How is your Mac Studio handling 4k display scaling?

[Sharky II]

Hi,

Currently running 2x 30" ACDs, and one of them is not able to maintain peak brightness. It needs to be run at full brightness because it's yellowed so much that, once calibrated, the screen is very dim (to compensate for the lack of blue light). I can literally watch a colorimeter read the brightness levels, slowly doing down each time I click 'update' to a max of 95 cd/m, and it's obviously very hot and uses 150W of power.

The other monitor is much better and can be run at 50% brightness to use around 80W (I have a wattmeter), but I still don't 100% trust the calibration. My calibrator is a Spyder 4, no longer supported after Mojave, so I'm using it with

I'm thinking of getting rid of everything and getting a 32" Benq PD3205 (or 3200 or 3220, depending on budget/second hand availability).

How is your Mac Studio handling the 4k scaling? Which res do you run and do you notice a performance hit? What about with dual 4k monitors?

I assume most are running a scaled 1440p. Is anyone using it @ native 4k?

I use Logic Pro mainly, but I am also a Capture One and FCPX user, where this becomes more of an issue.

I'm not ruling out purchasing a 1440p monitor, but really want the readability of text on a higher resolution display.

Thanks

 

[Sheepish-Lord]

If you got the cash go dual Studio Displays. All other monitors either have resolution issues, bad panel quality/specs, inferior build quality, or doesn’t wake up from sleeping as quickly as Apple’s monitor. Obviously not a cheap investment but the more you research the little things the more it becomes painfully obvious it’s not worth the headache unless you’re willingly to make compromises.

 

[Jim Lahey]

I can’t speak to the Mac Studio but in my view macOS looks very nice scaled to a 1440p UI on a 2160p panel. Certainly at 27”. At which size I’d classify it as ‘soft’ Retina. Retina with a softer edge….a world away from native 1440p anways.

My 2017 Intel MacBook Pro handles one external 4K monitor quite smoothly. Mostly 60fps but with a few skipped frames here or there with large animations and half a dozen desktops. A Studio won’t break a sweat.

 

[Sharky II]

If you got the cash go dual Studio Displays. All other monitors either have resolution issues, bad panel quality/specs, inferior build quality, or doesn’t wake up from sleeping as quickly as Apple’s monitor. Obviously not a cheap investment but the more you research the little things the more it becomes painfully obvious it’s not worth the headache unless you’re willingly to make compromises.

Unfortunately not possible for the time being, I'm afraid. Already in too deep with the Studio Ultra, and the 30" ACDs aren't worth much at all (one is yellowed, the other is almost perfect except for a big 'smudge' behind the backlight), so won't be getting much at all back from selling those.

I also never sleep my main machine as with various devices connected it always seems to cause problems. The Mac Studio boots so quickly, doesn't bother me

I also need a 32" because I sit quite far away from the screen in my (music) studio

 

[Killerbob]

I have two LG 32UL950-W monitors. They are 32” 4K Thunderbolt monitors, and they scale real nice on my Trashcan Mac Pro, with no performance impact, and I have no doubt they will be equally great on my Mac Studio - but I will see in one week.

Their advantage is that they are proper Thunderbolt monitors with Thunderbolt 3 bandwidth, and of course the UltraFine 4K IPS panels. I can daisy-chain the two of one Thunderbolt cable, and Thunderbolt is better at handling higher frequencies. When using the DisplayPort alt mode, the setup is using less comms lanes, which is why you cannot daisy-chain DisplayPort monitors.

 

[Sharky II]

I have two LG 32UL950-W monitors. They are 32” 4K Thunderbolt monitors, and they scale real nice on my Trashcan Mac Pro, with no performance impact, and I have no doubt they will be equally great on my Mac Studio - but I will see in one week.

Their advantage is that they are proper Thunderbolt monitors with Thunderbolt 3 bandwidth, and of course the UltraFine 4K IPS panels. I can daisy-chain the two of one Thunderbolt cable, and Thunderbolt is better at handling higher frequencies. When using the DisplayPort alt mode, the setup is using less comms lanes, which is why you cannot daisy-chain DisplayPort monitors.

Thanks - but which resolution are you running - like 1440p?

 

[Killerbob]

I am running 3840x2160 at 60Hz on both, one in landscape, and one in portrait. I use SwitchResX as supposed to the macOS Display settings.

 

[Sharky II]

OK but... that's not scaling, that's native 4K?

 

[shelkonnery]

I’ve been using the Dell UltraSharp 32” 4k U3223QE with my Mac Studio.
It’s my first non-Apple display in 20 years and I must say I’m quite happy with it.

I understand the community despises anything with PPI below what Apple usually offers and I’ve been there, but it hasn’t been an issue at all.

The IPS Black contrast and blacks are great, it comes very decently calibrated out of the box and it’s a very useful ports hub - which would come in handy for your dual screen setup.

I run it in native 4k 3840x2160 @ 60Hz, so no scaling.

 

[Killerbob]

If you say so... I know it works, and I get what I paid for, i.e. a 4K resolution on my 4K monitors. 4K on a smaller screen would be terribly small. I tried it on a 27" Studio, and I didn't like it - and forget about 5K...

 

[Sharky II]

Oh, cool - I didn't realise there were people running 32" screens @ native 4K - not sure if I've ever actually seen one in person. I've just seen so many people say that it's too small @ native that I assumed this was the case. I thought you'd need 40"+ for most people to do that.

I can't sit that close to my screen most of the time (Logic Pro) so I'm guessing need some level of scaling, but it's interesting to know that people are able to run the screen at native resolution.

Perhaps I can a purchase a monitor arm, then I can bring it close when I am doing photo/video work and run it native @ 4k, then 1440p scaling for using Logic (further away, but not so graphics intensive)...

 

[shelkonnery]

I really appreciate the screen real estate this resolution provides.
I guess years of smartphones got me used to small UI.

 

[Killerbob]

I know, right...

I love 4K on my 32" monitors, and I sit about 1m from them both. I am nearsighted, but have reading glasses that give me perfect vision on that distance. Also, most of my work is graphics work, and it really shows the details in a the RAW files I use (8,256 x 5,504 pixels).

For managing the real estate I use Divvy - couldn't live without it.

 

[theluggage]

I use Logic Pro mainly, but I am also a Capture One and FCPX user, where this becomes more of an issue.

1440p scaled should be perfect for Logic Pro*.

You might have issues with photo work - but even that depends on how you work. In 1440p scaled there's no real way of getting 1 pixel in the source image to map to 1 pixel on the screen. At normal viewing distances that's not really perceptible unless you look at something like a photo test target - that's only really a problem if you want to edit photos etc. at "actual pixels" resolution and lean in close to start checking/tweaking individual pixels (rather than simply zoom in until the pixels are clearly visible).

The other potential issue is if you're using 3D software, or other software that really hammers the GPU, in which case the extra GPU load of scaling might be the last straw. Mind you, it's also worth remembering that as far as the software is concerned, "1440p scaled" is actually 5k so you might want to set the software to render at a lower res...

...but "native" 4k should start to be usable at 30" 16:9 or more (depending on your eyesight) and don't rule out the 2:1 "HiDPI" modes which are still effectively native 4k but with double-size user interface elements. The UI does look a bit 'Lego Duplo' on a large screen, but people who claim it is somehow unusable are exaggerating somewhat. Once you full-screen the app (or just hide the dock & menu) and adjust the app's own zoom/font size settings to taste it depends on the design of the app you are using. I've found things like Logic, the Affinity apps and Visual Studio Code perfectly usable in 2:1 mode - the actual content you are working on can be zoomed to taste.

I'd say that the time to consider getting a 1440p display is if you have a single, dominant job that falls foul of the issues above. Otherwise, for mixed use, 4k is just more versatile, and it only takes a few seconds to switch mode.

Personally, I've got a pair of 3840x2560 (3:2) 28.2" Huawei Mateviews - and find that, with the 3:2 ratio (it's like a 27" 4k worth a couple extra inches of screen area glued on the bottom) the 2:1 mode "works for me". The equivalent of '1440p scaled' (2560x1707) works well too, though. It's a pity there isn't more choice of 3:2 or other aspect ratios - one annoyance you'll face is going from the 16:10 ACD to the 16:9 of "4k" UHD.

(NB: if one of your ACDs is still good, why not start with a single ~30" 4k display alongside it and see how it goes?)

(* the MIDI Environment window doesn't seem to have gotten any love since the days of VGA, and is getting really fiddly to use on any higher-res screen, but that's a depreciated feature now, anyway).

 

[TTYS0]

How is your Mac Studio handling the 4k scaling? Which res do you run and do you notice a performance hit? What about with dual 4k monitors?

I'm running two Gigabyte M32U 4K monitors at 1440 scaled resolution and 144Hz. I find them to be clear with text, even using scaled resolution, which is what I was primarily concerned with. I don't notice any performance hit, and considering the hardware, would be amazed if any overhead introduced by resolution scaling could be noticed in the first place.

 

[Shamgar]

My main workstation is a Mac Studio connected to 2x 27" 4k monitors (one at 120Hz SDR or lower Hz HDR and the other at 60Hz SDR). I run them both at "equivalent to 1440p" and have some edge case issues related to HDR behavior and high refresh rates messing with specific apps, but no general performance issues. Logic Pro and Final Cut work just fine for me. General UI performance when running the higher refresh 4k display even at scaled resolution is smooth and wonderful. UI and text is less crisp compared to the 5k 27" iMacs that I occasionally use, but I still find it vastly preferable to the 27" 1440p monitors I also use.

 

[Matt2012]

I use a Samsung Neo G9 49” ultra wide (5120x1440) now after going through x2 mateviews and a triple Studio display set up.
The studio is a nice monitor but with x2 I always looked at the centre of the big bezels and with a third, things just got too big and messy as you cannot rename the monitors so if you use audio or the camera, you have no real idea which one is which.
The G9 isn’t as crisp as the studio display obviously but I’m happy with it after much trial and error (and expense!), It just feels way more comfortable to work on than any other dual or triple set up.
It’s no bigger than a dual set up but you actually get more working space as you can have open windows in the centre of the screen.
And I can use it with my PC too and run Mac OS at 120hz

 

[jasoncarle]

I have an LG 32UL950 and I normally run it scaled to 2560x1440 and it works fine and looks great. If the 1K price point is too much their are a few models that are cheaper that will probably work just as well.

LG makes the panels for Apple, iirc.

32” UltraFine™ UHD 4K Monitor - 32UL950-W | LG USA

Discover the 32” UltraFine™ UHD 4K Monitor that features HDR10 and AMD FreeSync™. Find reviews, specs, and more for 32UL950-W.

www.lg.com

 

[handheldgames]

The MacOS System Preference for Displays has never provided the affined controls users need. I'd suggest investing $16 in SwitchResX and have full control of the resolutions displayed on the Mac Studio. I'd suggest finding the best HiDPI resolution that's comfortable for your eyes and workflow.

 

[jasoncarle]

I agree, SwitchResX is worth the $16 it costs.

 

[Sharky II]

I was able to try out my fathers M1 Mac Mini with 32” 4K LG monitor

I was surprised that the default scaled 1920x1080 is surprisingly nice to use, not just because of the sharpness, but because of the distance you might sit while doing general browsing with a single window. I’d be happy to use this for general browsing and emails when not doing ‘real work’. I thought it would look comically 'jumbo', but it doesn't, and you can always reduce the text size too.

1440p scaled looked fine, couldn’t really tell much difference in sharpness.

Full 4K native res was unusable for me, and I have pretty good eye sight/don’t require glasses. The menus at the top, iStat etc are all way too small unless you sit right on top of the monitor. I sit an arm to two arm lengths away most of the time.

Still, it is a nice option to switch to when working with native 4K video, for playback. I’d also consider it for proofing photos, when editing, if you have another display with your tools and a smaller preview of the image on

I wasn’t able to gauge any performance difference at the scaled resolutions as I was just messing around, but I actually think the sharp 1080p resolution is the surprising thing for me.

I often use my 15” rMBP at the native 1440 res rather than 1920 for the same reason. Better performance and easier to read at a distance.

I don’t think it was so much sharper than my ACD but side by side I’m sure it would be. I’ll check out the XDR and Studio Display next time I’m near an apple store, but they’re out of budget in any case.

I’ll have to see on the performance front!

 

[TightLines]

If you got the cash go dual Studio Displays. All other monitors either have resolution issues, bad panel quality/specs, inferior build quality, or doesn’t wake up from sleeping as quickly as Apple’s monitor. Obviously not a cheap investment but the more you research the little things the more it becomes painfully obvious it’s not worth the headache unless you’re willingly to make compromises.

Terrible advice - sorry. Apple branded displays are over hyped and are wildly over priced… Maybe you disagree, and thats fine… but anyone who thinks charging $6k for a display and another $1k to have a stand for it or $200 for an adapter just so it can then use a common standard wall mount… is okay… well... lets just say may be a bit uninformed.

Perhaps you may want to venture out and see what is equivalent in this area of peripherals that may not be adorned with the coveted Apple logo? Just because is says Apple on the product, doesn‘t make it a better or even equal in quality of another like kind product… and sorry to burst your bubble.. but if what I have read multiple times now from varying sources, Apple doesn’t even make their own monitors… Word is, Samsung does.

 

[rmadsen3]

For managing the real estate I use Divvy - couldn't live without it.

Really wish Mizage would update the app for Apple silicon!

 

[Killerbob]

Really wish Mizage would update the app for Apple silicon!

Divvy works with Rosetta, I just have noticed that sometimes I have to cycle through the shortcuts for the window to be just right…

 

[rmadsen3]

Divvy works with Rosetta, I just have noticed that sometimes I have to cycle through the shortcuts for the window to be just right…

Yup. I moved recently from Intel to M1. Before the switch I thought I'd have to replace Divvy. But it runs just fine on the new laptop -- thank goodness! Went in the app today, adjusted some settings. Reminds me that Divvy is best in class. I wish other apps had the grid overlay and click-and-drag functionality. Do you know of any app that does?? I think it's Moom developers who've said that the 'grid overlay' thing is patent-protected or something like that?