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

Does this 4k@120hz tweak work for you?

  • Yes

    Votes: 186 82.7%
  • No

    Votes: 18 8.0%
  • Can not get the right Adapter

    Votes: 19 8.4%
  • Yes, but Apple limit HDR/HiDPI functionality with macOS 14.1 and macOS 15

    Votes: 2 0.9%

  • Total voters
    225

dinosauradventure

macrumors member
Feb 11, 2023
32
36
Thanks all for your work on this. I’ve submitted more feedback to Apple and emailed Tim Cook. I believe this limitation is intentional to drive sales of Apple displays. It is anticompetitive and may be a violation of the EU digital markets act, which I stated in my messages. I would encourage you all to do the same, probably won’t change anything but worth a try.

If there’s no fix before the holiday return window ends, I’ll likely return my new mini. Sad!
 

AironMan

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 29, 2021
617
211
Thanks all for your work on this. I’ve submitted more feedback to Apple and emailed Tim Cook. I believe this limitation is intentional to drive sales of Apple displays. It is anticompetitive and may be a violation of the EU digital markets act, which I stated in my messages. I would encourage you all to do the same, probably won’t change anything but worth a try.

If there’s no fix before the holiday return window ends, I’ll likely return my new mini. Sad!
Plz share ure apple feedback ID so we can reference it.
 

waydabber

macrumors 6502
May 27, 2010
360
270
@AironMan - I don't think this is in any way malicious on Apple's part, more like a kind of simplified approach to things. The M4 mini seems to behave the way older Macs did, except when certain ultrawide, 6K or 8K displays are connected - in which case (to comply with specs) the logic that populates display modes probably goes to a different path. Since this behavior is ok for most users and fulfills the advertised capabilities, it's probably fine by their standards, especially for an initial rollout. Apple engineers might feel that it does not make sense to have HiDPI resolutions available beyond a certain scale and certainly not at a native resolution level (which produces only a 2x supersampling), despite the fact that some users want this feature. Hopefully this will be tweaked in the future.

Also, there might be other factors there, like a balancing act - if the system thinks a display would not benefit much from some higher resolution options, it just does not provide that in case an other display is connected later on which needed that resource. This is because these Macs support different resolutions and refresh rates depending on the number and type of displays connected (see the specs - it can do 3x6K or 1x8K+1x6K). Obviously the system does not know the user's intent in advance about what kind of displays will be connected later on - so it is trying to be as economical as possible (since if 8K resources are granted to a connection unnecessarily, the user could later on connect 1 less external display).
 

AironMan

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 29, 2021
617
211
@AironMan - I don't think this is in any way malicious on Apple's part, more like a kind of simplified approach to things. The M4 mini seems to behave the way older Macs did, except when certain ultrawide, 6K or 8K displays are connected - in which case (to comply with specs) the logic that populates display modes probably goes to a different path. Since this behavior is ok for most users and fulfills the advertised capabilities, it's probably fine by their standards, especially for an initial rollout. Apple engineers might feel that it does not make sense to have HiDPI resolutions available beyond a certain scale and certainly not at a native resolution level (which produces only a 2x supersampling), despite the fact that some users want this feature. Hopefully this will be tweaked in the future.

Also, there might be other factors there, like a balancing act - if the system thinks a display would not benefit much from some higher resolution options, it just does not provide that in case an other display is connected later on which needed that resource. This is because these Macs support different resolutions and refresh rates depending on the number and type of displays connected (see the specs - it can do 3x6K or 1x8K+1x6K). Obviously the system does not know the user's intent in advance about what kind of displays will be connected later on - so it is trying to be as economical as possible (since if 8K resources are granted to a connection unnecessarily, the user could later on connect 1 less external display).
The problem here is that it does work with 14.0, and they are limiting it in the next release! So they’re undoing a function that worked before! This is the problem I have with Apple in their feature list—this must be something they want to do. Why remove a function that already works? That does not make sense to me! It’s like you disable a function in BetterDisplay that you know people needed in the past, and now you ignore it and disable it in the next version without naming it in the changelog?? Holy sh…, for me it’s a big thing because it has a lot of impact for pro users. Another thing is the HDR disable function—how can you explain why it was changed so that it only affects non-Apple displays? I think you see it too neutrally; to me, it’s very clear what Apple is trying to do here.

In fact, with with macOS 14.0 it works nice, after released versions they limit more and more..
 

waydabber

macrumors 6502
May 27, 2010
360
270
Sorry, I was talking about the M4 (which does not support 14.0 - so that is not a reference point in its case). I don't have a clear explanation about the additional limitations for older Macs - but for the M4 limiting to 6K when 8K is not absolutely necessary makes sense looking at the specs and the dynamic way M4 seems to allocate resources in a way that allows 3 displays to be potentially connected.

I think the most plausible explanation for the changes affecting older Apple Silicon Macs is that the changes implemented for more recent Macs simply (needlessly) affect those as well - to keep the entire logic simplified and universal among generations.

Anyway, my main point is that this seems to be more like an engineering decision, not something that is driven by sales/marketing considerations. Still, it is useful to provide feedback and maybe the engineering team will further fine-tune things.
 

AironMan

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 29, 2021
617
211
Sorry, I was talking about the M4 (which does not support 14.0 - so that is not a reference point in its case). I don't have a clear explanation about the additional limitations for older Macs - but for the M4 limiting to 6K when 8K is not absolutely necessary makes sense looking at the specs and the dynamic way M4 seems to allocate resources in a way that allows 3 displays to be potentially connected.

I think the most plausible explanation for the changes affecting older Apple Silicon Macs is that the changes implemented for more recent Macs simply (needlessly) affect those as well - to keep the entire logic simplified and universal among generations.

Anyway, my main point is that this seems to be more like an engineering decision, not something that is driven by sales/marketing considerations. Still, it is useful to provide feedback and maybe the engineering team will further fine-tune things.
Yes, what you say does make sense, but this is a really simple way to handle it. Apple is a worldwide bestselling company—why not spend a little more time on its so-called PRO devices for PRO users? We are not talking about the MacBook Air; I’m on a MAX, and the M4 Pro also has this problem. I understand the logic you pointed out, but this is not the correct way to approach it. If they knew in the past that it was needed, they can’t remove it without any changelog for that. The clearest issue is HDR with HiDPI since 14.1, which only affects non-Apple displays.
 

waydabber

macrumors 6502
May 27, 2010
360
270
I don't have a clear explanation for the HDR issue at higher refresh rates. Probably one of the devices have an issue with HDR at higher framebuffer pixel clock rates, acting as a constraint that affects all other Macs in an unified logic. This might explain the retroactive change. But this theory is somewhat discredited by the fact that some Macs seem not to have this limitation. So I don't know. Probably the code that manages all this is not as neat internally as one might hope but actually looks like any other code that is being reused, patched, tweaked this way and that over the years, incorporating compatibility with newer and newer models with differing capabilities... ;)
 

AironMan

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 29, 2021
617
211
I don't have a clear explanation for the HDR issue at higher refresh rates. Probably one of the devices have an issue with HDR at higher framebuffer pixel clock rates, acting as a constraint that affects all other Macs in an unified logic. This might explain the retroactive change. But this theory is somewhat discredited by the fact that some Macs seem not to have this limitation. So I don't know. Probably the code that manages all this is not as neat internally as one might hope but actually looks like any other code that is being reused, patched, tweaked this way and that over the years, incorporating compatibility with newer and newer models with differing capabilities... ;)
Yess ORRRR they want us to force buy Apple Monitors without OLED and 120hz :D
 

kasakka

macrumors 68020
Oct 25, 2008
2,385
1,071
I don't have a clear explanation for the HDR issue at higher refresh rates. Probably one of the devices have an issue with HDR at higher framebuffer pixel clock rates, acting as a constraint that affects all other Macs in an unified logic. This might explain the retroactive change. But this theory is somewhat discredited by the fact that some Macs seem not to have this limitation. So I don't know. Probably the code that manages all this is not as neat internally as one might hope but actually looks like any other code that is being reused, patched, tweaked this way and that over the years, incorporating compatibility with newer and newer models with differing capabilities... ;)
If I've learned anything about Apple, it's that they don't seem to test on anything but their own monitors. There's just so many weird anomalies I've encountered with other brands on MacOS that just don't exist on Windows.

I use the Samsung G95NC 8Kx2K superultrawide on a M2 Max MBP, split using Picture by Picture mode to 5120x2160 + 2560x2160. The 2560x2160 is well within any Mac's display capabilities, yet MacOS has a lot of difficulty correctly detecting it when coming out of sleep. Sometimes it works, sometimes it gets thrown to mirroring mode, sometimes it's detected as 1920x1080. If I split the display as 4K + 4K, these issues seem to go away because it's a more standard resolution.

I even had 4K flickering issues with a HDMI 2.1 cable on my M2 Max MBP 16", that completely went away when I connected the exact same cable to my desktop PC's Nvidia GPU.

And this is without involving any USB-C to HDMI 2.1 adapters.
 

abe17

macrumors newbie
Nov 14, 2024
1
0
Really good news guys! I got an CableMatters Hub with USB-C PD, HDMI, 1Gbit Ethernet, 2x USB-A 3.0 that can be directly flashed to get 4k@120 YCBCR4:4:4 HDR. This will also solve all standby issue because its an active one. The Firmware ONLY FOR THIS MODEL are attached. I will update the OP with that new one.

The hub is this one:

Model-Number Cable Matters 201310

Hi There.

I have an issue while flashing my CableMatters Hub HDMI 2.1 to USB C (VMM 7100 model) with this firmware.
and this is all my fault because didn't read all the thread carefully.

It comes after I flashed my Hub with windows laptop, and actually I just downgrading the Firmware version from 7.02.123 to 7.02.112, then I got my resolution limited to 4k@30hz. (before this, i can have 4k@60hz with the latest firmware)


Then everything is just getting worst after realizing that I haven't the FW backup.
I come to the thread on this forum, and see that your thread attaching the firmware on latest date.

I Installed it, got the warning about “product id didn't match and the firmware was for a different board", just click ok (because on PDF says that), and then my CableMatters Hub is just die.

It cannot be detected as an Input, both on Win and Mac.
when i try to use VMM flash tool, (to recover / troubleshoot) there is an error message says cannot find synaptics MST DP hub IC
1731627725508.png



Is there anything I can do?
Please I really need your help guys
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.