Does the new Macbook Pro 15" (late 2013) supports 4K via Thunderbolt/Displayport?

johnniecache wrote:

PaintingStar wrote:

I've completely given up on the 4K idea, but am waiting patiently for a Thunderbolt "2" Display (TD) update.

Well, mission accomplished?

And no wonder the TD has not been updated, even with the iMac features it will still be a dinosaur standing next to a retina MBP.

Actually even 4k is not enough, it needs to be at least 5k to be a proper retina 27" display. So it will take time, I am guessing late 2014.

Otherwise, I may go for something like this:

LG-29UM95

http://www.lg.com/be_fr/moniteurs/lg-29UM95-ips-monitor

the "scaled resolution" is not a solution to this problem! It would be insane to buy a 4k display and run it in 1080p scaled mode.

The only possibility would be to force the "Retina Display Setting", which has a larger (not scaled!) GUI. Maybe this is possible through an EDID hack.

do you have some more informaion on this?

Apple says that the Retina GUI is not scaled:

Scaled resolutions do not offer the same visual quality as the Retina setting. Scaled resolutions may also impact graphics performance depending on which applications you are using.

i believe that the retina gui is simply natively twice the size of the normal gui. Also modern websites would load content like images and backgrounds @2x the size when a retina display is found (pixel-device-ratio). With the retina setting its not scaled, only on a scaled resolution setting it will be scaled down again (smaller)

johnniecache wrote:

i believe that the retina gui is simply natively twice the size of the normal gui. Also modern websites would load content like images and backgrounds @2x the size when a retina display is found (pixel-device-ratio). With the retina setting its not scaled, only on a scaled resolution setting it will be scaled down again (smaller)

absolutely right.

"retina" Mode is ok on a Macbook with 221ppi, or e.g. on a Dell UP2414Q

But on a 31.5" with Ultra HD you usually want to use scaled modes.

for me, (virtual) 2560x1440 HiDPi is absolutely usable on a 31.5" Ultra HD desktop monitor. That would be a pixel-device-ratio of 1.5

4K will always have the dilemma of tiny text vs more desktop space and the compromise either way is not optimal. On the other hand, the newly announced ultrawide screens like the LG 29UM95 (3440x1440) seems to be a better compromise for Mac since it's not too big physically, not too small, text will not be too tiny and still you can get extended desktop space and 129 PPI (compared to 109 PPI of current Thunderbolt display), which becomes retina equivalent at 27 inches distance (an ideal distance for most people).

In fact, I think that Apple may rather release an update to the Thunderbolt display with exactly the same size and resolution as the LG29UM95.

Having a retina mbp, i personally don't want any display below 200ppi any more. I believe apple has solved this very well with the retina gui, only that it brings us back to the real estate problem on small displays.

Actually i think that the solution would be 300ppi for the small 13" and 15" displays and 220ppi would be perfect for 27", 30" and 32". This is the way to go. I also understand that apple cant put this on the market before prices have settled for such panels. (around 1k EUR i guess)

Big question remains if ever there will be support for the 2013 MBPr's

I like Windows 8.1. People,talk a lot of trash on it, but I def don't mind it... I placed an order for the new Mac Pro but it hasn't shipped yet. I'm thinking of canceling amd building a machine. Bigger, more noise but fully update-able and expandable for half the cost. Ha**intosh all day...

I could never live without either OS to be honest as they both have their pros and cons. The pros of Apple is usually better for the average user and design and the pros of Windows is more in depth customizability and business. I usually switch back and forth between both Windows and Mac on a daily basis. They are both good operating systems but I would never choose one over the other.

i am pretty sure that somebody already had a 13" Iris Standard Retina MBP running 4k@60Hz. You can also run two 2560x1440 displays daisy chained plus the retina display on the MBP, so why shouldnt it be able to handle one 4k display instead.

Also i dont believe that apple cares so much about Intel or Nvidia releasing drivers both or only one of them. I actually have a feeling that the notebook markets is loosing weight every day, money is made with tablets and smartphones nowadays. Who cares about a handful of nerds trying to run the first 4k dsiplay via a MST hack.

Sorry, I just meant because NVIDIA's state of drivers only applies to the laptops with NVIDIA GPUs. Intel appears to be even farther behind NVIDIA in MST 60Hz support, but it could be possible. But the other post made a great point - Apple probably would wait until BOTH drivers were capable rather than alienate some of the Macbook Pro line...

I completely agree that if you can do two 2,560 monitors you should be able to do one 4K monitor, and the DisplayPort 1.2 HBR protocol allows it, so I don't understand why MST is required - and that's what needs the special drivers. Maybe someone with behind the scenes GPU knowledge could explain why MST is needed?

I agree that while laptops are < 10% of revenue, you NEED them - they can't disappear. And a 2560 display barely has the resolution to display an iPad app -> if a 13" iPad Pro arrives with an even higher desktop resolution, then we'll really need 4K to write apps for them. 🙂 I think this is most significant, because it means people inside Apple might start demanding 4K.

IMO 30 Hz shouldn't be so bad, but most people report that they can't see the cursor move, so maybe there's driver issues slowing even 30 Hz down?

jksdfjk wrote:

mg428 wrote:

I don't see any reason why your statements are not applicable to low-end late 2013 rMBPs, including the 13-inch ones using Iris.

According to http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/quick-reference-guide-to-intel-processo r-graphics only Intel 5200 (Iris Pro) is cappable of 3840x2160@60Hz

And Intel 5200 Graphics is only available on Intel's Core i7 H-Processors

Thanks for pointing this out!

johnniecache wrote:

i am pretty sure that somebody already had a 13" Iris Standard Retina MBP running 4k@60Hz. You can also run two 2560x1440 displays daisy chained plus the retina display on the MBP, so why shouldnt it be able to handle one 4k display instead.

I don't know how this happens but according to the specs sheet it should not. When you say "pretty sure", are you 100% sure? Would you mind finding and referencing your source?

jdiamond wrote:

But the other post made a great point - Apple probably would wait until BOTH drivers were capable rather than alienate some of the Macbook Pro line...

If it turns out that Iris (Standard) cannot output 4k@60Hz (which seems to be the case according to the specs), then Apple would likely wait for a new line of rMBP where all configurations within are capable of outputting 4k@60Hz so that Apple 1) would not alinenate some of its current Haswell rMBP customers; and 2) can market such new line as if it has gained a brand new feature.

mg428 wrote:

johnniecache wrote:

i am pretty sure that somebody already had a 13" Iris Standard Retina MBP running 4k@60Hz. You can also run two 2560x1440 displays daisy chained plus the retina display on the MBP, so why shouldnt it be able to handle one 4k display instead.

I don't know how this happens but according to the specs sheet it should not. When you say "pretty sure", are you 100% sure? Would you mind finding and referencing your source?

I was just thinking if so far any forumite who owns a 13-inch Haswell rMBP (which comes with Iris) has confirmed he can output 4k@60 Hz when running Windows? If so, then it would confirm Iris is also capable of such output, contrary to what the specs sheet says.

mg428 wrote:

I was just thinking if so far any forumite who owns a 13-inch Haswell rMBP (which comes with Iris) has confirmed he can output 4k@60 Hz when running Windows? If so, then it would confirm Iris is also capable of such output, contrary to what the specs sheet says.

Everything i found was about an nvidia equipped 15" macbook.

According to Intels Reference Guide linked above, 4k@60 Hz is only available on the Iris Pro 5200, that is only available in i7 quad-core models. Macbook Pro 13" hast Intel Iris 5100 Graphics.