Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

5K, 6K or 8K: new Asus ProArt monitors

T'hain Esh Kelch said:
I have none! But 1199$ is *really* cheap, and there's essentially no 6k market, and absolutely no 'low end' 6k market, so they could easily charge more. The closest competitor is Dell, and theirs is 1000$ more expensive after almost a year on the market. I am guessing we're much closer to 1999$ than 1199$.
Click to expand...
etc said:
I guess around 1.8-2k or 2.5k - similar to Dell 6K, with better aesthetics. As mentioned above there's no 6k market, so they will try to set higher prices in the beginning.
Click to expand...
I just looked up some Amazon USA pricing on Retina monitors:

27" Samsung ViewFinity S9 5K - Current $750, Max $1100, Min $600
27" LG UltraFine 5K LG 27MD5KL - Current (out of stock), Max $1300, Min $889
27" Asus ProArt 27" 5K PA27JCV - Current $800, Max $800, Min $800 (as it just came out a few months ago)
31.5" Dell UltraSharp 6K U3224KB - Current $2134, Max $3200, Min $1850

In that context, with the Samsung 5K at $599.99 street and the Asus 5K at $799 retail, I'm starting to believe that $1199.99 price tag for the 31.5" Asus ProArt PA32QCV 6K monitor, given that it's a lower end panel without IPS Black. I had originally predicted $2299.99 for the LG UltraFine 6K 32U990A, but in retrospect, I think it will definitely be less than $2000 retail. Not sure the exact amount, but perhaps somewhere from $1599.99 to $1999.99 at launch.

You guys say there is no 6K market. Well, up until now you were correct that there was almost no 6K market. However, I believe that will drastically change as of 2025, even just from Mac users.

Right now, my main interest is with the LG 31.5" (?) UltraFine 6K, Asus 31.5" 6K, or else perhaps the 31.5" Acer 5K. I'd either run them at the HiDPI 2560x1440 setting or else a custom resolution like 2720x1530, with an M4 Mac mini. I would not run them at 3008x1692. BTW, are there difficulties or quirks with running custom resolutions like 2720x1530 or 2880x1620 these days in macOS? I tried running a custom resolution many years ago on 27" 5K iMac, but it caused some problems with the displays preferences so I stopped running it.
 
Eug wrote:
"Right now, my main interest is with the LG 31.5" (?) UltraFine 6K, Asus 31.5" 6K, or else perhaps the 31.5" Acer 5K."

I'm wondering if the 31.5/32" 5k panels will become a greater "market" than the 6k panels (in the same 32" size)?

I'm hoping that a few other manufacturers will enter the market with 32" 5k.

What I'd REALLY like to see is 32" 5k OLED...:)
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: EugW, Arthur75, drrich2 and 1 other person
Outside the world of gaming, Asus even featured a 6K (6,016 x 3,384) display targeted at creators. The ProArt Display 6K PA32QCV will come in a 31.5-inch form factor and use a bright mini-LED display for a surprisingly reasonable $1,249 (competing displays can cost well over $2,000). Of course, this isn’t a great choice for gaming due to its 60Hz refresh rate, but it’s another good example of the industry’s march ever upward.
Click to expand...

www.ign.com

The Biggest Gaming Monitor Trends of CES 2025 - IGN

Curious what 2025 has in store for PC gaming monitors? We have the answer, direct from CES.
www.ign.com www.ign.com
 
T'hain Esh Kelch said:
But 1199$ is *really* cheap, and there's essentially no 6k market, and absolutely no 'low end' 6k market, so they could easily charge more.
Click to expand...

etc said:
As mentioned above there's no 6k market, so they will try to set higher prices in the beginning.
Click to expand...

EugW said:
You guys say there is no 6K market. Well, up until now you were correct that there was almost no 6K market. However, I believe that will drastically change as of 2025, even just from Mac users.
Click to expand...

Fishrrman said:
I'm wondering if the 31.5/32" 5k panels will become a greater "market" than the 6k panels (in the same 32" size)?
Click to expand...
I've read before that with 5K, a video editor can view full resolution 4K video on his display and still have room on-screen for this editing tools beside it, so he has his tools and also a good look at what he's working on.

Is there a similar use case for 6K, such that many professionals would benefit from it, or is the case for 6K mainly sharp text and fine detail on a 32" screen?

I ask because need (or strong want) and demand will drive the 6K market forward...or not.

A recent PC World article delved into how little Thunderbolt 5 was in evidence at CES (here's a thread on that). It lamented the lack of Intel chipsets with integrated Thunderbolt 5 and 'stalled' transition to 8K content - a lack of 8K broadcast means a lack of 8K displays means hardware capable of rendering 8K content isn't as valuable. In another thread we discussed the issue of streaming 8K video, but the increase in bandwidth demand for modest benefit to a small market didn't sound like it would drive fast adoption. And the PC World article indicated the focus will be more on high refresh rates rather than resolution. This may change in a few years.

It's interesting I didn't see 6K video mentioned. Why is the assumption if we go beyond 4K video that we should leap straight to 8K? Not 5, not 6, straight to 8!
 
drrich2 said:
Is there a similar use case for 6K, such that many professionals would benefit from it, or is the case for 6K mainly sharp text and fine detail on a 32" screen?
Click to expand...
If you edit 5K images?

You are forgetting this is also a question about the size of the display, and hence PPI. People like big screens, and content on said screens will just look better if the resolution is higher, compared to lower.
 
  • Like
Reactions: filmgirl and drrich2
drrich2 said:
It's interesting I didn't see 6K video mentioned. Why is the assumption if we go beyond 4K video that we should leap straight to 8K? Not 5, not 6, straight to 8!
Click to expand...
I think this is because of different nature of use. There's a gold standard PPI for displays like 220 for Retina and 110 for non-Retina screens. That's why we have 6K on 32" computer screens - they can render UI perfectly with the right physical size.

At the same time we have a lot of 4K screens which are designed mostly to watch videos and play games. For professional work these are not comfortable unless they have the right PPI (you won't find one these days) - UI size either too small, or large (though this can be helpful for people who care a lot about their eyes), or poorly rendered.

As for video, there's no pixel size standard for it, resolution just drives everything and just doubling at each quality level is easy and convenient on every production stage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: filmgirl and drrich2
etc said:
I think this is because of different nature of use. There's a gold standard PPI for displays like 220 for Retina and 110 for non-Retina screens. That's why we have 6K on 32" computer screens - they can render UI perfectly with the right physical size.
Click to expand...
Well, the older OS X non-Retina desktop gold standard was 101 ppi, for their flagship $$$$ 30" Cinema HD Display. I think they got it right with that one, as I much prefer that over 109 ppi. And just like I'm not a huge fan of 109 ppi, I'm not a huge fan of 218 ppi with 2X scaling either, because I think both 109 ppi at 1X and 218 ppi at 2X render everything just a touch too small.

I own 101 ppi, 109 ppi, and 218 ppi Macs and displays, and have compared all of these side-by-side in my home.

So, for a 32" 16:9 display, I'd actually prefer something like 5.6K 5632x3168 (202 ppi). Or else I may have to consider running a LG or Asus 32" 6K with a custom resolution (since macOS doesn't offer an appropriate option to emulate something like a 2816x1584 resolution without using a third part application like BetterDisplay). I am also interested in that Acer 5K 31.5" monitor as it is 186 ppi. Stuff would be rendered a tad large on that one, but IMO a bit too large is better than a bit too small. And yes, 186 ppi is "Retina" at normal recommended desktop seating distances. That 32" 5K would be Retina at 19", and recommended seating distance is >20". I typically sit at >22".

OTOH, if say an 8K 30" screen existed, that could actually work pretty well. 8K 7680x4320 294 ppi at 3X scaling would be the equivalent of exactly 2560x1440, which would provide the same text sizing as a 98 ppi screen, very similar to my goldilocks 101 ppi. Apple would need to provide 3X assets for macOS though to make this work best. The other benefit of 8K at that screen size is that the pixel density is so high, even if you don't use integer scaling, it would be nearly impossible to notice the difference vs. integer scaling at any reasonable seating distance. It would take a huge amount of bandwidth and GPU power though if you used non-integer scaling at those resolutions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: drrich2 and AlphaCentauri
  • Like
Reactions: JaredJenkinsDesign, Benhama, Arthur75 and 2 others
Archer13 said:
Fortunately, my keyboard supports Bluetooth and multiple connections, so I just switch it to the second computer, press any key, and it wakes up. Then I can use the KVM to switch the input, and I can either switch the keyboard back to the USB port with a shortcut or leave it on Bluetooth.
Click to expand...
I can attest this works - although I wish there was a better way. Seems like a hack.
 
Archer13 said:
View attachment 2461935

This is my first HDR monitor, so I don’t have another one to compare it with, but I’m really happy with how it performs! :)
Click to expand...
Which Mac is this with? With the M4 non-Pro Mac mini and 27" Studio Display, other higher resolution options are 2880x1620 and 5120x2880, with nothing in between. There are more options with the M4 Pro, like 3200x1800.

Actually for someone like me who likes bigger text, 2880x1620 might work well with the 32" Acer 5K. I'm still curious what resolution options there will be with the 32" Asus 6K, but I'm guessing it will be a jump from 2560x1440 all the way up to 3008x1692 with nothing in between, at least with the M4 non-Pro Mac mini. I'd probably prefer the intermediate 2880x1620 but it looks like that probably won't be an option for the 6K, unless you go with custom resolutions.
 
I’m very happy with my pa27jcv. I tried a Benq pd2706u but wasn’t happy with the scaling issues.
 
drrich2 said:
Please describe what you experienced with that. People on the forum are often curious about the issue.
Click to expand...
Some things like text and UI features looked a bit off and personally I noticed it most with text as for work I do a lot of documentation so I’m in excel, numbers, word, pages, and web based apps all day. That and video calls. So text clarity was number one for me. What bothered me the most was fuzziness on text especially rounded characters like O or U.
I also bought and returned a Studio Display. It was brilliant. Fantastic build quality, crisp text, colors that popped, but it was too reflective. My office is not bright, more of a warm light paired with some natural light and to minimize reflections I had to turn the brightness up way too high so it led to eye fatigue. I returned it and bought the Asus.
I do have a Dell u2723qe I think is the model on the way. My SO wanted a monitor and although I encouraged a 5k 27” they didn’t want to pay that much. This will be used with a M1 MacBook Air so I’ll have another opportunity to try a 27” 4k monitor here shortly. I’m hoping this one performs a little bit better and I may have to try better display. I never tried that with my previous 4k monitor. If it looks good enough I may go for another as I run dual screens and my 24” 1080p monitor is painful to look at compared to my Asus lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: parameter and drrich2
soloz2 said:
Some things like text and UI features looked a bit off and personally I noticed it most with text as for work I do a lot of documentation so I’m in excel, numbers, word, pages, and web based apps all day.
Click to expand...
You will never get a sharper display of text than you had with a 220PPI glossy screen! I also spend between 8-10 hours a day in front of the display(s) for work (I have 3x 5K displays ... real 5K, i.e. 5120x2880) and all of them have a glossy screen. That's why I want an affordable 6K or 8K display with ~220PPI also in glossy. Unfortunately, there is only the Dell in 8K for over €3,000 or the Apple XDR for over €5,000. It would be very nice that if you are willing to pay such prices, that the monitor is 1. durable and 2. future-proof, which means, for example, that the screen should also support at least 120hz.
 
Dark-Signature said:
You will never get a sharper display of text than you had with a 220PPI glossy screen! I also spend between 8-10 hours a day in front of the display(s) for work (I have 3x 5K displays ... real 5K, i.e. 5120x2880) and all of them have a glossy screen. That's why I want an affordable 6K or 8K display with ~220PPI also in glossy. Unfortunately, there is only the Dell in 8K for over €3,000 or the Apple XDR for over €5,000. It would be very nice that if you are willing to pay such prices, that the monitor is 1. durable and 2. future-proof, which means, for example, that the screen should also support at least 120hz.
Click to expand...
I agree 220 ppi offers clarity you just don’t get with anything less.

One thing I often find frustrating is how 60hz monitors often get dismissed for not being 120hz. However, you can’t have a 120hz 5 or 6k display using thunderbolt 4. HDMI and DisplayPort can’t either except possibly the latest standards. Thunderbolt 5 can drive a 10bit 5k 120hz display, but only the newest macs even have that and I have yet to see any TB5 monitors be announced. I do think this would be nice, but I don’t think it’s realistic in 2025.
 
soloz2 said:
I agree 220 ppi offers clarity you just don’t get with anything less.

One thing I often find frustrating is how 60hz monitors often get dismissed for not being 120hz. However, you can’t have a 120hz 5 or 6k display using thunderbolt 4. HDMI and DisplayPort can’t either except possibly the latest standards. Thunderbolt 5 can drive a 10bit 5k 120hz display, but only the newest macs even have that and I have yet to see any TB5 monitors be announced. I do think this would be nice, but I don’t think it’s realistic in 2025.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that it should not be possible with DisplayPort 2.1 (UHBR 20) to fire 5K (aka 5120x2880) at 120Hz? Even if UHBR 20 is not used and UHBR 13.5 is used instead, it could work with DSC. Thunderbolt 5 is only mentioned because we are in a primarily Apple-oriented forum here, but I am just as interested in whether there are such displays for the Windows world with Nvidia RTX 5090 cards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back