Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
27 or 32 monitor for Mac Studio
- Thread starter al2813
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I had a 32" 1440p display and I did not like the pixelated text. I returned it after a week. (A 27" 1440p display looked noticeably better to me.) I'd probably like your 27" 1080p monitor even less.
82 ppi - 27" 1080p
92 ppi - 32" 1440p
164 ppi - 27" 2160p
A 27" 4K screen would have 2X scaling to "looks like" 1080p. This looks excellent if you like such large fonts. Or you could run a scaled resolution of say 2048x1152 which would be a hiDPI version of an 87 ppi monitor, and would give you a little bit more screen real estate than 1080p. This also looks very good on a 4K screen even though it is not a 2X scale.
Or if you need even more vertical screen space, you can get the monitor I got which is a 28" 3:2 4K+ monitor at 3840x2560. Perfect 2X scaling will give you "looks like" 1920x1280 82 ppi. Another scaling option is "looks like" 2048x1365 87 ppi. (I run at 2304x1536 which is hiDPI that "looks like" 98 ppi. On a 27" 4K monitor, that would be 2304x1296, but it sounds like those fonts would be too small for you.)
LG should take the panels that are used in the 24" iMac & the 27" Studio Display, put them in lower cost enclosures, mount them on one of their Ergo Mounts, US$1999...?
I got the LG 5K - 660 EUR including shipping from an ebay German IT seller. I hope it is in perfect conditions as described. I think that for this price it is the best option for me by far
I have 27 inch displays because that was the Ultrasharp large size when I started buying them. Also, it's the same size as the Aluminum large iMacs (I got one in 2010). So I can mix and match computers and monitors and they're the same size.
I'm fine with 60 Hertz monitors. I have a 2021 MacBook Pro and it's fine but so are my Dell Ultrasharps. I'm not a gamer except for online chess.
My preference is 4k and I run 2 at native resolution and one at 3,008 x 1,692 (not completely sure about that height number). 5k is nice (had a 5k iMac) but the cost of monitors isn't worth the difference for me.
I'm fine with 60 Hertz monitors. I have a 2021 MacBook Pro and it's fine but so are my Dell Ultrasharps. I'm not a gamer except for online chess.
My preference is 4k and I run 2 at native resolution and one at 3,008 x 1,692 (not completely sure about that height number). 5k is nice (had a 5k iMac) but the cost of monitors isn't worth the difference for me.
Just wanted to add that I have the Benq sw271 at 163ppi now connected via hdmi to the mac studio ultra and its in the middle scale in display settings, out of the 5 variations it gives. The smallest one on the right is too tiny for me. Maybe will try maybe to go one up for more window space. I also have the 27" cinema display non thunderbolt i was using but now just on the mac pro 5.1. Hoping to slowy move things to just studio side this year. I did see a good deal on a pro display xdr but perhaps will wait to see what apple releases this spring maybe monitor wise.
Depending on what OS you’re running, CTRL-click or OPTION-click in the Display Preferences will give you a list of other available resolutions.
Just buy the Pro Display XDR and be done with it. Too pricey? Put it on a card and don’t worry about it.
A few new monitors are coming out during CES so good competition and choices overall for us consumers. The Samsung one really is cool with all the bell and whistles. Not into the the upper chin of the dell with that camera. However if these built in cameras are better than the standalone ones like insta360 or elgato, one less purchase to make. Waiting for the reviews.
Well, their 4k version is on sale for just over $4k US. So…
I’m hoping Apple updates the Pro Display HDR soon.
After a closer look - the Dell is design is a bit weird. Got to give it to Apple on that - both the XDR and Studio are beautiful pieces of equipment. And maybe it's silly but it matters to me. I really like looking at my ASDs and using them (which I spend a lot of time doing).
I had an XDR briefly and loved it. Ultimately decided that multiple ASD was a better fit for my needs. But I miss 32" from time to time.
I'm curious to see what both the Samsung and Dell monitors cost, their final production specs and some reviews. I have a suspicion that it will make the ASD and XDR look maybe a little less crazy. Still crazy but a tad less so. Ex: while the LG 5K is $300 cheaper (retail prices) it's not all that hard to make a compelling argument that the ASD is better for the money. If you're going to spend $1300, why not $1600? Now the question of whether paying for either is a good idea is a different debate.
I do think there's a chance the Samsung is cheap enough to make it compelling particularly because in that price range people are more price sensitive (vs. XDR). I wonder about the Dell. It would need to be pretty cheap - if it's anywhere close to $4K it's squarely in the crazy territory IMO. For me at least, to lose the seamless Apple integration I'd need to be saving a decent percentage. There's value in how well the ASD and XDR play with my machines.
I had an XDR briefly and loved it. Ultimately decided that multiple ASD was a better fit for my needs. But I miss 32" from time to time.
I'm curious to see what both the Samsung and Dell monitors cost, their final production specs and some reviews. I have a suspicion that it will make the ASD and XDR look maybe a little less crazy. Still crazy but a tad less so. Ex: while the LG 5K is $300 cheaper (retail prices) it's not all that hard to make a compelling argument that the ASD is better for the money. If you're going to spend $1300, why not $1600? Now the question of whether paying for either is a good idea is a different debate.
I do think there's a chance the Samsung is cheap enough to make it compelling particularly because in that price range people are more price sensitive (vs. XDR). I wonder about the Dell. It would need to be pretty cheap - if it's anywhere close to $4K it's squarely in the crazy territory IMO. For me at least, to lose the seamless Apple integration I'd need to be saving a decent percentage. There's value in how well the ASD and XDR play with my machines.
The problem isn't that everything less than 220ppi is terrible, the problem is that macOS doesn't properly support anything between 110ppi and 220ppi.
It works fine, once the ppi is high enough. 2X scaling is not necessary if you brute force it with a high enough ppi.
Probably for most people, that’s around 160ish ppi and for even more people that’s probably around 180ish, for a desktop that is, at normal desktop seating distances.
I agree with this as a former 27" 4K monitor user. Even though I was using it at 2560x1440, text and UI still looked sharp and I didn't notice any weird text scaling until someone pointed it out to me and even then, it didn't bother me. I did have some performance issues with an older Mac but had zero issues with my M1 Mac.
My iMac just failed me after 7 years. LOVE the 5k panel - currently sitting behind a 27" 4k connected to my MacBook and I just can't get on with it. To many the difference might be minimal if anything at all, but for colour, crispness, it can't be beaten. A new Studio is on its way but I refuse to splash out £1500 on a Studio Display given its specs. I also refuse to go a couple of hundred quid less and go for the LG because the build quality is woeful. Samsung's upcoming panel looks a lot closer to the ASD than the LG so I'll wait to see what that costs. I *hope* it will be towards the LG in terms of price. The specs look really good - hopefully I'll plump for that. Otherwise, 4K it is unfortunately!
The 4K vs. 5K and scaling stuff is a totally personal. Some people care, some don't. Good news is there are options for both. I'm glad that Samsung appears to be providing a 5K option that is more affordable. Let's hope the final specs, performance and price come together to allow more people who might want 5K get it.
And of course there's the third option, a 27" with 2560x1440 resolution. Sure, you can see the pixels, but the screen real estate is identical to a 27" retina 5K, and you can get around 7 of these, with IPS panels, for the price of 1 Studio Display.
I had a 27" 1440p next to my iMac. Difference is night and day.
I know. I don't care. A retina display doesn't make me more productive. I'm happy with 110ppi.
Yes, the retina display in my 16" MacBook Pro is much nicer, but it's just aesthetically better, not functionally.
That's my point - some care, some don't. No right answer. It's my money and I bought the ASDs. You chose not to. Good choice for you.
I agree, I was just adding a third choice to the list of viable 27" inch displays -- full on 5K retina, and 4K (with scaling) had already been mentioned.