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

Decision: M1 vs 2020 iMac

Well the resolution of your linked monitor is 3440x1440 (not 5k) which is much lower than the 27” iMacs 5120×2880. So again you’re going for a lower resolution on a much bigger screen.

I absolutely wouldn’t go less than full 4k. So I’d stay away from anything that says QHD. If i was going ultrawide I would need to have a vertical resolution of at least 2160 if I was moving from a Retina display. (Something like the LG UltraWide 34WK95U) I would still be stepping down pixel density so would be losing sharpness but I would probably cope as the display will still be fairly sharp.

The retina displays are so good that to match / beat their sharpness on a bigger form factor you really need to go 8k or go for the apple xdr display at around £5k. People look at the iMac’s and think they’re expensive but they are actually incredibly good value for money particularly given the quality of the display. So…whilst you are right in saying you could trade in your iMac and get a Mac mini and screen for the same money, you will be taking a major step down in image quality. I think to get closer, you’re going to have to pay out a bit. To match / beat it, you’re going to have to pay out ‘a lot’

Don’t get me wrong, there are advantages to going bigger or ultrawide and I don’t regret my decision to go for the 32un880 which is full 4k (but still not retina) It’s just important you understand the trade offs. The other thing to factor in is that you probably need to be investing in speakers and a webcam. Whilst monitors will likely have speakers built in, they’ll be a bit **** in comparison to the iMacs. My lg monitor does not have a built in webcam.
 
Last edited:
I've been down the exact same rabbit hole, upgrading from a 2020 iMac, and ended up buying a Pro Display XDR in the end just because it was the only thing that didn't seem like a significant downgrade from the iMac screen that I was used to and that's after going through 2 really expensive $1k+ PC monitors all of which sucked.

My advice would absolutely be stay on the iMac, and then buy an Apple Silicon iMac 27" in 2022 if you really need more power.

PC monitors are great for gaming, but for everything else they are massively inferior to Apple screens (imo)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bodhitree and AAPLGeek
A $1300 5k monitor to duplicate Retina kills the deal for me. Maybe best thing to do is wait and see if apple introduces a 32" imac in the spring

Thanks everyone for your expertise
 
  • Like
Reactions: wilberforce
omeletpants said:
A $1300 5k monitor to duplicate Retina kills the deal for me. Maybe best thing to do is wait and see if apple introduces a 32" imac in the spring

Thanks everyone for your expertise
Click to expand...
I think a 32" iMac with similar quality (pixel density and gamut) as the 27" 5k screen would be nice but I think is wishful thinking, or else will be at a price that generates outrage.
The only monitor that achieves this quality at this size is the Apple Pro XDR for $6000 including stand. I am hoping the price of such a monitor comes down to the $2000 to $3000 range, as I could really use it for my photo editing. I would be astonished if a 32" iMac with a similar quality display costs less than $4000.
 
omeletpants said:
A $1300 5k monitor to duplicate Retina kills the deal for me. Maybe best thing to do is wait and see if apple introduces a 32" imac in the spring

Thanks everyone for your expertise
Click to expand...

It’s worth stating that even the $1300 monitor I linked to will be lower pixel density than the iMac. It roughly matches the horizontal resolution but is ‘ultrawide’ so the same number of horizontal pixels are spread over an incredibly wide screen. It has a lower vertical resolution.

apple paired up with LG to make a 27” Retina monitor. It’s around the £1000 mark so if they release a 32” version (which they may) I’d expect it to be a good deal more expensive than that
 
All this great advice has forced me to revisit what I'm trying to accomplish.

My original goal was to duplicate a 27" retina on a larger monitor and gain some speed via the M1/16gb. But my needs are simple: email, surfing and world of warcraft and my current set up handles that well. Thought I could buy the Mini and pair it with a $400 monitor and duplicate resolution. But I was very wrong and needed guidance before I invested/wasted time and some money and the eventual product returns. Even $1000 more than my original estimate won't solve the problem.

So, I'm just going to step back and wait 6-12 months and see if anything changes

Thanks again
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fawkesguyy, andrewstirling and JFR0317
omeletpants said:
All this great advice has forced me to revisit what I'm trying to accomplish.

My original goal was to duplicate a 27" retina on a larger monitor and gain some speed via the M1/16gb. But my needs are simple: email, surfing and world of warcraft and my current set up handles that well. Thought I could buy the Mini and pair it with a $400 monitor and duplicate resolution. But I was very wrong and needed guidance before I invested/wasted time and some money and the eventual product returns. Even $1000 more than my original estimate won't solve the problem.

So, I'm just going to step back and wait 6-12 months and see if anything changes

Thanks again
Click to expand...
For your use case, any upgrade seems unnecessary, your 2020 iMac should be fine for years.
 
andrewstirling said:
People look at the iMac’s and think they’re expensive but they are actually incredibly good value for money particularly given the quality of the display.
Click to expand...
Apple displays are better than anything else I've seen – and they've spoiled me for anything less. It's a slight exaggeration, but a standard 'HD' monitor almost feels like going back to VHS after 4k. Earlier this year I went into an electronics store wanting to buy an external monitor for my Macbook Air. I ended up with a 24" iMac. I don't do anything fancy (no games or video editing) but I spend a *lot* of my life looking at screens, so I want my dull Word documents to look as good as possible! Of course this never seemed a problem back when screens were 72dpi...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bodhitree and wilberforce
Interesting to read the rumours of apple partnering with LG to reintroduce external monitors for macs. There’s talk of 24”, 27” and 32” mini led models. The latest rumours put the 27”’at around $2000 which should make the 27” iMac pricing interesting! The 32” is thought to be a refresh of the pro xdr and will not be affordable to most.
 
Not to beat a dead horse, but I was looking at this LG monitor video. It's 3840x2160. If you go to the 3:00 mark the icons and print type looks very clear. Are we thinking this is inferior against retina to the point of being not watchable?

 
I remember doing some research on this back when I was considering buying an M1 MacBook Air. That LG UltraFine display is still not retina resolution as it’s a 32”. I ended up buying a 24” M1 iMac because the quality of the screen is so hard to match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: susanm
omeletpants said:
Not to beat a dead horse, but I was looking at this LG monitor video. It's 3840x2160. If you go to the 3:00 mark the icons and print type looks very clear. Are we thinking this is inferior against retina to the point of being not watchable?

Click to expand...

That’s the monitor I have. I really like it. Being full 4k, it’s certainly a step up over the other monitors you’ve linked to. It’s not as sharp as the retina but it is decent.

Couple of things to be aware of….it has no webcam and the speakers are awful in comparison to the iMac. It also won’t auto dim or adjust based on your environments lighting. Finally, the brightness and volume buttons on your keyboard won’t work although this is fixable via a small downloadable program.

On the plus side, it has an anti-glare screen which I like, uniformity and colour accuracy are also decent.
 
andrewstirling said:
That’s the monitor I have. I really like it. Being full 4k, it’s certainly a step up over the other monitors you’ve linked to. It’s not as sharp as the retina but it is decent.

Couple of things to be aware of….it has no webcam and the speakers are awful in comparison to the iMac. It also won’t auto dim or adjust based on your environments lighting. Finally, the brightness and volume buttons on your keyboard won’t work although this is fixable via a small downloadable program.

On the plus side, it has an anti-glare screen which I like, uniformity and colour accuracy are also decent.
Click to expand...
What settings did you use on the mac

I never use webcam and always use headphones
 
I wonder if people are being overly picky. The 5k iMac has a great screen, but a 4K is no slouch and obviously much much better then a 1080p. I use a 5k iMac for work and at home I have a PC I built with a Samsung 4K monitor. Not as nice as the iMac obviously but nothing I could not work with or would have be clawing at my eyes. Colours are crips and clean, colours vibrant and costs a fraction of what the high end screens cost. If not doing any sort of graphical work be it video, photos or graphic design, I don't think you are going to suffer with any 4K monitor.
 
wonderings said:
I wonder if people are being overly picky. The 5k iMac has a great screen, but a 4K is no slouch and obviously much much better then a 1080p. I use a 5k iMac for work and at home I have a PC I built with a Samsung 4K monitor. Not as nice as the iMac obviously but nothing I could not work with or would have be clawing at my eyes. Colours are crips and clean, colours vibrant and costs a fraction of what the high end screens cost. If not doing any sort of graphical work be it video, photos or graphic design, I don't think you are going to suffer with any 4K monitor.
Click to expand...
I looked at a couple of videos of the UN880b and thought the icons and print types were terrific.

Just for testing, I tested retina on my 27" iMac and reduced the settings by one level and couldnt tell the difference
 
wonderings said:
I wonder if people are being overly picky. The 5k iMac has a great screen, but a 4K is no slouch and obviously much much better then a 1080p. I use a 5k iMac for work and at home I have a PC I built with a Samsung 4K monitor. Not as nice as the iMac obviously but nothing I could not work with or would have be clawing at my eyes. Colours are crips and clean, colours vibrant and costs a fraction of what the high end screens cost. If not doing any sort of graphical work be it video, photos or graphic design, I don't think you are going to suffer with any 4K monitor.
Click to expand...

I think this is a fair question. For any kind of graphical work things like the colour space coverage matters, and 4.5k pixels on a 24” screen gives you greater sharpness. But I think most people wanting to do web browsing, media consumption, coding, writing, spreadsheets, IT work, zoom, teams and so on will not notice.

That said, I would stay with the full 4K screens. There are enough of them around at reasonable prices.
 
Yeah. The early suggestions were all qhd screens which would be a massive step down for the OP. Full 4k is a good option but I think we just wanted to set expectations in case the OP ended up regretting his decision. 4k on a 32” screen is clearly going to be less sharp than 5k on a 27” screen. Is that worth the trade off for bigger size? Maybe but it’s not a slam dunk.
 
omeletpants said:
What settings did you use on the mac

I never use webcam and always use headphones
Click to expand...

Do you mean resolution settings? I used the default but have since changed to the ‘more space’ setting since moving to MacBook and monitor. The arm on 32un880 is a great addition in my opinion. I love being able to position the monitor exactly where I want it depending on what I’m doing. I could never get my iMac to the right height and ended up propping it up on books.
 
andrewstirling said:
Do you mean resolution settings? I used the default but have since changed to the ‘more space’ setting since moving to MacBook and monitor. The arm on 32un880 is a great addition in my opinion. I love being able to position the monitor exactly where I want it depending on what I’m doing. I could never get my iMac to the right height and ended up propping it up on books.
Click to expand...
I'm not technical so I would kindly ask you for any setting YOU are using on the iMac's display setting in system preferences and any "non-default" setting for the monitor on the LG side. Then I would know that I'm using an expert's advice
 
andrewstirling said:
Do you mean resolution settings? I used the default but have since changed to the ‘more space’ setting since moving to MacBook and monitor. The arm on 32un880 is a great addition in my opinion. I love being able to position the monitor exactly where I want it depending on what I’m doing. I could never get my iMac to the right height and ended up propping it up on books.
Click to expand...
This is my 72"x40" 300lb desk. The current monitor is 20" away from the end of the desk and that is more extension than I want and for esthetics to use the LG standard mount. I was looking at this Vesa 100
 

Attachments

  • 81l5FH6TikL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
    81l5FH6TikL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
    200.3 KB · Views: 61
  • IMG_0243.jpg
    IMG_0243.jpg
    75.2 KB · Views: 65
The LG32 UN880 reaches in 16” from the back edge of the desk. And has excellent cable management. It’s a shame you can’t make use of the LG’s stand as it’s one of the monitor’s best features.

I have my MacBook set at ‘looks like’ 3008 x 1692 scaled on my LG monitor (full 4K native is too small to read). On my iMac I had the default setting which is ‘looks like’ 2560 x 1440. Of course the iMac was actually displaying 5120 x 2880 and the LG monitor is actually displaying 3840 x 2160. The extra resolution is used to smooth the fonts in both instances.
 
Last edited:
Just checked my display resolution in system preferences and I'm currently using 1600x900 (scaled). So, looks like I'm not even using the Retina setting now? And for me everything looks great. If I understand correctly, the setting you suggested should make my picture similar to what I'm using now?
 
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