32” 4K Monitor (Dell U3223QE) @ 3840 x 2160 Resolution = Fuzzy Text? Fixes/Alternative Monitors?

[Val3]

(Using M1 Max Mac Studio, FYI)

Despite knowing that this is supposed to be a common issue (i.e., fuzzy text on non-Apple monitors) for Mac owners, I still went ahead and bought a 32” 4K monitor (the Dell U3223QE).

Why? I wanted to maximize screen space for reading text, which meant a monitor that I could run at full 4K (i.e., 3840 x 2160) resolution. I was initially consider a 27” monitor (the Dell U2723QE), but text at 3840 x 2160 resolution on a 27” monitor was just too tiny for me, when I saw it in person, whereas 32” was just right. However, the monitors that I saw in person were hooked up to Windows computers, and the text looked sharp and crisp then, even when I got right up to the screen, but of course I had no way of knowing how the monitors would play with Macs.

Still, I figured that I can’t be the only Mac user out there with a 32” 4K monitor who demands readable text, and surely someone must have figured out a working solution to this problem (e.g., Better Display, SwitchResX, etc.). Some reviews said the text on their monitor was sharp, other reviews said the text was fuzzy, though I will note that the reviews were not always clear as to what resolution they were running their monitors at. I figured, I don’t do graphic design, and I don’t consider myself to have exceptional eyesight, so surely I won’t notice if the text is ever-so-slightly off or fuzzy.

Well, I guess I was wrong, and my eyes are pickier than I gave them credit for. When I hooked up the Dell U3223QE monitor to my M1 Max Mac Studio desktop, the resolution was by default set to 1920 x 1080. Everything looked super sharp and crisp (albeit huge), even when I got right up to the screen. But as soon as I switched to 3840 x 2160 resolution, I immediately noticed that something felt off. I sit about 24” away from the monitor, but moving even slightly closer to the monitor immediately revealed the reason for that vague sense of off-ness - fuzzy text.

Fortunately (or so I thought), I was prepared for this - I immediately downloaded and installed Better Display. But maybe I’m an idiot and don’t know the right settings, because text was still fuzzy (albeit marginally better) when I had Better Display set the 3840 x 2160 resolution to HiDPI. So I decided to try downloading and installing SwitchResX instead. Still fuzzy text.

For those who have been able to achieve crisp, sharp text on their 32” 4K monitors, can you tell me what you did? Alternatively, recommend me some alternative 32” 4K+ monitors. I did a lot of research before I settled on the Dell U3223QE, and I love the adjustability of the stand, but I might be able to sacrifice that benefit for clearer text. The Apple Pro Display XDR is a pipe dream. I sure wish I had that kind of money!

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

No good answer here Val3.

Basically, Windows scales (optimally) to any resolution. It is not as picky as Mac. That means you can pretty much pair it with ANY monitor resolution and the OS will display everything as good as it can.

macOS is finicky. If you read many threads about this topic, the inevitable conclusion is you need a perfectly pixel-doubled "retina" display... which- conveniently enough- leads to a 27" inch one sold by Apple themselves at about the price they used to pack the SAME 27" screen with a whole computer inside and call it iMac. Strip the computer out, keep the price the same, shareholders rejoice! 💰💰💰

Several generations of macOS ago, Apple licensed a text smoothing algorithm from somebody, which helped text look better on non-retina screens. However, that license was allowed to expire (presumably, shareholders need every nickel) and the solution became "buy above referenced monitor" (for much more than you paid for that Dell 32")

Other options: Samsung Viewfinity S9 is a 5K monitor that sometimes goes on sale at a price below $1K. Watch for it, buy it and you'll have a good alternative to ASD for a much lower price than ASD (still higher- but not a LOT higher- than that Dell 32").

The LG 5K monitor that Apple stocked in stores BEFORE they rolled out ASD can also be found often on sale for below $1K. So you can watch for that and pick one of those up.

Unfortunately, all 3 of those options are 27" monitors, so the "too tiny" issue you reference would apply even if resolution gets you to retina.

Another option is to perhaps go HIGHER than 5K to perhaps the Dell 6K monitor. It MSRPs for only a little more than an ASD with stand option and if you catch it on sale, you may be able to get it for a little less than ASD with stand option (but that will probably be double+ what you paid for the 32" you already have). That would get you your 32" screen size to deal with "too tiny" WHILE upping the resolution and basically "brute forcing" sharper text courtesy of 6K.

While someone may know better than me on what I'm about to write, I don't believe you are are going to find a system-wide text smoothing option/hack to improve (Mac) text on the monitor you have. So if you can't learn to roll with it, you might want to pay much more for that 6K Dell or perhaps wait for Apple, Samsung, LG or other to roll out a retina "bigger" monitor at some point.

 

[picpicmac]

Thanks in advance for your help!

How do you connect your Mac to the Dell? You will have three options and wondering if they make a difference.

I've been scouring display threads for the very decision you made, and I keep coming across posts of people declaring that one should use the DisplayPort. MacMost even recently did a video about this.

It can be maddening reading people's reports, as for the same monitor and Mac one person declares text "sharp" and the next person declares "fuzzy".

One thing is definitely true though: one's distance from the monitor is often what determines which resolution is acceptable or not.

 

[Bigwaff]

Download Better Display

GitHub - waydabber/BetterDisplay: Unlock your displays on your Mac! Flexible HiDPI scaling, XDR/HDR extra brightness, virtual screens, DDC control, extra dimming, PIP/streaming, EDID override and lots more!

Unlock your displays on your Mac! Flexible HiDPI scaling, XDR/HDR extra brightness, virtual screens, DDC control, extra dimming, PIP/streaming, EDID override and lots more! - waydabber/BetterDisplay

github.com

and set to 2880x1620, which is 150% interface scale.

 

[Val3]

No good answer here Val3.

Basically, Windows scales (optimally) to any resolution. It is not as picky as Mac. That means you can pretty much pair it with ANY monitor resolution and the OS will display everything as good as it can.

macOS is finicky. If you read many threads about this topic, the inevitable conclusion is you need a perfectly pixel-doubled "retina" display... which- conveniently enough- leads to a 27" inch one sold by Apple themselves at about the price they used to pack the SAME 27" screen with a whole computer inside and call it iMac. Strip the computer out, keep the price the same, shareholders rejoice! 💰💰💰

Several generations of macOS ago, Apple licensed a text smoothing algorithm from somebody, which helped text look better on non-retina screens. However, that license was allowed to expire (presumably, shareholders need every nickel) and the solution became "buy above referenced monitor" (for much more than you paid for that Dell 32")

Other options: Samsung Viewfinity S9 is a 5K monitor that sometimes goes on sale at a price below $1K. Watch for it, buy it and you'll have a good alternative to ASD for a much lower price than ASD (still higher- but not a LOT higher- than that Dell 32").

The LG 5K monitor that Apple stocked in stores BEFORE they rolled out ASD can also be found often on sale for below $1K. So you can watch for that and pick one of those up.

Unfortunately, all 3 of those options are 27" monitors, so the "too tiny" issue you reference would apply even if resolution gets you to retina.

Another option is to perhaps go HIGHER than 5K to perhaps the Dell 6K monitor. It MSRPs for only a little more than an ASD with stand option and if you catch it on sale, you may be able to get it for a little less than ASD with stand option (but that will probably be double+ what you paid for the 32" you already have). That would get you your 32" screen size to deal with "too tiny" WHILE upping the resolution and basically "brute forcing" sharper text courtesy of 6K.

While someone may know better than me on what I'm about to write, I don't believe you are are going to find a system-wide text smoothing option/hack to improve (Mac) text on the monitor you have. So if you can't learn to roll with it, you might want to pay much more for that 6K Dell or perhaps wait for Apple, Samsung, LG or other to roll out a retina "bigger" monitor at some point.

Thanks so much for the super informative response!

Based on your very helpful advice, I think I’m now leaning towards upgrading to a > 4K monitor, probably either the Dell 6K (U3224KB) monitor or the Dell 8K (UP3218K) monitor. I’m not thrilled at the thought of spending gobs more money, not to mention the Dell 8K monitor would require me to upgrade to the M2/M3 Pro/Max chip (which I’d been planning to do, but later rather than sooner!), but after playing around with the Dell U3223QE for the past several days, I’ve discovered that: 1) I really like the 32” size, and I think I’d have a hard time downsizing to 27” and losing that extra space; 2) fuzzy text issues aside, I really like 3840 x 2160 resolution on the 32” display, as it allows me to display so much more while still being readable enough; 3) unfortunately, I don’t think I can convince my eyes to just “deal” with the fuzzy text, as they definitely feel much more easily fatigued.

If it helps, prior to purchasing the Dell U3223QE, I’d been using two 16” 4K portable monitors, each running at 1920 x 1080 HiDPI resolution, and one monitor positioned on top of the other monitor; at that size and resolution, I basically had two-quarters of a 32” 4K HiDPI monitor, and so that’s what I’m now used to. I’d actually been considering adding two more such monitors, which would basically get me to the almost-equivalent of a 32” 4K HiDPI monitor, but the placement of 4 such monitors would have put awkward breaks right in the center of my field of vision.

I also realized I do a lot of reading on my iPad, which I typically hold very close to my face (my eyes are weird, I know; I’m far-sighted in one eye and near-sighted in the other). Thinking about it, without even realizing it, I’ve been using screens with > 200 PPI all along, so I think to really be happy with a 32” monitor, I would have to go > 4K.

The question now, I suppose, is whether to go with the Dell 6K monitor or the Dell 8K monitor. I don’t like that the 6K monitor has thick bezels, and I don’t like that the 8K monitor requires two ports/cables. All in all, I think I’m leaning towards the 8K monitor, but it’s also 6 years old at this point. Sucks that there’s not a lot of choices and the choices aren’t great.

Does anyone have experience with either or both of those two monitors, or does anyone have a recommendation for one or the other (and why)?

Thanks again!

 

[Val3]

How do you connect your Mac to the Dell? You will have three options and wondering if they make a difference.

I've been scouring display threads for the very decision you made, and I keep coming across posts of people declaring that one should use the DisplayPort. MacMost even recently did a video about this.

I’m using the DisplayPort over USB-C cable that comes with the monitor.

It can be maddening reading people's reports, as for the same monitor and Mac one person declares text "sharp" and the next person declares "fuzzy".

I agree, a lot of people also leave off what resolution they’re actually using their 4K monitor at, and I suspect that’s (partly) why there are so many conflicting reports as to whether the text is “sharp” or “fuzzy”. For example, if I set the resolution on the U3223QE to a smaller resolution like 1920 x 1080 (50% of full 4K) or even 2880 x 1620 (75% of full 4K), the text is what I would describe as sharp and crisp. However, I bought a 32” 4K monitor really so that I could use it at full 4K resolution (3840 x 2160), and unfortunately, that’s where it fails for me, using a Mac.

One thing is definitely true though: one's distance from the monitor is often what determines which resolution is acceptable or not.

Yeah, that’s why I mentioned the distance between my eyes and the monitor (I literally pulled out a ruler to measure this), in case it might help people. At 24”, my eyes can’t see that the text is fuzzy (though something does feel a little off…), but if I move my head just a little closer to the screen, it immediately becomes clear that the text is fuzzy and that’s why.

I will say that I definitely expect different people with different eyes (and experiences/expectations) are going to have different results. I didn’t think I would be picky, but it turns out I am (or at least, my eyes are). I also noted in a previous post that, without realizing it, I’ve been using high-PPI screens all along, and so now I guess that’s what my eyes are used to, and it’s a literal pain to get them to accept something less pixel-dense.

 

[Val3]

Download Better Display

GitHub - waydabber/BetterDisplay: Unlock your displays on your Mac! Flexible HiDPI scaling, XDR/HDR extra brightness, virtual screens, DDC control, extra dimming, PIP/streaming, EDID override and lots more!

Unlock your displays on your Mac! Flexible HiDPI scaling, XDR/HDR extra brightness, virtual screens, DDC control, extra dimming, PIP/streaming, EDID override and lots more! - waydabber/BetterDisplay

github.com

and set to 2880x1620, which is 150% interface scale.

Thanks for the suggestion, but unfortunately, I really want to use the 32” monitor at full 4K resolution (i.e., 3840 x 2160), and that’s where I’m having issues. I’m actually already using Better Display, but haven’t been able to tweak the settings so that text at 4K resolution is sharp and clear. Let me know if you have any other suggestions!

 

[picpicmac]

either the Dell 6K (U3224KB) monitor or the Dell 8K (UP3218K) monitor

Remember that Thunderbolt 4 bandwidth will limit the maximum refresh rate you will get at pushing so many pixels. Thunderbolt 5 (no Macs yet with such) will address that...eventually.

if I set the resolution on the U3223QE to a smaller resolution like 1920 x 1080 (50% of full 4K)

I prefer to state it as 200% zoom. It's the user interface (text, widgets, etc.) that gets zoomed up 2x . The computer is still pushing out 2160p lines.

And that is why the bandwidth problem for higher resolution displays is a problem. Scaling the user interface or not, the more pixels to push the more bandwidth the computer needs on the interface.

 

[drrich2]

Basically, Windows scales (optimally) to any resolution. It is not as picky as Mac. That means you can pretty much pair it with ANY monitor resolution and the OS will display everything as good as it can.

macOS is finicky. If you read many threads about this topic, the inevitable conclusion is you need a perfectly pixel-doubled "retina" display...

Is there any benefit to Apple's approach to this issue, or is it just an inferior way of doing things compared to the Windows PC world?

Note: I'm pro-Mac, but that doesn't mean I'm drinking the Apple Kool-aid and automatically assume everything they do is superior. Remember the hockey puck mouse!

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Thanks so much for the super informative response!

Based on your very helpful advice, I think I’m now leaning towards upgrading to a > 4K monitor, probably either the Dell 6K (U3224KB) monitor or the Dell 8K (UP3218K) monitor. I’m not thrilled at the thought of spending gobs more money, not to mention the Dell 8K monitor would require me to upgrade to the M2/M3 Pro/Max chip (which I’d been planning to do, but later rather than sooner!), but after playing around with the Dell U3223QE for the past several days, I’ve discovered that: 1) I really like the 32” size, and I think I’d have a hard time downsizing to 27” and losing that extra space; 2) fuzzy text issues aside, I really like 3840 x 2160 resolution on the 32” display, as it allows me to display so much more while still being readable enough; 3) unfortunately, I don’t think I can convince my eyes to just “deal” with the fuzzy text, as they definitely feel much more easily fatigued.

If it helps, prior to purchasing the Dell U3223QE, I’d been using two 16” 4K portable monitors, each running at 1920 x 1080 HiDPI resolution, and one monitor positioned on top of the other monitor; at that size and resolution, I basically had two-quarters of a 32” 4K HiDPI monitor, and so that’s what I’m now used to. I’d actually been considering adding two more such monitors, which would basically get me to the almost-equivalent of a 32” 4K HiDPI monitor, but the placement of 4 such monitors would have put awkward breaks right in the center of my field of vision.

I also realized I do a lot of reading on my iPad, which I typically hold very close to my face (my eyes are weird, I know; I’m far-sighted in one eye and near-sighted in the other). Thinking about it, without even realizing it, I’ve been using screens with > 200 PPI all along, so I think to really be happy with a 32” monitor, I would have to go > 4K.

The question now, I suppose, is whether to go with the Dell 6K monitor or the Dell 8K monitor. I don’t like that the 6K monitor has thick bezels, and I don’t like that the 8K monitor requires two ports/cables. All in all, I think I’m leaning towards the 8K monitor, but it’s also 6 years old at this point. Sucks that there’s not a lot of choices and the choices aren’t great.

Does anyone have experience with either or both of those two monitors, or does anyone have a recommendation for one or the other (and why)?

Thanks again!

Well, given all of that, let me complicate your thinking a bit more: since you like the 4K resolution- particularly the 2160 piece of that- consider doing what I did: coming from a 27" iMac, I chose the Dell 5K2K 40" ultra-wide monitor, also for about the price of a ASD with stand option. This is something in between retina 27" screens and 6K screens. To my 20:20 eyes everything- including text- is just as crisp as it was on my 27" iMac... but now I have much more screen R.E.

While I haven't tried it myself, if you used the right VESA mount, you could probably rotate it when you need more height than width as shown in this picture...

...effectively becoming a 2160 X 5120 display. That website does a good job talking to the key concepts to do this.

A good "hiDPI" mode for this one 3840 X 1620, which renders the whole macOS most like how it all looked on the former iMac... except- again- with much more vertical (or horizontal) screen R.E.

If you have a reasonably easy ability to visit some retailers that sell Dell monitors, I encourage you to take your Mac, hook it up to some display models and try them with your own eyes.

I'm perfectly thrilled with this Dell. Though it lacks the height you like (32"), it delivers much more width. And if I opted to rotate it, then it would offer much more height than 32".

If this stirs your interest, note that Dell announced a newer version of this monitor at CES in early JAN and it is supposed to be released in the next few days for about $300 more (MSRP) than this one. This video hits the key highlight features in 45 seconds...

So that would make it possible to either get this model in closeout deals for probably a good discount or get "latest & greatest" version hot off the assembly line.

I don't know that that will be better for your eyes... but it's a third consideration against that 6K and 8K. Depending on how much width you need that makes you favor 32", this much greater height than 32" when rotated might scratch the itch well.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Is there any benefit to Apple's approach to this issue, or is it just an inferior way of doing things compared to the Windows PC world?

Note: I'm pro-Mac, but that doesn't mean I'm drinking the Apple Kool-aid and automatically assume everything they do is superior. Remember the hockey puck mouse!

I don't know. As I understand it, this pixel doubling "requirement" is something left over from Steve Jobs Next computer OS (or perhaps is grounded in iDevice creations, depending on which version of this one wants to believe). Next became the foundation for macOS. iDevice begot Mac Silicon.

If Next, I haven't dug in to understand why this part of the system would not as effectively scale and do find it generally odd given how much of the (Next-foundational) system seems to revolve heavily around PDF underpinnings which, of course, is all about scaling to any size.

My gut guess (and I can be completely wrong here) is that there is NO advantage at all to it (as a display technology)... and thus us Apple people are generally pressed to pay way up for oddball resolutions to get true "retina" (perfectly pixel doubled) instead of having an OS that scales to any resolution and presents all visual elements as sharp as they can be displayed. macOS certainly can scale to any resolution, so it's that second part where it disappoints.

Now, what I mean there is no advantage to macOS being built that way. In other words, pair Windows with a 5K retina screen and Windows will take full advantage of those retina pixels too. But step down some resolution or up and Windows will just as readily maximize its presentation on other resolutions as well. Macs don't. Step much off the retina resolution targets and you deal with things like OP describes about text not looking as crisp or UI interface elements being much too small or much too large. The big negative here is that consumers can't as readily "shop around" for an exceptional price on commodity resolutions and are instead pressed to not have much consumer choice in just a few models of "retina" 5K monitors (or higher resolutions).

To OPs issue, an older version of macOS did have a licensed algorithm to smooth text on non-retina screens... but Apple opted to let that license expire, basically creating a greater need for Apple people to go Retina... and pay up for it. 💰💰💰

Somebody with more knowledge than me on this topic should chime in here and perhaps explain why the whole retina premium is worth the higher pricing vs. the Windows display approach of scaling to ANY resolution- including the same "retina" one and displaying visual assets as sharp as possible. Hopefully, it won't be rationalization about retina being ideal for eyes (indistinguishable pixels) as again, Windows will readily scale to "retina" resolution too... but some strong reason why the whole retina underpinnings approach is better than the "scale to any resolution" Windows approach. My guess is that there is nothing objectively tangible... and this is just something we Apple people must roll with because of the legacy link back to Next OS or iDevice roots.

 

[picpicmac]

My gut guess (and I can be completely wrong here) is that there is NO advantage at all to it (as a display technology)...

The pixel density needed for a human to not discern pixels is determined by two things:
1) human vision angular resolution;
2) distance from the display.

Hand-held devices like phones are typically held closer to the eye and thus they have a higher pixel density.

The 218ppi of Apple's "retina" definition, for their computer displays, is approximately what it takes for the human eye to not discern pixels at the usual desk sitting distance.

Those of us with poorer than average eyesight don't need pixel densities quite that high.

Also: when Apple modified their Mac display rendering a few years back, Next Step had already been used for years. So people complaining about the change liked the prior method which was done with the legacy Next operating system. Apple's decision to make the changes is probably rooted in their strategy to unify the look of the Apple products across the entire company. Thus someone using an iPhone will have gotten used to the high pixel density, and thus the Mac followed suit.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

OP, once again (at least the 3rd time now) Samsung is offering that 5K Viewfinity S9 monitor for under $1K... basically their crack at replicating the ASD with several additional features of note: particularly superior webcam, AppleTV-like apps (so it can double as a little TV), stand options that cost extra from Apple built in and- perhaps most important- a SECOND video input so you could easily plug something else into it and use it for the other thing too.

For example, since Silicon basically dumps "bootcamp" (ARM Windows is not the same as Full Windows), one option for a second input is a Mac Mini-like PC to then have access to a full Windows PC too. Or hook up a game console if you are into games? Or an AppleTV if you want AppleTV apps. Etc.

Yes, at 27" it probably still clashes with your "too tiny" issue... but with Mac, 5K "retina" will somewhat matter vs. 4K- particularly against the issue of blurry text- and this will likely cost around the same as what you paid for that 4K Dell.

While I still suspect that bigger Dell 6K seems best match for what you have shared in this thread, a 5K 27" panel MIGHT offer an interesting alternative choice. Or maybe TWO of them mounted vertical side by side? Like maybe this...

Use a flexible VESA Dual Monitor mount like this one to position them in all kinds of ways on your desk and easily mix & match as it best serves whatever you are doing at any given moment...

 

[MrGunny94]

Hi, the easiest I have found Is just have my work Windows PC hooked app all the time on my home setup and use the Mac for on the go.

I know it's not ideal but I use one desk for gaming during the evening and during the day for work therefore I'm rocking 4k 144hz displays.

 

[MacGizmo]

It's not your eyes, or your self-perceived pickiness. Your display has a max ppi of 137.68. There is no piece of software, no cable connection method and no resolution you can set that is going to make that display look decent.

People always seem to focus on the size, aspect ratio, resolution, and pixel-doubling of a display with regard to sharpness/clarity – and the reality is that those things have little impact when the ppi is low. Brightness also comes into play. You really need to have something in the range of 400-500 nits minimum.

If you want a quality 32" display with a high ppi count, you'll have to really do some digging. Kuycon makes a 163ppi 34" display, and two different 218ppi (retina) 27" displays. All are more affordable than Apple's Studio Display even with fully adjustable stands. Of course, LG makes the Ultrafine 27" display, which also offers a high ppi – as does Samsung with the ViewFinity S9 27" display (currently $899).

The unfortunate truth is, that there are very few 4k 32" displays that have a high enough ppi that satisfy truly picky eyes. Very, very few.

But remember, screen clarity and quality are subjective. I have a 34" LG Ultrawide that has a 5120 x 2160, 163 ppi screen. I think it looks great, but only when I don't compare it to a retina resolution display (then it looks awful - no matter what resolution setting I'm using). But I've had people tell me that they can't believe how great the picture quality is. So who to believe? The only thing you can do is order one you think might suit you, and return it if it doesn't.

 

[chrfr]

The unfortunate truth is, that there are very few 4k 32" displays that have a high enough ppi that satisfy truly picky eyes. Very, very few.

4k at 32" is a defined resolution- there can't be a 4k 32" display that has a higher or lower ppi as they're all the exact same resolution.
Further, a 32" 4k display just puts macOS into a weird spot so that the OS rendered at 1x resolution isn't sharp and if it's set to some other pixel doubled resolution, the interface is just huge. It'll never be a good looking display for Macs.