Powering 30" display @ 2560 x 1600

Ok, so ive got a 30" Dell 3007WFP-HC display and im currently running it on a PC. However, I got the new 24" imac for at work, after a week of using it im pretty much ready to ditch my PC at home (which was dated anyway) for a new MAC. This is where I come to a bit of a problem.

Am I right in thinking that the only way i can power my display at the full resolution is by getting either a Macbook Pro or a Mac Pro?

I hope not as im just not prepared to pay that much for a mac that wont be anywhere nere as powerful as the price equivalent PC. I was rather hoping to get a Mac Mini, or another 24" imac then run the 30" off one of those.

Surely this cant be right? The only desktop that powers the 2560 x 1600 res is the mac pro, I just find that insane, seeing as the imac has a graphics card that SHOULD have Dual DVI-D out. This must actually mean they have had it removed or a special downgraded version has been added to all imacs.

quantic said:

...seeing as the imac has a graphics card that SHOULD have Dual DVI-D out. This must actually mean they have had it removed or a special downgraded version has been added to all imacs.

Click to expand...

im not sure if this part of your post is true... but the rest is accurate.

Why dosnt the iMac have Dual DVI-D out??? only Mr. Jobs knows for sure.

Well, I cannot really understand it. If you buy the graphics card that comes in the imac, either separately or in a PC it comes with at least one dual-link DVI-D.

I know because my pc has exactly the same one. This means that they have deliberately made it so that the only desktop that can run the 30ACD is the mac pro.

God, that is some very evil product placement. Such a shame too, OSX 10.4/10.5 is great.

quantic said:

Well, I cannot really understand it. If you buy the graphics card that comes in the imac, either separately or in a PC it comes with at least one dual-link DVI-D.

I know because my pc has exactly the same one. This means that they have deliberately made it so that the only desktop that can run the 30ACD is the mac pro.

God, that is some very evil product placement. Such a shame too, OSX 10.4/10.5 is great.

Click to expand...

The graphics card on an iMac is built into the logic board. It is not a seperate card like it is found on a desktop tower. There is a dvi out to a second monitor. Whether the graphics card is rated for a 30" monitor is something totally different. The graphics cards in the iMac arent high end and not rated for a 30" monitor.
Maybe Apple assumes high end users will use their high end computer.

Yeah but thats just it? 1500pounds for a top spec imac that wont even power a single 30" monitor?

Where as you could get a PC with SLI 8800GTX for the same price, that will power 4?

"Maybe Apple assumes high end users will use their high end computer."

Id quite like to make that choice on my own and would assume something costing 1500pounds was high-end.

Remember quantic, the assumption is that most users will use the iMac's built in screen. Only a very small percentage will go beyond that. I think Apple's choices in this area make good sense, given the market they were going after. I think for you, the Mac Pro may be the right (although expensive) choice.

mac57 said:

Remember quantic, the assumption is that most users will use the iMac's built in screen. Only a very small percentage will go beyond that. I think Apple's choices in this area make good sense, given the market they were going after. I think for you, the Mac Pro may be the right (although expensive) choice.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I had a CD iMac before my Mac Pro and never imagined putting a 30" monitor up to it. 30" seems a bit much as a second monitor and somewhat overpowering.

quantic said:

Where as you could get a PC with SLI 8800GTX for the same price, that will power 4?
Id quite like to make that choice on my own and would assume something costing 1500pounds was high-end.

Click to expand...

You're not really comparing a random fruit with that same random fruit. (I would say apples with apples but that might get confusing.) If people could pick whatever video card they want in an iMac, they probably wouldn't put in what Apple did. Plus, you're buying a Mac, not a PC. Prices are higher for many reasons. No one said you had to buy one.

If I was Steve Jobs, I'd make a Mac Pro Mini that was $700 cheaper than the Mac Pro. But I am not Jobs so there is no Mac Pro Mini so bought the Mac Pro.

Whether the graphics card is rated for a 30" monitor is something totally different. The graphics cards in the iMac arent high end and not rated for a 30" monitor.

Click to expand...

The max resolution for the Radeon HD2600 is 2560 x 1600. Ie. suitable for a 30" display.

Alexis said:

The max resolution for the Radeon HD2600 is 2560 x 1600. Ie. suitable for a 30" display.

Click to expand...

Specs copied and pasted from the Apple.com website:

Support for external display in extended desktop mode
Digital resolutions up to 1920 by 1200
Analog resolutions up to 2048 by 1536