That's because your monitor is not a hi-Res display. (i.e. not 4K or 5K). It is a regular 2560x1440
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Officially giving up on the Mac Mini 2018 + 4K monitor dream
- Thread starter Tigerman82
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They’re fine, to me. The bezels aren’t the thinnest compared with newer models but honestly that just blends away when I’m focussed on something.
PPI is my main concern too.
I already have Ultrafine 4K waiting for me, but was considering the P2415Q if i couldn't get the UltraFine. Slightly larger screen still intrigues me since I've been working on 1080p 27" in the meantime and got used to it... which is still larger ui than 24" (but sloppier) and I got used to it. Am afraid I'm gonna find the 22" ultrafine too small, and 24" seems like a sweet spot.
I guess it’ll depend on your usage/preferences/eyesight.
I find 1080p too big on 24” so I’m using them in 1440p “scaled” res. On a 2018 Mini I wouldn’t recommend this without an eGPU if you have more than one.
I'm probably going to use only the 4K display + a 9.7" PackedPixels that i have, and i really really don't want to use scaled after using 1920*1200@2x on the MBP for years... That's why I thought that 24" might look big.
My eyesight is not perfect, but the 1-step scaled on the 15" mbp seemed fine. I prefer native on the 13".
I'm not that bent up on screen real-estate, 1920*1200 suits me well for most things + additional smallish screen as a "scratch"/dump.
I agree that this is a matter of usage, personal preference and eyesight.
I'm 71 years old but my corrected eyesight is reasonably good, and I've found my 24-inch 4k monitor at 2x scaling to be about right. The default font in the Finder is a bit too small, so I increased that one notch, and some internet pages in Safari are too large, so I made those smaller. On balance, the 24-inch monitor is right for me.
From my experience, and generally speaking, the smaller the screen, the closer one tends to sit to it.
And the closer one sits, the higher resolution, and smaller the fonts can be.
For example I am equally happy with a 21 inch 4K iMac (same as LG 4K), but tend to work quite close to it. And sometimes even scale it to higher screen resolutions.
By contrast, at work, I sit further back with 27" + 24" and often wish I had yet *more* screen space, and often consider the default font size of the 27" to be too small.
And the closer one sits, the higher resolution, and smaller the fonts can be.
For example I am equally happy with a 21 inch 4K iMac (same as LG 4K), but tend to work quite close to it. And sometimes even scale it to higher screen resolutions.
By contrast, at work, I sit further back with 27" + 24" and often wish I had yet *more* screen space, and often consider the default font size of the 27" to be too small.
What do you guys think of the BenQ PD3200U
https://www.benq.com/en-us/monitor/designer/pd3200u/specifications.html
Will scaling be an issue with this monitor, thanks
I have the mm 2018 i7 32gb ram
https://www.benq.com/en-us/monitor/designer/pd3200u/specifications.html
Will scaling be an issue with this monitor, thanks
I have the mm 2018 i7 32gb ram
Good choice, but pricy. This is IPS panel with a good response rate. You could save some money with a VA panel, but ghosting is more apparent on those. Before anybody mention TN and how they are faster, be warned that they are also awful to look at.
Hey everyone, I'm thinking of building a Mac mini 2018 to lowest specs with the i7 6 core and upgrading RAM to 32gb. I currently own a LG 27" 4k UK650 monitor and I'm wondering if by adding something like the gigabyte gaming box with RX 580 via thunderbolt 3 eGPU would help scale the LG UI to 1440 hiDPI without any lagging. I really don't want to see stutter in youtube 4k streaming or UI elements on my LG monitor. I don't do any gaming so I don't care about that. I just want sharp text, a little more real-estate than 1080 doubled UI, and no stutter when streaming 4k.
I don't think you'll need an eGPU if you're on a single monitor set up. I watch 4k videos on my i7 mac mini natively. I used to have an external 580 for gaming, but since moved to PC. I'd just use the mini by itself first and see if it works well enough before investing on the eGPU set up.
If you don't game or render, a radeon 570 is just as good for your purposes (to save a couple of bucks). You probably would need an eGPU for dual or triple monitor set ups (or 120hz+ refresh rates at 4k).
Thanks for your quick response. I've been hearing a lot about scaling the UI down to 1440 for more real-estate than the 1080p doubled UI and an overall lame experience with 4k monitors/ mac mini due to the lacking graphics in it. Do you notice this when running 1440 hiDPI on the 4k monitor? I can watch 4k video on my Sony X940E if I want, but would be pretty upset if the UI is lagging when set to 1440p hiDPI for normal everyday mac use. This was my initial reasoning for investigating the eGPU combo with mini 2018.
I personally don't recommend this. The slight lag is barely noticeable, and if you're working mostly with stills, you won't be missing much. But the effect on framerate and image quality is a deal breaker for me. The motion of a 60fps youtube video is much better on native resolution (I can't tell if this is because of monitor or how mac os is handling it though).
I would just run Mac OS in 4k and run the 1440p video (either windowed or stretch to full screen). Also, I'm not understanding how you get more real estate with lower resolution (the mac isn't running at 1080p and doubling everything unless you are taking the larger text option). You're literally getting more pixels with high resolution. Running at 4k is You can manually adjust font and icon sizes if they are too big/small at 4k. The 3 middle options, you really are running at a lower resolution (I think).
BTW, monitor settings used to be transparent about this, but now you have to hold the option key while clicking the scaled button to see actual monitor resolutions. 3840x2160 is the option you want on 4k monitors for ideal performance (if I'm understanding you correctly, you're using the default 5 image scale from "larger text" to "more space"). I believe full resolution is the "more space" option, but I just use from the list or default for display (depending on how the monitor is behaving).
I would just run Mac OS in 4k and run the 1440p video (either windowed or stretch to full screen). Also, I'm not understanding how you get more real estate with lower resolution (the mac isn't running at 1080p and doubling everything unless you are taking the larger text option). You're literally getting more pixels with high resolution. Running at 4k is You can manually adjust font and icon sizes if they are too big/small at 4k. The 3 middle options, you really are running at a lower resolution (I think).
BTW, monitor settings used to be transparent about this, but now you have to hold the option key while clicking the scaled button to see actual monitor resolutions. 3840x2160 is the option you want on 4k monitors for ideal performance (if I'm understanding you correctly, you're using the default 5 image scale from "larger text" to "more space"). I believe full resolution is the "more space" option, but I just use from the list or default for display (depending on how the monitor is behaving).
Last edited:
I understand that aspect of it when setting to native 4k, but scaling the UI to 1440p hiDPI does give your screen more room for side by side windows and such without making everything else way too small. I've heard when doing this there is noticeable lag though because the GPU has to kick in heavily to scale everything to 1440 on a 4k monitor and those aren't even numbers.
Some have said that increasing RAM to 32gb or 64gb helped. Some have said an RX 580 eGPU has helped get rid of any UI lag when scaled. I'm just curious.
In the end I guess I could just stick with "default for display" options, but that zooms everything in a little too big for my liking on a nice 27" monitor. I'd rather have more useable space with slightly smaller UI, but not if lag is going to be introduced.
When you choose from the 3 middle options, you really are running at a lower resolution. More space is the native resolution, and the larger text, you're still running at 4k but running everything double sized (so it "feels like" 1080p).
Personally I would hold option key while clicking scaled, and then picking the highest option. If things are too small, you can manually increase the size of most things. This is all preference though. (middle 3 options are slightly crappier on the mini as previously mentioned, even with more ram. eGPU would probably mitigate some of problem, but quality is lower regardless).
Thank you again. Yes 1440p does look blurry because currently I'm running late 2013 retina MBP via HDMI 1.4 to the LG 4k monitor. When I hook up my wifes 2017 macbook via USB-C to Displayport I get more available resolution options as well as 1440p hiDPI which looks clean and fine, but things do lag a bit. Youtube videos in 4k are not watchable. Can't tell if its because her specs aren't great with a base model 13" from 2017 or if its the issues with Scaling the monitor and trying to watch the content.
In my opinion, running a 27 inch 4K screen at native 4K resolution is too small for macOS user elements. As the user posts, the 'normal' size is approx 2560x1440 effective screen resolution.
There are lots of people that say running in these scaled modes makes no sense. I disagree completely. They work very well, to bring the benefits of a high DPI display, without ridiculously small or large (2x) user elements.
Regarding the question: the i7 Mac mini with at least 16GB RAM can run at scaled resolutions with a 4K target screen pretty smoothly. I am effectively running a 5K plus a second 4K monitor without an eGPU. It works OK for me, but I agree that it isn't completley smooth.
I would try it out, and if it isn't up to what you want, try adding an eGPU.
There are lots of people that say running in these scaled modes makes no sense. I disagree completely. They work very well, to bring the benefits of a high DPI display, without ridiculously small or large (2x) user elements.
Regarding the question: the i7 Mac mini with at least 16GB RAM can run at scaled resolutions with a 4K target screen pretty smoothly. I am effectively running a 5K plus a second 4K monitor without an eGPU. It works OK for me, but I agree that it isn't completley smooth.
I would try it out, and if it isn't up to what you want, try adding an eGPU.
Exactly what I was thinking. Start with the most affordable upgrade and see what happens. Then consider something like the Gigabyte Gaming Box with RX 580 via thunderbolt 3 next.
All I'm saying is try it without the eGPU first. Scaled modes have their uses, just understand you are compromising something for it. There is lag on the 2018 mac mini, but I personally didn't mind that aspect (as mentioned before, it was the image quality and frame rate that was a deal breaker for me).
I agree that 27" 4k is a bit small (I use a 32" monitor myself). Certain 4k TVs can improve the experience at full resolution too (find one that has 4:4:4 chroma and low input latency).
I agree that 27" 4k is a bit small (I use a 32" monitor myself). Certain 4k TVs can improve the experience at full resolution too (find one that has 4:4:4 chroma and low input latency).
Agreed. My X940E does 2.0 bandwidth so no 4k 60 12bit 4:4:4 because no HDMI 2.1. Stuck with 4:2:2 max on 4k or can do 1080 4:4:4 8bit
So in short, will I be able to buy a really nice 4k or 5k monitor to use with my Mac Mini 2018 with 32 ram and i7? Currently waiting to see what the new Apple display will be like. Would be very bummed if I can't use it
I'm sure you'll be fine in general, but if you want to drive tons of pixels and utilize smooth scaling, you should look into combining an eGPU to the mini. Thats what I gather anyway. I'm running one 4k 27" screen now with no scaling and my old 2013 Macbook Retina does fine via HDMI. Looking to only use the one monitor with the Mac Mini when I get it and have a Sonnet 550 box with Vega 56 ready to go for it. Also will be using the Samsung X5 1TB as boot SSD drive and upgrade to 32gb of ram from 8gb base model 128gb/8gb i7. Can't wait to actually buy the MM. Its the last piece in the puzzle.
Why run an external boot drive on the ‘18 Mini? It can only be slower.
Plus the ‘13 MacBook only does 30 Hz @ 4K via HDMI, so I can’t imagine that is too pleasant to use.