k displays).
- Igglyboo 12y ago
  These aren't monitors, they're full computers. You can't even use them as external monitors like the old iMacs could.
- jpalomaki 12y ago
  Anandtech has the following message in their story: Update: And for anyone wondering whether you can drive the 5K display as an external display using Target Display Mode, Apple has confirme that you cannot. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8623/hands-on-apples-imac-with-retina-display http://www.anandtech.com/show/8623/hands-on-apples-imac-with...
activeplum 12y ago
Can anyone tell me please will my 2013 Mac Pro handle two such new iMacs at external displays at 60 Hz? Thanks.
- devindotcom 12y ago
  No chance. The I/O is too slow - you'd need a mess of cables. As others pointed out, putting the computer inside the monitor bypasses this and lets the display driver interact directly with the display rather than sending the signal through a port and cable.
activeplum 12y ago
Can anyone tell me please will my 2013 Mac Pro handle two such new iMacs at external displays at 60 Hz? Thanks.
sillysaurus3 12y ago
I was curious what the exact resolutions were. A quick google search claims: "4k monitor": 3824 x 2160 "5k monitor": 5120 x 2880 That's a lot of pixels. It might be a good idea to be skeptical about spending >$1,500 on a 27-inch monitor in Q4 2014. It's difficult to notice any pixelation on a 27" screen at a resolution of 2560x1440, so clearly the reason to upgrade to 5120x2880 is for the extra screen workspace. But unless you have very good vision, you're probably not going to be able to read text at 5120x2880 without zooming. What's the advantage? For $1,000 you can buy two 27" 2560x1440 monitors, which is a huge amount of workspace. Also, a single $300 midrange GPU can drive both monitors at full resolution. A couple years ago, that was cutting-edge tech, but it cost ~$2600. Also, two monitors offer a better user experience than one monitor, since window management is a bit easier. Would anyone mind explaining whether the pros of a 5k monitor outweigh the hefty pricetag?
- masklinn 12y ago
  For $450 you can buy a 28" 4k monitor: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&sku=210-ACHO http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&c... Although I'm not sure how the display quality compares, that'll be for e.g. Anandtech to test. And other 5k monitors are in the same price range as the imac (except without the computer part)
- thedaveoflife 12y ago
  I would think for graphic design work the extra resolution would be well worth the extra price.
- devindotcom 12y ago
  I would say the pros are not there just yet; it would certainly look nicer, but not a whole lot nicer. Moving from 1366x768 on laptops to 2560x1560 (or whatever it is, can't remember off the top of my head) was a great shift. This isn't quite as big a deal. It would be very nice to be able to display full 4K detail or side-by-side 1080p videos for editing purposes. Photo editing will be great too, though you will have to resort to 'physical zoom' (i.e. moving your head closer) to do serious pixel peeping, rather than the old and probably superior technique of blowing up the pixels to larger than you'd see them normally. For gaming and such.... I'm not really sure. Downsampling is now the name of the game, i.e. rendering above the display rez and dropping it down, which has nice effects on IQ. Rendering 14.7 million pixels is a hell of a task to start with, and then you start getting all manner of masks, per-pixel effects, etc... the demands really multiply. Plus there's also a focus on high framerates, like 120, which we're not going to see at 4K or 5K for a gooood long while. It'll be years before things catch up at the mid-tier level of processors and GPUs. And 8 GB of RAM, I hardly need add, is entirely insufficient. tl;dr: for today's flat desktop purposes, probably not necessary but could be nice. for gaming and other purposes, probably reaching too far. but it's still a nice trend.
adnam 12y ago
ಠ_ಠ 6 apple.com links on the homepage
- canadaj 12y ago
  ...Yesterday it was Google. Both companies just announced a bunch of stuff and you're surprised to see it here?
Robadob 12y ago
It's interesting that they have dropped NVidia graphics, hopefully they won't for the rmbp line in spring seeing as I'm hoping to buy one then for CUDA development.
- Rafert 12y ago
  Why no OpenCL?
  - chrisbennet 12y ago
    It's been a while since I played with GPU stuff but it seems like OpenCL just hasn't gotten as much love/development as CUDA. Lest people think OpenCL is somehow at odds with NVIDIA: "The OpenCL standard was developed on NVIDIA GPUs and NVIDIA was the first company to demonstrate OpenCL code running on a GPU," [1] The Vice President of NVIDIA is (was?) the chair of the OpenCL working group (and president of the Kronos group). [1] http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1240224603372.html http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1240224603372.html
    - Ziron 12y ago
      NVIDIA are easily the ones holding it back at this point. Both AMD and Intel have OpenCL 2.0 support on windows, and Nvidia hasn't even shipped support for OpenCL 1.2. Nvidia obviously want OpenCL to die off and CUDA to do well.
      - m_mueller 12y ago
        Well, there's also Intel who decided to ship their accelerator product (MIC / Xeon Phi) without OpenCL support initially. Their big marketing angle was that HPC programmers could just use their existing OpenMP x86 code. This shows how Intel had no idea in what they're getting into, because accelerator programming needs to deal with different problems than on the CPU, regardless of whether you have a simple CUDA core or a MIC x86 [1]. Results have so far been rather poor because of that. Kepler GPUs with CUDA support are for that reason still the best tooled accelerators for HPC programming. [1] First of all, when you need on the order of thousands to tens of thousands of threads to saturate your cores, memory becomes a big issue again. Your threads have maybe 400k usable memory. Memory bandwidth is usually even a more important limitation - these systems have 2-3 times less bandwidth per physical thread than CPUs. This can be mitigated using a programming model that uses bandwidth very efficiently (e.g. stream programming like in CUDA, OpenCL) - an area where GPUs are traditionally more advanced, since they deal with this limitation since a long time. Don't get me wrong though, Intel will probably catch up at some point.
skrowl 12y ago
Funny how in their keynote they went on and on about how having a high resolution display is great... a month after they released the sub 1080p iPhone 6.
- MatthiasP 12y ago
  I would say a PPI of 326 still qualifies as high resolution display.
MatthiasP 12y ago
That price is cheaper than I expected, since Dell announced that they would charge $2500 for their 5K display. It is about time that 'retina' comes to the desktop, hopefully this will put more pressure on Microsoft and third party devs to actually make high DPI displays work with Windows. As it stands now, Apple has a monopoly on a usable high DPI environment (Assuming the usual quick adaption to this display of the OSX dev community). That may be enough for me to change over to OSX as daily driver, just think about how nice coding on this thing could be.
mrb 12y ago
This might be off-topic, but I instantly recognized the waterfall image at http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/ http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/ as being http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sk%C3%B3gafoss http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sk%C3%B3gafoss / https://www.google.com/search?q=Skógafoss&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=Skógafoss&tbm=isch :)
- maxmwood 12y ago
  Ah well spotted :) Icelands waterfalls seem very popular. "Dettifoss" is another featured in the opening scenes of Prometheus.
- kenferry 12y ago
  OS X 10.11, Skógafoss! :-)
rsync 12y ago
For. The. Love. Of. God., where is the retina macbook air ? Are we 3.5 years, or 4 years now since the original retina macbook was introduced ?
- ChikkaChiChi 12y ago
  I believe the tradeoff is that the battery would be murdered like a camp counselor in a horror movie. What's more shocking to me is the dearth of PC laptops using high resolution; and Microsoft's inability to support HiDPI with any sort of efficiency.
  - dragontamer 12y ago
    What's more shocking to me is the dearth of PC laptops using high resolution Wat? * Toshiba Kirabook * Lenovo Y50 4K * HP EliteBook (2560) * Dell XPS 11 (2560) * Samsung Series 9 (2560) You can buy laptops well above 1080p today... if you so desire. Hell, you could have bought them 2 years ago.
    - Igglyboo 12y ago
      You can, but most laptops being sold are still 1366 x 768.
      - dragontamer 12y ago
        Like... the Macbook Air. Most people don't seem to care about monitor resolution. Fact is a fact. Those who do care have _plenty_ of options. Windows based (Kirabook or Lenovo 4k), Mac based (Macbook Pro).
  - skeletonjelly 12y ago
    Typing this from my Lenovo W540. High DPI is good and all, but holy shit do programs vary between regular, tiny font, and large font. VMWare's remote desktop client (vmrc.exe) triggered via VCloud in browser renders at native, which requires me to squint and put my face 2 inches away from the screen.
post_break 12y ago
Better spring for the 4GB video card, 5k is going to eat up 2GB of video memory fast.
- jseliger 12y ago
  Better spring for the 4GB video card, 5k is going to eat up 2GB of video memory fast. Can you elaborate on this, or link to someone who has elaborated on it?
  - post_break 12y ago
    That resolution will take a lot of vram to push. Start gaming or editing on it and it will get crushed. Most 290x's start at 4GB, why Apple chose 2GB I don't know. http://www.digitalstormonline.com/unlocked/video-memory-usage-at-4k-uhd-resolutions-idnum146/ http://www.digitalstormonline.com/unlocked/video-memory-usag...
    - vidoc 12y ago
      Considering the lack of games on the mac paltform, this should not be too much of a problem eh ?
      - post_break 12y ago
        There are tons of current gens games for mac thanks to Steam and Mac ports.
      - Alphasite_ 12y ago
        Only 3090 on steam. Which is ~1/3 of the while windows back log. And a large chunk of the imported games are older games, so Linux and Mac both are making steady progress.
      - elif 12y ago
        not to mention running games with PlayOnMac (wine wrapper) or parallels. Honestly you can't name a game that won't play on mac.
swframe 12y ago
I wonder if apple will prevent rendering at full resolution like the retina macbook pros because the max font/icon size for many apps is too small. This would mean you are paying for a screen that can't render at the new fancy resolution because the resulting info would be too small to resolve by most people. Many computer users suffer from eye strain because they have to stare to resolve the information; their eyes dry and then each blink causes tiny scratches which over time causes serious damage.
- Igglyboo 12y ago
  They don't prevent rending at full resolution it's just disabled by default. You can switch it on in system preferences.
  - swframe 12y ago
    Please backup your claim with a link that shows how. This is an example of all the sites that I've found: http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/macbook-pro-retina-display-faq/macbook-pro-retina-display-hack-to-run-native-resolution.html http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/macbook-pr... It says ... One size that Apple does not offer is the actual native resolution of each display, no doubt because icons, text and other interface elements are too small for just about anyone to read. In any event, the issue is customers should check if this product will actually render the full 5k resolution without hacking and if it is usable at the resolution. It is abusive to sell a product with a spec that you can't actually use. But Apple is all about form over function.
    - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
      Thank golly space and pixels are not the same thing; you can always render more pixels in the same amount of space, keeping your UI quite usable and even improved, since rendering the same vector in 400 pixels will look much better compared to rendering it with 100 pixels. > It is abusive to sell a product with a spec that you can't actually use. Ya, if pixels and space were the same thing, Apple should be sued! Thankfully they aren't. > But Apple is all about form over function. Because good looking rendering of vectors and fonts is only about form and doesn't improve function. For sure. </sarcasm>
pdknsk 12y ago
When Dell announced their 5K monitor (which does almost certainly have the same panel, albeit probably not the same circuitry) about a month ago, barely anyone registered. This show the brand power and marketing might of Apple I guess. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8311741 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8311741
- ghshephard 12y ago
  ATP talked about the Dell 5K for several episodes - but they couldn't figure out how they could drive that many pixels from any of their systems (including Marco's Mac Pro) - Apple just solved that problem today, and is the first company to do so - which is what's getting so much attention. It's a real technological/integration leap forward. Credit where it's due.
  - pdknsk 12y ago
    I partially withdraw my comment and add: Apple has built a solution that people can use today.
- Igglyboo 12y ago
  Except that this is an all in one computer, not just a monitor. There's a miniscule amount of people that have the hardware to power that dell monitor. Plus the iMac costs the same and is an actual computer.
ambler0 12y ago
Has anyone figured out what the refresh rate of this display is going to be?
lazyjones 12y ago
I like the specs, but am wondering whether it is as quiet as a 2008 iMac 24" (I have one now). The parts are probably rated a bit higher TDP-wise. Any experiences yet, is there a noisy fan?
bogomipz 12y ago
Does each new Apple product really need a separate post on HN? Is there not enough media coverage on this stuff elsewhere?
activeplum 12y ago
The specs for the new retina iMac claim it supports an external display @3840x2160. But: 1. Will it be 60Hz? 2. Only one such display, right? Thanks.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
rmbe 12y ago
I wonder what the average power draw is.
jbarham 12y ago
This looks like a perfect 4K video editing rig: the 5K display is big enough to play 4K at 100% with lots of extra space for editor controls. Pair it with the Panasonic GH4 and you can shoot and edit cinema quality 4K footage for under $5k, which is amazing.
BillyParadise 12y ago
Get jiggy with that parallax scrollin'
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
thegenius 12y ago
Just got mine! http://i.imgur.com/KcvlmZ3.png http://i.imgur.com/KcvlmZ3.png
Skywing 12y ago
I've owned and used both a 4k monitor and a 144 Hz refresh rate monitor. I personally value the higher refresh rate over the higher resolution. My 4k monitor is actually difficult for me to use, because it feels like the software has not caught up to the resolution yet. Very little is optimized for 4k desktops, yet.
KobaQ 12y ago
Hmmm, impressive. But I (honest question) wonder how this will handle blu rays or other full HD content at full screen? All those pixels need to be interpolated an 60 (50) Hz ... Highly peronal: I hate all the marketing retina HD bla bla shit from Apple, but I love these beautiful iMacs. I want one :-).
visarga 12y ago
MacBook Air 11'' - scrolls smoothly in Chrome MacBookPro 13'' Retina - choppy scroll in Chrome So, the more advanced, 4x higher pixel count laptop was the worst in speed.
- userbinator 12y ago
  The screen has 4x more pixels, but the graphics subsystem isn't 4x faster.
- rsynnott 12y ago
  When were you looking at this? Chrome used to behave really badly on retina macs; it still behaves somewhat badly, but it's a lot better. Safari and Firefox don't have this problem, however.
- scrumper 12y ago
  Choppy scrolling on a 2014 MBPr here, Safari on Mavericks.
elnate 12y ago
I always enjoy the irony of the pictures in these ads. Those displays look awesome while using a quarter of my 1080 display.
vidyesh 12y ago
It is great for media professionals to have such a great display but consumer level isn't this bad? Isn't anyone concerned how horrible all our exiting media will look at this resolution? By horrible I mean, windowed of course would look excellent but beyond a certain size not so much maybe? Most media consumption is done on 1080p or below, not everyone is fortunate to stream 2K or 4K content yet and we are pushing to 5K.
ultrabenosaurus 12y ago
5K? Seriously? This shouldn't make me anywhere near as furious as it has done. Fucking Apple, yet again, does whatever they can to make sure their users aren't compatible with the rest of the world.
- wrboyce 12y ago
  What the hell are you on about? 5k is a very real resolution, it is double 1440p. It means you can have a 1440p looking display, but with retina scaling. I've got a 4k display, with scaling I have a 1080p looking display and as a result wouldn't want to go any bigger than 24". This is exactly the display I have been waiting for (only it has a computer inside it).
  - ultrabenosaurus 12y ago
    Of course it's a "very real resolution" are you an idiot? Any display made using current technologies uses a "very real resolution" because that's how displays work. What I was talking about, however, is that every other company under the Sun that has a relation to displays/media/TVs/whatever is pushing 4K and 8K as the next standards after Full HD. Yet, Apple in their infinite wisdom, go and pull a number out of their asses that isn't evenly divisible into those emerging standards - even if it is easily scalable into them. Why? What could they possibly gain besides consumer dependence on yet-another piece of proprietary Apple nonsense? Sure, the points being made about it pushing other companies to develop comparable tech for cheaper stands as Dell selling a display for the same price as an entire Mac computer is ridiculous. But so what? Apple diehards will get a 5K while the rest of the world goes with 4K and 8K, creating unnecessary disparity.
    - baq 12y ago
      do you have any idea what 8K even means or are you just trolling?
    - wrboyce 12y ago
      To reiterate my point, 5k is simply a doubling of the commonly used 1440p resolution allowing for retina scaling. Regarding "proprietary Apple nonsense", I direct you to the recently announced Dell 5k display… http://www.anandtech.com/show/8496/dell-previews-27inch-5k-ultrasharp-monitor-5120x2880 http://www.anandtech.com/show/8496/dell-previews-27inch-5k-u...
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Kiro 12y ago
Does this mean you have to do stuff differently when adapting your website for retina?
smenko 12y ago
Samsung had this in bla bla....
vans 12y ago
Master Xtrem top most over ultimate power. Penta HD 3D dolby monster hugely powerfull master. Chef sergeant ultra hydra peta wonderfull ultimately bestest. ... To the max ! ... throw up
ttty 12y ago
A similar screen would make win display correctly? From past experience windows is a mess at scaling when the DPI is high.
72deluxe 12y ago
Very impressive. I notice that the new Mac Mini has dropped in price to £300 here in the UK, although of a significantly lower (rubbish) spec than the lowest model we've seen before. If this runs fine, it looks like an attempt to make inroads into the "PC" market, as £300 + a screen is really in the economy PC market area, no?
- danbee 12y ago
  Where are you seeing £300? It's £400 (well, £399).
  - 72deluxe 12y ago
    Hmmmm new glasses needed. I really am wrong! Thanks!
fynd 12y ago
5K is great an all, if your GPU and connection interface can handle it. It takes roughly 17.2Gbps of bandwidth to drive a 4K @ 60 fps signal in a single stream (Single Stream Transport); DisplayPort 1.2 has just enough bandwidth to support a single 4K @ 60 fps SST stream, but 5K is far too large for the standard. This iMac comes stock with an R9-M290X(2012 GPU) which supports up to DisplayPort 1.2. To get the bandwidth needed for 5k@60hz on DP1.2, Apple would have to overclock the DisplayPort signal by 50-100% on single stream transport. It seems like the M295X upgrade is a necessity for this thing to render well.
- avens19 12y ago
  That is insane bandwidth

615 points by davidbarker 12y ago

I'm normally firmly in the "I hate websites that mess with the normal scrolling of a page" crowd. The scrolling transition at the top of this page really impressed me.

bshimmin 12y ago
Interestingly done - the huge image is broken up into 15 separate canvas elements and then the containing DIV is scaled with CSS transforms as you scroll. Not immensely clever, but a solution which performs pretty well in Chrome on my Mac, at least.
zaroth 12y ago
Zoom out the whole page to 33% shows an interesting perspective on the design. Monitors keep getting wider, web pages keep getting narrower and longer :-)
- ryanSrich 12y ago
  This is because your eyes never get wider. So it makes sense that the content would never get wider either. I feel like web apps are the only real use case (aside from experimentations) where using a fluid-width (the content grows with the screen) is appropriate.
century19 12y ago
Very impressed too, pretty stunning design. Really memorable.
mikeash 12y ago
I agree, this is the first one I've seen that didn't annoy me, including some of Apple's past efforts (e.g. the Mac Pro page).
colordrops 12y ago
You'll probably like this then: http://acko.net/ http://acko.net/
- Fuzzwah 12y ago
  You were correct. That is really fun to play with.
calinet6 12y ago
It actually has meaning, unlike most scroll captures. I also like how (about 3/4 down the page) they capture the background iMac image on the left and keep it "sticky" during scroll, but not completely stationary -- it still responds and gives slight feedback, which makes it 99% less annoying. Nice.

bsimpson 12y ago

FWIW, the only other 5k monitor I can find is from Dell. It's also $2500.[1] In other words, buy a Retina Cinema Display, get the computer to power it for free. [1]: http://www.maximumpc.com/dells_5k_monitor_pre_reviewed_2014 http://www.maximumpc.com/dells_5k_monitor_pre_reviewed_2014

ceejayoz 12y ago
I can't imagine it'll stay that way for long. 4k displays are already down to $300-500 at Amazon.
- Tloewald 12y ago
  Shitty 4k displays have been cheap for a while. It's not a reasonable comparison. (My no-name brand Korean 27" IPS display was great until it frizzed out after 9 months.)
  - Audiophilip 12y ago
    Dell's 24" UP2414Q is an IPS 4K monitor with 99% AdobeRGB and 100% sRGB coverage, and it has a 185 PPI panel that I'd argue is already in the "retina" range. Although with its ~€555 price it's not exactly in the $300-$500 range, but it's a close call, so I wouldn't call all 4K monitors around this price range "shitty" at all. Update: it works in 60Hz @ 4K.
    - _broody 12y ago
      It was twice as expensive at launch, though. I suspect the new Dell model will follow suit.
    - Tloewald 12y ago
      You can buy a good 24" display for a lot less than a similar 27" display. That's a whole different discussion.
      - 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

ceejayoz 12y ago
Whatever it is, my 2011 Macbook Pro despises it.

lprez 12y ago

As much as I'd love that display, I can not believe that a $2500 computer is shipping with 8GB of RAM in almost-2015.

burntcookie90 12y ago
Think of it a a $2500 5k monitor shipping with a computer for free
- izacus 12y ago
  Unfortunately you can't hook up a powerful workstation to that monitor :/
  - jpb0104 12y ago
    If this holds true you should be able to: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3924#12 http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3924#12
    - jsheard 12y ago
      I don't think that will work here - TB2 is derived from DP1.2, which only goes up to 4K@60hz. You'll have to wait for TB3 to drive an external 5K monitor from a Mac.
      - gambiting 12y ago
        Like I have posted elsewhere already: 5120x2880 = 14745600 pixels 14745600pixels x 3 colours, 1 byte each = 44236800 bytes 44236800/1024/1024 = 42.19MB each frame 42.19MB per frame x 60 frames a second = 2531.25MB. TB2 has a bandwidth of 20Gbps = 2560MB/s So yeah, theoretically TB2 has enough bandwidth. But it's a very tight fit.
        jsheard 12y ago
        Doesn't TB2 have two interleaved streams, one carrying DP1.2 and the other carrying 20Gbps PCI-E? Even if the PCI-E stream has enough bandwidth for 5K in theory, the ecosystem isn't in place to use it as a display output. That's what the DP part is for.

pptr1 12y ago

I am really curious about the technology behind the 5k iMac. I am not sure if there is any off the shelf GPU out there that can drive that display using retina type rendering. It's interesting they did a custom controller for the display timing (Timing Controller (TCON)) . They must have had to do deep customizations to use the AMD R9 M290X (comparable to the Radeon HD 7870) to drive it. If this is not innovative I am not sure what is, in terms of an engineering standpoint.

slantyyz 12y ago
Couldn't they do basically what is being done with current 4K monitors? I.e. treat the monitor like a dual screen using two connections?
- slg 12y ago
  Most 4k displays do that due to bandwidth restrictions of current display cables. There is unlikely to be any GPU benefit to treating it as two separate displays since you still have to push the same number of pixels.
  - jacquesm 12y ago
    Except of course that both outputs could come from their own separate GPU. Plenty of dual GPU cards.
slg 12y ago
That was my first thought as well. I wonder if Apple has limited the refresh rate to something like 30hz or if they are banking on most apps simply using the downsized resolution instead of the full 5k. I can't imagine that card trying to play any modern game at anything close to that resolution for example.
- nknighthb 12y ago
  Of course not. You don't even run recent graphics-intensive games at full resolution on the highest-end MBP with 1/3rd the pixels. We're still some ways from any consumer system taking full advantage of retina displays for high-end gaming.

call 12y ago

I can really FEEL the retina with this page. http://cl.ly/image/3L1b250W0o1r http://cl.ly/image/3L1b250W0o1r http://cl.ly/image/1C421h22391Z http://cl.ly/image/1C421h22391Z

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

gmays 12y ago

Hopefully they'll release an updated 5K version of the Thunderbolt Display. They haven't updated it in years, I was really hoping for it today.

broabprobe 12y ago
This seems like a rather large oversight.
- alexgaribay 12y ago
  It's a technical limitation, not an oversight. No current Mac can output that much data over a single port.
- n42 12y ago
  I think they might be waiting for a bigger refresh of the Mac Mini to power it
- oddevan 12y ago
  With the amount of custom chips they needed for the display, it wouldn't surprise me if there are issues getting it to work as an external display that they haven't solved yet.
- barumrho 12y ago
  They have to update their notebooks with Thunderbolt 3 before they can release 5K Thunderbolt Display. Thunderbolt 2 doesn't have enough bandwidth to push the pixels.
milen 12y ago
As I mentioned in the other thread, there's just not enough bandwidth to drive at 60fps over a single bus / single cable with DisplayPort 1.2 without compression (DP v1.2 gives about 17.3Gbps usable bandwidth which is just not enough). The iMac allows them to bypass that bottleneck by interfacing directly with the graphics card. My predication is that once we see Apple deploy Thunderbolt 3 / DisplayPort 1.3 (capable of 25.9Gbps usable bandwidth [1]), we'll see the Apple Cinema Display Retina. [1] http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/190130-displayport-1-3-unveiled-32-4-gbps-bandwidth-support-for-4k-60-fps-5k-and-8k http://www.extremetech.com/electronics/190130-displayport-1-...

fuzzythinker 12y ago

Very nice presentation of background image transforming into image on monitor.

wehadfun 12y ago
Yes i agree it was awesome
zaroth 12y ago
I'm not seeing it. Is it disabled for Chrome / Windows / Win7?
- fuzzythinker 12y ago
  I'm on Chrome on OSX, scroll down to see effect. Chrome on win7 shouldn't be much different.
  - STRML 12y ago
    I'm not seeing it anymore on Chrome/OSX/MBPr, but I see it in Safari. They must have disabled it for performance reasons on some configurations.

ChikkaChiChi 12y ago

Thank you, Apple! They put the "Retina" display in the iMac. This means people will buy it. Higher volume means whoever (LG, I think?) is manufacturing the screens will have to produce more, driving the cost down. That means they will sell variants. Then their competition will also sell competitive options because nobody will want 1080p on a computer screen anymore. Monitor technology has been stalled for years. This is going to be a gigantic kick in the pants to the industry!

w1ntermute 12y ago
I can't wait to see these available from off-brand Korean resellers. I wonder how much cheaper they'll be.
- RussianCow 12y ago
  The problem is, most GPUs can't drive that many pixels, which wasn't the case with the 1440p ones. So there is now a new set of issues with displays like these being used standalone.
- danboarder 12y ago
  Similar sized 4K UHD 60hz monitors have been available between $500-$600 for a while now, Monoprice for example: http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=1130703&p_id=12156&seq=1&format=2 http://www.monoprice.com/Product?c_id=113&cp_id=11307&cs_id=...
  - elif 12y ago
    Or if you want one from a more reputable manufacturer and retailer: http://www.amazon.com/Philips-28-Inch-Monitor-resolution-288P6LJEB/dp/B00K15LQZM/ http://www.amazon.com/Philips-28-Inch-Monitor-resolution-288...
    - brownbat 12y ago
      Is monoprice considered disreputable? I've been using them for years for inexpensive yet high quality cables, I thought their reputation was pretty well established. Maybe I missed a scandal out there somewhere.

fuzzythinker 12y ago

Spec doesn't show what resolutions are supported...

sremani 12y ago

I have Lenovo Y50 4K and use Seiki 50-inch TV 4k TV which I sometimes use it as a monitor for my machine. 4K resolution is amazing but there is definitely diminishing returns. I am sure 5K would be definitely amazing but do not expect a lot if you are power user or a programmer. Designer and other artistic folks may have more to mine here.

ctdonath 12y ago
The 5K is a result of the Mac having an aspect ratio other than 4K & HD's 16:9, and resolving that difference with using a simple "retina" multiplier. Kicking 4K's butt when it's barely out the gate probably helped.
- hollerith 12y ago
  >The 5K is a result of the Mac having an aspect ratio other than . . . 16:9 Huh? The aspect ratio of the 27-inch iMac is 16:9.
  - ctdonath 12y ago
    Sorry, mighta confused it with another Apple screen. Thought it was 16:10. Anyway, point is the 5K was the result of finding the sweet spot among several pixel-count factors.

Xcelerate 12y ago

Wow. I've been waiting for a screen like that for a decade now. My first Mac purchase (retina display Macbook) was made only on the basis of the screen, and I don't regret it at all. I hope they come out with a standalone display soon, but I'll have to upgrade my laptop I guess to power it. I don't think the current MBPR's can even drive a 5K screen?

autism_hurts 12y ago

God DAMN Apple's product pages are unparalleled.

kbutler 12y ago

I am far from an Apple fan boy, but I am so glad they are pushing the move for resolutions higher than 1920x1080, where monitors were stuck for far too long.

activeplum 12y ago

Can anyone tell me please will my 2013 Mac Pro handle two such new iMacs just as external displays at 60 Hz? Thanks.

aet 12y ago
Why would you do that?
- activeplum 12y ago
  Well, because I need high-ppi displays:) That's the main reason I changed my 2011 iMac to the 2013 Mac Pro. Now it's weird: either a single 5k-screen with the new iMac, or two worse 4k-screens on Mac Pro.
milen 12y ago
Most likely, your 2013 Mac Pro won't be able to do that because a single cable / single bus DisplayPort v1.2 cannot provide the bandwidth for 5k (DP v1.2 provides about 17.3Gbps which is insufficient). Unless Apple provide a multi-cable solution for the 2013 Mac Pro when the 5k Thunderbolt display comes out, you won't be able to take advantage of 5k displays on it. My prediction is that we'll see an updated Mac Pro that also uses the Haswell Xeons (2013 Mac Pro uses last gen Ivy Bridge) and also DP v1.3 (which can support 5k displays).
Igglyboo 12y ago
These aren't monitors, they're full computers. You can't even use them as external monitors like the old iMacs could.
jpalomaki 12y ago
Anandtech has the following message in their story: Update: And for anyone wondering whether you can drive the 5K display as an external display using Target Display Mode, Apple has confirme that you cannot. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8623/hands-on-apples-imac-with-retina-display http://www.anandtech.com/show/8623/hands-on-apples-imac-with...

activeplum 12y ago

Can anyone tell me please will my 2013 Mac Pro handle two such new iMacs at external displays at 60 Hz? Thanks.

devindotcom 12y ago
No chance. The I/O is too slow - you'd need a mess of cables. As others pointed out, putting the computer inside the monitor bypasses this and lets the display driver interact directly with the display rather than sending the signal through a port and cable.

activeplum 12y ago

Can anyone tell me please will my 2013 Mac Pro handle two such new iMacs at external displays at 60 Hz? Thanks.

sillysaurus3 12y ago

I was curious what the exact resolutions were. A quick google search claims: "4k monitor": 3824 x 2160 "5k monitor": 5120 x 2880 That's a lot of pixels. It might be a good idea to be skeptical about spending >$1,500 on a 27-inch monitor in Q4 2014. It's difficult to notice any pixelation on a 27" screen at a resolution of 2560x1440, so clearly the reason to upgrade to 5120x2880 is for the extra screen workspace. But unless you have very good vision, you're probably not going to be able to read text at 5120x2880 without zooming. What's the advantage? For $1,000 you can buy two 27" 2560x1440 monitors, which is a huge amount of workspace. Also, a single $300 midrange GPU can drive both monitors at full resolution. A couple years ago, that was cutting-edge tech, but it cost ~$2600. Also, two monitors offer a better user experience than one monitor, since window management is a bit easier. Would anyone mind explaining whether the pros of a 5k monitor outweigh the hefty pricetag?

masklinn 12y ago
For $450 you can buy a 28" 4k monitor: http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&sku=210-ACHO http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&c... Although I'm not sure how the display quality compares, that'll be for e.g. Anandtech to test. And other 5k monitors are in the same price range as the imac (except without the computer part)
thedaveoflife 12y ago
I would think for graphic design work the extra resolution would be well worth the extra price.
devindotcom 12y ago
I would say the pros are not there just yet; it would certainly look nicer, but not a whole lot nicer. Moving from 1366x768 on laptops to 2560x1560 (or whatever it is, can't remember off the top of my head) was a great shift. This isn't quite as big a deal. It would be very nice to be able to display full 4K detail or side-by-side 1080p videos for editing purposes. Photo editing will be great too, though you will have to resort to 'physical zoom' (i.e. moving your head closer) to do serious pixel peeping, rather than the old and probably superior technique of blowing up the pixels to larger than you'd see them normally. For gaming and such.... I'm not really sure. Downsampling is now the name of the game, i.e. rendering above the display rez and dropping it down, which has nice effects on IQ. Rendering 14.7 million pixels is a hell of a task to start with, and then you start getting all manner of masks, per-pixel effects, etc... the demands really multiply. Plus there's also a focus on high framerates, like 120, which we're not going to see at 4K or 5K for a gooood long while. It'll be years before things catch up at the mid-tier level of processors and GPUs. And 8 GB of RAM, I hardly need add, is entirely insufficient. tl;dr: for today's flat desktop purposes, probably not necessary but could be nice. for gaming and other purposes, probably reaching too far. but it's still a nice trend.

adnam 12y ago

ಠ_ಠ 6 apple.com links on the homepage

canadaj 12y ago
...Yesterday it was Google. Both companies just announced a bunch of stuff and you're surprised to see it here?

Robadob 12y ago

It's interesting that they have dropped NVidia graphics, hopefully they won't for the rmbp line in spring seeing as I'm hoping to buy one then for CUDA development.

Rafert 12y ago
Why no OpenCL?
- chrisbennet 12y ago
  It's been a while since I played with GPU stuff but it seems like OpenCL just hasn't gotten as much love/development as CUDA. Lest people think OpenCL is somehow at odds with NVIDIA: "The OpenCL standard was developed on NVIDIA GPUs and NVIDIA was the first company to demonstrate OpenCL code running on a GPU," [1] The Vice President of NVIDIA is (was?) the chair of the OpenCL working group (and president of the Kronos group). [1] http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1240224603372.html http://www.nvidia.com/object/io_1240224603372.html
  - Ziron 12y ago
    NVIDIA are easily the ones holding it back at this point. Both AMD and Intel have OpenCL 2.0 support on windows, and Nvidia hasn't even shipped support for OpenCL 1.2. Nvidia obviously want OpenCL to die off and CUDA to do well.
    - m_mueller 12y ago
      Well, there's also Intel who decided to ship their accelerator product (MIC / Xeon Phi) without OpenCL support initially. Their big marketing angle was that HPC programmers could just use their existing OpenMP x86 code. This shows how Intel had no idea in what they're getting into, because accelerator programming needs to deal with different problems than on the CPU, regardless of whether you have a simple CUDA core or a MIC x86 [1]. Results have so far been rather poor because of that. Kepler GPUs with CUDA support are for that reason still the best tooled accelerators for HPC programming. [1] First of all, when you need on the order of thousands to tens of thousands of threads to saturate your cores, memory becomes a big issue again. Your threads have maybe 400k usable memory. Memory bandwidth is usually even a more important limitation - these systems have 2-3 times less bandwidth per physical thread than CPUs. This can be mitigated using a programming model that uses bandwidth very efficiently (e.g. stream programming like in CUDA, OpenCL) - an area where GPUs are traditionally more advanced, since they deal with this limitation since a long time. Don't get me wrong though, Intel will probably catch up at some point.

skrowl 12y ago

Funny how in their keynote they went on and on about how having a high resolution display is great... a month after they released the sub 1080p iPhone 6.

MatthiasP 12y ago
I would say a PPI of 326 still qualifies as high resolution display.

MatthiasP 12y ago

That price is cheaper than I expected, since Dell announced that they would charge $2500 for their 5K display. It is about time that 'retina' comes to the desktop, hopefully this will put more pressure on Microsoft and third party devs to actually make high DPI displays work with Windows. As it stands now, Apple has a monopoly on a usable high DPI environment (Assuming the usual quick adaption to this display of the OSX dev community). That may be enough for me to change over to OSX as daily driver, just think about how nice coding on this thing could be.

mrb 12y ago

This might be off-topic, but I instantly recognized the waterfall image at http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/ http://www.apple.com/imac-with-retina/ as being http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sk%C3%B3gafoss http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sk%C3%B3gafoss / https://www.google.com/search?q=Skógafoss&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=Skógafoss&tbm=isch :)

maxmwood 12y ago
Ah well spotted :) Icelands waterfalls seem very popular. "Dettifoss" is another featured in the opening scenes of Prometheus.
kenferry 12y ago
OS X 10.11, Skógafoss! :-)

rsync 12y ago

For. The. Love. Of. God., where is the retina macbook air ? Are we 3.5 years, or 4 years now since the original retina macbook was introduced ?

ChikkaChiChi 12y ago
I believe the tradeoff is that the battery would be murdered like a camp counselor in a horror movie. What's more shocking to me is the dearth of PC laptops using high resolution; and Microsoft's inability to support HiDPI with any sort of efficiency.
- dragontamer 12y ago
  What's more shocking to me is the dearth of PC laptops using high resolution Wat? * Toshiba Kirabook * Lenovo Y50 4K * HP EliteBook (2560) * Dell XPS 11 (2560) * Samsung Series 9 (2560) You can buy laptops well above 1080p today... if you so desire. Hell, you could have bought them 2 years ago.
  - Igglyboo 12y ago
    You can, but most laptops being sold are still 1366 x 768.
    - dragontamer 12y ago
      Like... the Macbook Air. Most people don't seem to care about monitor resolution. Fact is a fact. Those who do care have _plenty_ of options. Windows based (Kirabook or Lenovo 4k), Mac based (Macbook Pro).
- skeletonjelly 12y ago
  Typing this from my Lenovo W540. High DPI is good and all, but holy shit do programs vary between regular, tiny font, and large font. VMWare's remote desktop client (vmrc.exe) triggered via VCloud in browser renders at native, which requires me to squint and put my face 2 inches away from the screen.

post_break 12y ago

Better spring for the 4GB video card, 5k is going to eat up 2GB of video memory fast.

jseliger 12y ago
Better spring for the 4GB video card, 5k is going to eat up 2GB of video memory fast. Can you elaborate on this, or link to someone who has elaborated on it?
- post_break 12y ago
  That resolution will take a lot of vram to push. Start gaming or editing on it and it will get crushed. Most 290x's start at 4GB, why Apple chose 2GB I don't know. http://www.digitalstormonline.com/unlocked/video-memory-usage-at-4k-uhd-resolutions-idnum146/ http://www.digitalstormonline.com/unlocked/video-memory-usag...
  - vidoc 12y ago
    Considering the lack of games on the mac paltform, this should not be too much of a problem eh ?
    - post_break 12y ago
      There are tons of current gens games for mac thanks to Steam and Mac ports.
    - Alphasite_ 12y ago
      Only 3090 on steam. Which is ~1/3 of the while windows back log. And a large chunk of the imported games are older games, so Linux and Mac both are making steady progress.
    - elif 12y ago
      not to mention running games with PlayOnMac (wine wrapper) or parallels. Honestly you can't name a game that won't play on mac.

swframe 12y ago

I wonder if apple will prevent rendering at full resolution like the retina macbook pros because the max font/icon size for many apps is too small. This would mean you are paying for a screen that can't render at the new fancy resolution because the resulting info would be too small to resolve by most people. Many computer users suffer from eye strain because they have to stare to resolve the information; their eyes dry and then each blink causes tiny scratches which over time causes serious damage.

Igglyboo 12y ago
They don't prevent rending at full resolution it's just disabled by default. You can switch it on in system preferences.
- swframe 12y ago
  Please backup your claim with a link that shows how. This is an example of all the sites that I've found: http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/macbook-pro-retina-display-faq/macbook-pro-retina-display-hack-to-run-native-resolution.html http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/macbook-pr... It says ... One size that Apple does not offer is the actual native resolution of each display, no doubt because icons, text and other interface elements are too small for just about anyone to read. In any event, the issue is customers should check if this product will actually render the full 5k resolution without hacking and if it is usable at the resolution. It is abusive to sell a product with a spec that you can't actually use. But Apple is all about form over function.
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    Thank golly space and pixels are not the same thing; you can always render more pixels in the same amount of space, keeping your UI quite usable and even improved, since rendering the same vector in 400 pixels will look much better compared to rendering it with 100 pixels. > It is abusive to sell a product with a spec that you can't actually use. Ya, if pixels and space were the same thing, Apple should be sued! Thankfully they aren't. > But Apple is all about form over function. Because good looking rendering of vectors and fonts is only about form and doesn't improve function. For sure. </sarcasm>

pdknsk 12y ago

When Dell announced their 5K monitor (which does almost certainly have the same panel, albeit probably not the same circuitry) about a month ago, barely anyone registered. This show the brand power and marketing might of Apple I guess. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8311741 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8311741

ghshephard 12y ago
ATP talked about the Dell 5K for several episodes - but they couldn't figure out how they could drive that many pixels from any of their systems (including Marco's Mac Pro) - Apple just solved that problem today, and is the first company to do so - which is what's getting so much attention. It's a real technological/integration leap forward. Credit where it's due.
- pdknsk 12y ago
  I partially withdraw my comment and add: Apple has built a solution that people can use today.
Igglyboo 12y ago
Except that this is an all in one computer, not just a monitor. There's a miniscule amount of people that have the hardware to power that dell monitor. Plus the iMac costs the same and is an actual computer.

ambler0 12y ago

Has anyone figured out what the refresh rate of this display is going to be?

lazyjones 12y ago

I like the specs, but am wondering whether it is as quiet as a 2008 iMac 24" (I have one now). The parts are probably rated a bit higher TDP-wise. Any experiences yet, is there a noisy fan?

bogomipz 12y ago

Does each new Apple product really need a separate post on HN? Is there not enough media coverage on this stuff elsewhere?

activeplum 12y ago

The specs for the new retina iMac claim it supports an external display @3840x2160. But: 1. Will it be 60Hz? 2. Only one such display, right? Thanks.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

rmbe 12y ago

I wonder what the average power draw is.

jbarham 12y ago

This looks like a perfect 4K video editing rig: the 5K display is big enough to play 4K at 100% with lots of extra space for editor controls. Pair it with the Panasonic GH4 and you can shoot and edit cinema quality 4K footage for under $5k, which is amazing.

BillyParadise 12y ago

Get jiggy with that parallax scrollin'

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

thegenius 12y ago

Just got mine! http://i.imgur.com/KcvlmZ3.png http://i.imgur.com/KcvlmZ3.png

Skywing 12y ago

I've owned and used both a 4k monitor and a 144 Hz refresh rate monitor. I personally value the higher refresh rate over the higher resolution. My 4k monitor is actually difficult for me to use, because it feels like the software has not caught up to the resolution yet. Very little is optimized for 4k desktops, yet.

KobaQ 12y ago

Hmmm, impressive. But I (honest question) wonder how this will handle blu rays or other full HD content at full screen? All those pixels need to be interpolated an 60 (50) Hz ... Highly peronal: I hate all the marketing retina HD bla bla shit from Apple, but I love these beautiful iMacs. I want one :-).

visarga 12y ago

MacBook Air 11'' - scrolls smoothly in Chrome MacBookPro 13'' Retina - choppy scroll in Chrome So, the more advanced, 4x higher pixel count laptop was the worst in speed.

userbinator 12y ago
The screen has 4x more pixels, but the graphics subsystem isn't 4x faster.
rsynnott 12y ago
When were you looking at this? Chrome used to behave really badly on retina macs; it still behaves somewhat badly, but it's a lot better. Safari and Firefox don't have this problem, however.
scrumper 12y ago
Choppy scrolling on a 2014 MBPr here, Safari on Mavericks.

elnate 12y ago

I always enjoy the irony of the pictures in these ads. Those displays look awesome while using a quarter of my 1080 display.

vidyesh 12y ago

It is great for media professionals to have such a great display but consumer level isn't this bad? Isn't anyone concerned how horrible all our exiting media will look at this resolution? By horrible I mean, windowed of course would look excellent but beyond a certain size not so much maybe? Most media consumption is done on 1080p or below, not everyone is fortunate to stream 2K or 4K content yet and we are pushing to 5K.

ultrabenosaurus 12y ago

5K? Seriously? This shouldn't make me anywhere near as furious as it has done. Fucking Apple, yet again, does whatever they can to make sure their users aren't compatible with the rest of the world.

wrboyce 12y ago
What the hell are you on about? 5k is a very real resolution, it is double 1440p. It means you can have a 1440p looking display, but with retina scaling. I've got a 4k display, with scaling I have a 1080p looking display and as a result wouldn't want to go any bigger than 24". This is exactly the display I have been waiting for (only it has a computer inside it).
- ultrabenosaurus 12y ago
  Of course it's a "very real resolution" are you an idiot? Any display made using current technologies uses a "very real resolution" because that's how displays work. What I was talking about, however, is that every other company under the Sun that has a relation to displays/media/TVs/whatever is pushing 4K and 8K as the next standards after Full HD. Yet, Apple in their infinite wisdom, go and pull a number out of their asses that isn't evenly divisible into those emerging standards - even if it is easily scalable into them. Why? What could they possibly gain besides consumer dependence on yet-another piece of proprietary Apple nonsense? Sure, the points being made about it pushing other companies to develop comparable tech for cheaper stands as Dell selling a display for the same price as an entire Mac computer is ridiculous. But so what? Apple diehards will get a 5K while the rest of the world goes with 4K and 8K, creating unnecessary disparity.
  - baq 12y ago
    do you have any idea what 8K even means or are you just trolling?
  - wrboyce 12y ago
    To reiterate my point, 5k is simply a doubling of the commonly used 1440p resolution allowing for retina scaling. Regarding "proprietary Apple nonsense", I direct you to the recently announced Dell 5k display… http://www.anandtech.com/show/8496/dell-previews-27inch-5k-ultrasharp-monitor-5120x2880 http://www.anandtech.com/show/8496/dell-previews-27inch-5k-u...

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Kiro 12y ago

Does this mean you have to do stuff differently when adapting your website for retina?

smenko 12y ago

Samsung had this in bla bla....

vans 12y ago

Master Xtrem top most over ultimate power. Penta HD 3D dolby monster hugely powerfull master. Chef sergeant ultra hydra peta wonderfull ultimately bestest. ... To the max ! ... throw up

ttty 12y ago

A similar screen would make win display correctly? From past experience windows is a mess at scaling when the DPI is high.

72deluxe 12y ago

Very impressive. I notice that the new Mac Mini has dropped in price to £300 here in the UK, although of a significantly lower (rubbish) spec than the lowest model we've seen before. If this runs fine, it looks like an attempt to make inroads into the "PC" market, as £300 + a screen is really in the economy PC market area, no?

danbee 12y ago
Where are you seeing £300? It's £400 (well, £399).
- 72deluxe 12y ago
  Hmmmm new glasses needed. I really am wrong! Thanks!

fynd 12y ago

5K is great an all, if your GPU and connection interface can handle it. It takes roughly 17.2Gbps of bandwidth to drive a 4K @ 60 fps signal in a single stream (Single Stream Transport); DisplayPort 1.2 has just enough bandwidth to support a single 4K @ 60 fps SST stream, but 5K is far too large for the standard. This iMac comes stock with an R9-M290X(2012 GPU) which supports up to DisplayPort 1.2. To get the bandwidth needed for 5k@60hz on DP1.2, Apple would have to overclock the DisplayPort signal by 50-100% on single stream transport. It seems like the M295X upgrade is a necessity for this thing to render well.

avens19 12y ago
That is insane bandwidth