Getting max resolution with NEC PA302W on new Mac Pro

[Rob Reiter]

A client of mine has a new Mac Pro and NEC PA302w monitor. Witht the supplied DVI-D cable and a Mini Display Port adapter she can only get 1920 1200 resolution. The monitor also has ports for Mini Display port, Display Port and HDMI. Is it a matter of choosing a different port to get the 2560x1600 resolution this monitor is capable of?

[Czornyj]

Use mDP - DP cable (AFAIK should be in the box). You need active dual-link DVI adapter to get full 2560x1600px resolution, so it won't work with standard mDP-DVI adapter.

[AlterEgo]

Use mDP - DP cable (AFAIK should be in the box). You need active dual-link DVI adapter to get full 2560x1600px resolution, so it won't work with standard mDP-DVI adapter.

can't you use HDMI port in his monitor too ? I least I can drive my 2560x1440 through HDMI (dGPU GTX 870m + iGPU 4600)

[Czornyj]

can't you use HDMI port in his monitor too ? I least I can drive my 2560x1440 through HDMI (dGPU GTX 870m + iGPU 4600)

HDMI connection is usually limited to 30Hz

[aaronleitz]

A client of mine has a new Mac Pro and NEC PA302w monitor. Witht the supplied DVI-D cable and a Mini Display Port adapter she can only get 1920 1200 resolution. The monitor also has ports for Mini Display port, Display Port and HDMI. Is it a matter of choosing a different port to get the 2560x1600 resolution this monitor is capable of?

Yes.  It comes with a display port - mini display port cable. Just plug it in to one of the thunderbolt ports and that's it.

[David Eichler]

Also, I seem to recall that that the monitor does not display its full (wide) color gamut unless it is connected to the Display Port bus.

[WillH]

Incorrect. Any input can display any color gamut selection.

Also, I seem to recall that that the monitor does not display its full (wide) color gamut unless it is connected to the Display Port bus.

[AlterEgo]

HDMI connection is usually limited to 30Hz

I just checked - display reports HDMI 2560x1440x60hz

[David Eichler]

Incorrect. Any input can display any color gamut selection.

Thank you for the correction. It seems I misunderstood this from the product info for my PA241W:

14-bit internal 3D LUTs, displays
1.07billion colors out of 4.3 trillion（10-bit DisplayPort input);
16.7million colors out of 1.05 billion color palette（DVI-D input）

However, the specs for the PA302W say:

1.07 billion out of 4.3 trillion (10-bit DisplayPort or HDMI input); 16.7 million colors
out of 1.05 billion color palette (DVI-D)

[digitaldog]

Thank you for the correction. It seems I misunderstood this from the product info for my PA241W:

14-bit internal 3D LUTs, displays
1.07billion colors out of 4.3 trillion（10-bit DisplayPort input);
16.7million colors out of 1.05 billion color palette（DVI-D input）

However, the specs for the PA302W say:

1.07 billion out of 4.3 trillion (10-bit DisplayPort or HDMI input); 16.7 million colors
out of 1.05 billion color palette (DVI-D)

And in reality, like all such spec's, even those that suggest 24-bit color produces 16.7 million colors, it's not so. Those are device values, not colors. We humans can't see 16.7 million colors. We can encode and define 16.7 million device values.
Case in point: here are two device values that are the same color:

[AlterEgo]

Case in point: here are two device values that are the same color:

why the Lab readouts are 8bit integers though ? up the precision and Lab will be different.

[digitaldog]

why the Lab readouts are 8bit integers though ? up the precision and Lab will be different.

So what? It's still far below human perception (far less than a dE of 1). Slice it any way you wish; we can't visually see any difference between those two device values. They ARE the same color. They may have differing device values with more precision but that's not the point.

[digitaldog]

why the Lab readouts are 8bit integers though ? up the precision and Lab will be different.

More precision from ColorThink Pro, dE report (0.01). Happy? The same color or two different colors?

[AlterEgo]

So what? It's still far below human perception (far less than a dE of 1).

depens how far is far and which dE, no ? so it is technically better to illustrate with the proper precision becuse Lab values __ARE__ different, then you can make an argument that dE-whatever is like less than 0.01... but it is still not absolute zero (numbers-wise).

[digitaldog]

depens how far is far and which dE, no ?

In this example no. The two device values are 0.01dE (dE 2000) which is INVISIBLE to any human expect maybe the StarChild at the end of 2001: A space odyssey who at that point isn't a human. 
Do you really believe we humans can see 16.7 million colors (let alone billions or trillions)?
I think you're missing the important distinction between device values and colors, the later being something we humans can see!

[AlterEgo]

In this example no. The two device values are 0.01dE (dE 2000) which is INVISIBLE to any human expect maybe the StarChild at the end of 2001: A space odyssey who at that point isn't a human. 
Do you really believe we humans can see 16.7 million colors (let alone billions or trillions)?

I was talking only about the illustration in your posting - you can't use incorrect statements that lab values are the same to support the valid point... that's it... nothing about the bigger picture here at all... I do agree that dE-whatever = 0.01 or less is too small for regular humans !

[digitaldog]

I was talking only about the illustration in your posting - you can't use incorrect statements that lab values are the same to support the valid point... that's it... nothing about the bigger picture here at all... I do agree that dE-whatever = 0.01 or less is too small for regular humans !

Sorry (going OT) but that's rubbish. The two Lab values are the same without the added precision and if you understand Lab values, it should be clear they are not visibly different! They ARE the same color!
The added decimal you requested wasn't necessary, nor the dE report. Other than to show your requests for added precision isn't at all necessary and that the dE values are super tiny; invisible by a large degree.   
What you stated in this context of color perception is untrue: up the precision and Lab will be different.

I do agree that dE-whatever = 0.01 or less is too small for regular humans !

By a long shot; try dE 1.0 to be kind.... So will you answer the question so we can move on? Do you really believe we humans can see 16.7 million colors (let alone billions or trillions)?

[AlterEgo]

Sorry (going OT) but that's rubbish. The two Lab values are the same without the added precision

there are 2 different Lab values dispayed with insufficient precision that creates an "impression" that they are equal... they are not... you mix the real value and its presentation... the real value was never ever 8bit integer...  more over 2 colors can have the same 8bit interger value and be visually different, I tried for example in CT&A 99.5/0.49/0.49 vs 99.5/-0.49/-0.49 both are if 8bit integer are rounded to 100,0,0 and I can see the difference when on patch is displayed within the other... granted dE2K is big > 1, but 8 bit integer Lab values rounded to the identical numbers... just correct the illustration or put a comment, that's it...

[AlterEgo]

try dE 1.0 to be kind.

why ? with certain colors my vision can do low first digits = dE2k 0.x for sure... something like de2K = 0.0x I am not sure, never tried

[digitaldog]

why ? with certain colors my vision can do low first digits = dE2k 0.x for sure... something like de2K = 0.0x I am not sure, never tried

They are more than equal to support the fact that the two device values are the same perceived color. Color is a perceptual attribute of humans in this discussion.
You're getting caught up in a debate about precision that's totally unnecessary!
It's like suggesting that using a $25 ruler which isn't as accurate as something NASA uses (which is accurate within 10000th of an inch) to measure window shades is therefore, an invalid measurement for ordering window shades. That's ridiculous.