Is it worth it to use a Mac Mini if you're using a 1080p monitor?

[Miyoi]

My Mac Mini comes in tomorrow and I've had a lot of people tell me that 1080p is dated technology. That it's antiquated and that the new standard is 4k minimum. This seems weird to me, considering by all measures most people aren't using 4k TV's yet, let alone monitors, and steam statistics tell us the majority are on 1080p while only 2% are using 4k.

This came up mainly because I was asking around about font smoothing. It turns out that even on 4k monitors there's some blurry font issues and it has to do with font rendering, and doesn't seem to be 1080p-specific. With that in mind, are they actually right? Am I going to have issues with 1080p with a Mac, either now or in the future, or is this simply a font smoothing issue? Are there other visual issues I might see? It seems like people don't use 1080p monitors with Macs often so I can't find a whole lot on this. I can't tell how good the support is for 1080p monitors.

Of course, they could have been completely wrong, Apple doesn't consider 4k the bare standard, and these issues will be fixed in a future patch and 1080p is completely fine, but I'm just worried I'm going to plug it in and see more issues than just the font which just seems to be an issue with everyone not on Retina screens right now.

 

[leman]

If you work with text, high DPI monitors are a night and day difference. Having used retina laptops for years, I simply can’t go back to old screen tech, those screens looked blurry and washed out and make my eyes tear. As to font smoothing, retina displays font need it, since they naturally provide smoothing via very small pixels.

Of course, in the end it’s up to you and your preferences.

 

[jerryk]

I use 2K and lower monitors most of the time. I do coding and find for desktop use, a 2K or 1080 works best for me and has the least eye strain.

 

[mj_]

There is literally no reason whatsoever to use a 1080p display over a 4K display other than price. The difference between a scaled 27" 4K display and a 27" FHD or even WQHD display is like night and day.

 

[abhi182]

+1 to what everyone else is saying.
I also use a 1080p windows laptop and while it's surely not bad and perfectly usable - the hiDPI rendering on a higher res monitor (for the same font/rendering size) just looks so much better.

You don't have to upgrade right away, nor would it be an issue for everyday usage- but you should upgrade ASAP if the cost is not a burden

PS: Text on 4K monitor and 4K video on TV are quite different.
The diff between 1080p and 4K on a TV is nowhere as dramatic as on a computer monitor while working with text (probably because You watch TV from a much farther distance vs working on a PC.)

 

[Miyoi]

There is literally no reason whatsoever to use a 1080p display over a 4K display other than price. The difference between a scaled 27" 4K display and a 27" FHD or even WQHD display is like night and day.

I have noticed that 4k monitors have become pretty affordable. Is it possible to get 24 inch 4k monitors? I find 27 inch monitors to be nausiating.

 

[mj_]

Apart from Apple's own LG Ultrafine 4K you mean? No idea.

 

[pldelisle]

I have noticed that 4k monitors have become pretty affordable. Is it possible to get 24 inch 4k monitors? I find 27 inch monitors to be nausiating.

There’s only one left on the market and it’s the Ultrafine.

Dell U2720Q, LG 27UL850 are the best in class 27 inch 4K displays being sold right now.

 

[uller6]

It seems to me like you’re asking about the differences between HiDPI retina monitors (4K) and regular monitors (1080p). I run both retina and non-retina monitors with my macs. Both types of monitors are fine. Retina displays are obviously much sharper, and I really notice this on long pages of text. I think regular displays are fine though.

Size is also important here. A 21” 1080p is much higher DPI than a 27” 1080p monitor, and thus a lot sharper. I think 27” 4K is too small to run at native 4K, but too large to run at full retina mode (1080p pixel doubled). The solution is to run that 4K display at a scaled resolution (think 27” 4K @ 1440p), but I’m not a fan as the display can be fuzzy and the performance laggy. I hear the new M1 macs don’t have performance issues with scaled resolutions however.

You should decide for yourself after getting your Mac mini and testing it with your 1080p monitor if you want an upgrade. But a 1080p screen will work fine.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I have a 1080p monitor for my mini. I didn't the look of it and decided to go headless using my iPad Pro or M1 Air.

 

[4sallypat]

I use a 24" Apple Cinema display (1900x1200) and it works perfect for text & HTML coding...

At home I have a 32" 4K and is impossible for web, text, etc but great for movies!

 

[MarkAtl]

My MBP connects to a 32” 4K monitor, my Mini to a 32” 4K TV. Both work well scaled to 1080p.

 

[||\||]

1080 looks really bad on anything past 10.13 due to a change to AA scaling. 21.5" doesn't looks good. Anything bigger is going to look worse.

 

[pldelisle]

1080 looks really bad on anything past 10.13 due to a change to AA scaling. 21.5" doesn't looks good. Anything bigger is going to look worse.

Never noticed that personally with mu Dell U2414H.

 

[JouniS]

I frequently switch between the 5k display on my 27" iMac and the 1080p 24" display on my gaming PC, and there is no substantial difference between the two. Of course the displays look different, but I can use either of them comfortably for extended periods.

There are some situations where I find the higher resolution useful:

• Photos look better on the iMac, because I can see all the small details.
• I often zoom in to the part of the display I'm reading. Because the original resolution is sufficiently high, text still looks good with 2x to 3x magnification.
• Some recent TV series show small details on large screens, and they look better in 4k than in 1080p. The effect is much more noticeable on a 55" TV than on the smaller computer displays.

 

[||\||]

Never noticed that personally with mu Dell U2414H.

Adjust your viewing distance.

 

[SpeQ]

I'm using a 24" 1920 X 1200 and I'm perfectly happy with it. No blurry text or anything. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing. The difference between a 24" and 27" 4K is like $150-200 vs $350-400. That's substantial to me.

 

[Miyoi]

Thanks for the opinions folks. Looks like people are pretty torn on it. It'll be in tomorrow morning so hopefully I don't notice it too badly. I appreciate everyone responding!

 

[ivnj]

I have a dell 24 inch 1080p works ok. I also have a 4k tv. Would that work? Or monitor is better than tv.

 

[pldelisle]

I have a dell 24 inch 1080p works ok. I also have a 4k tv. Would that work? Or monitor is better than tv.

A computer monitor is very different from a TV, especially in the input lag.

Using a TV as monitor isn’t a great idea.

 

[Project Alice]

I don't have anything higher than a 1080 display... (okay I do have a 1920x1200 but that's basically the same).
I will never understand the people who have a higher res display than that. Unless you're sitting in front of a 75" screen it makes no sense to me. 1080p is more than enough. I remember when I thought 1280x1024 was a high resolution...

 

[Moosebear]

I have noticed that 4k monitors have become pretty affordable. Is it possible to get 24 inch 4k monitors? I find 27 inch monitors to be nausiating.

There is this LG one, a lot cheaper than the Ultrafine. There's a discussion in another thread in this forum comparing these 2 24" offerings. I just bought the Ultrafine 4k and am happy with it despite the sticker shock.

LG 24UD58-B Monitor 24" 4K Ultrafine (3840 x 2160) IPS Display, FreeSync, On-Screen Control, Screen Split 2.0, Game Mode, Black Stabilizer - Black

Seeing is believing with the LG 24UD58 4k UHD monitor. Whether your playing games, watching movies, or just reading from your screen, the 4k UHD display provides stunning images at four times the resolution of standard full HD. The 24UD58 works hard, but plays hard too. With a host of gamer frien...

www.amazon.com

 

[Starfia]

It's been a while since I've used a 1080p display as my primary one, but I don't think that means there's anything wrong with it. It's not the state of the art, but it's fully supported.

I'd say that if you use macOS and get below 720p for your main display these days, things are likely to start feeling cramped – the occasional application might open with a window that takes up all (or more?) of the screen on the assumption you're using something larger – but I think even there, you'd get by if you really had to. I'm not sure I'm even aware of the font smoothing issues you mentioned, though I've sometimes noticed certain text appears bolder than it should based on the system's rendering.

All that in mind, the transition to "retina" resolutions on the Mac were amazing to me, and I don't think I could go back. I'm guessing you really don't know what you're missing, but again, nothing particularly wrong with that.

 

[Santiago]

I don't have anything higher than a 1080 display... (okay I do have a 1920x1200 but that's basically the same).
I will never understand the people who have a higher res display than that. Unless you're sitting in front of a 75" screen it makes no sense to me. 1080p is more than enough. I remember when I thought 1280x1024 was a high resolution...

Text simply looks miserable on non-retina screens. If you're gaming, you probably won't notice much of a difference, because you're looking at continuous images. If you're doing work and looking at text all day, like computer code, documents for human consumption, or spreadsheets, a retina screen looks so much better. I got a 5k iMac in 2014, and am now on an M1 Mini with an LG Ultrafine 5k, and I refuse to go lower.

 

[Project Alice]

Text simply looks miserable on non-retina screens. If you're gaming, you probably won't notice much of a difference, because you're looking at continuous images. If you're doing work and looking at text all day, like computer code, documents for human consumption, or spreadsheets, a retina screen looks so much better. I got a 5k iMac in 2014, and am now on an M1 Mini with an LG Ultrafine 5k, and I refuse to go lower.

Yeah none of that bothers me. The computer I use at work is an old Dell PC with 4:3 LCD monitor. Works just fine for spread sheets and text, or report writing which is mostly what it gets used for. Which you could do on literally anything... If I type something long I usually use a PowerBook G4 because they have the best keyboards. I couldn't care less what resolution my text looks like.
I know of people that do their typing on compact Macs.