[Deleted b/c replied to wrong post!] [accidentally replied to @motrek instead of @tornado99 -- sorry guys!]
Last edited:
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.
The *COMPLETE* list of 27" 5K Displays?
- Thread starter i486dx2-66
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
That's not my finding. I use a 5k@27" (218 ppi) and a 4k@27" (163 ppi) side-by-side, both at the default 2:1 integer scaling.
To my eyes, the difference is clear. Comparing the same absolute text size, I find the 5k is noticeably sharper. And the same if I don't re-size the text on the 4k to make it the same size as on the 5k. It's more blurry (softer) either way.
Then again, I have very good close vision (I used to be able to read the microprinting on US currency, and while I've lost a bit with aging, it's still quite good), and have always been very sensitive to text sharpness.
As I keep emphasizing, we're all different, and you can't extrapolate your experience to someone else. Yes, there is a pixel density beyond which no human could discern the difference, but the limited studies I've seen indicate we're not close to that with large displays.
Plus your 4k is 24" (185 ppi) rather than the usual 27" (163 ppi), so the difference may not be as noticeable.
Last edited:
@motrek, I also have a 285 ppi portable monitor. Even on that extreme pixel density, when I switch from 2x scaling to fractional scaling I notice everything is slightly blurry.
@theorist9, does your 4K have the same brightness, the same contrast, and most importantly, is it glossy? A matte coating immediately downgrades the sharpness.
@theorist9, does your 4K have the same brightness, the same contrast, and most importantly, is it glossy? A matte coating immediately downgrades the sharpness.
Yeah, that's my situation. It looks like the Kuycon can still be had from ClickClack for cheaper (they're ~$1,000 from Kuycon directly vs ~$800 from ClickClack) but the cheapest ASD I've seen locally is about $1500, and that's like, "slight cosmetic wear item on Craigslist" pricing. That's also 3x the price of my Mac Mini and since I'm not a graphic, photo, or video professional it's very hard to justify.
That's a good point—I can match brightness but not contrast, and the 4k is matte, which does affect sharpness.
But it really is fundamentally about the pixel density rather than those other factors.
I know this because I also used the 4k under High Sierra and earlier. Those provided subpixel text rendering, which significantly increases the effective horizontal resolution (naively it's a 3-fold increase,but in practice it's of course much less than that). And with those OS's, I was pleased with the sharpness of my 4k.
Thus, for the same monitor (and thus the same brightness, contrast, and coating), I observed a noticeable difference in sharpness between "plain" 4k (163 ppi) and something that was effectively significantly higher.
Hence you'll simply need to accept that others are able to see differences even if you cannot. There's nothing wrong with that--we're all different!
As an aside, I'll add that there are degrees of matte, and the reason I like this particular Dell is that it has a very light matte coating (this one of the things I researched extensively before I bought it), and thus has less effect on sharpness than most matte coatings (and certainly much less than Apple's nanotexture, which is very strong).
Last edited:
I sometimes switch between 1440p and 1692p logical resolution on my 4K monitor. The latter looks noticeably blurrier to me, but not because of fractional scaling. Because they're both doing fractional scaling. Presumably it's because the same stuff is being rendered at a lower physical resolution.
Be prepared for QC issues with the Kuycon. No one outside Kuycon or its vendors has statistics on the the actual frequency, but there does appear to be cause for concern.
There's also some debate whether ClickClack is selling the same quality of product as you get when you buy directly from Kuycon. I'd email Kuycon to ask.
I purchased a Kuycon G27X from ClickClack back in July 2023 and am pretty satisfied—it's still my daily driver. No dead pixels or backlight issues with mine. I don't doubt that it's a lottery though and am glad that I got lucky.
That said, I will be purchasing the successor to the Studio Display for the following reasons in order of priority:
That said, I will be purchasing the successor to the Studio Display for the following reasons in order of priority:
- True Tone
- Auto-Brightness
- Speakers
- Camera
@theorist9, but you haven't compared text on 163 ppi glossy nor 185 ppi glossy to 220 ppi glossy with 2x scaling, so it's unknown if your eyes would find either of those less sharp.
But I have compared text on 163 ppi matte to >163 ppi matte (">" b/c of subpixel text rendering) and found that effective increase in pixel density was sufficient to create a noticeable improvement in sharpness.
And if I can see that sharpness difference on a matte screen, I could certainly also see it on a glossy screen, since it's easier to detect differences without the interfering matte layer.
@theorist9, except for the fact that sharpness differences plateau at some point. You don't know what that threshold is for you until you try the intermediate points. Both of the cases you describe are further down the scale.
I actually returned a 285 ppi matte monitor as it was worse than any of my glossies except in the pitch dark.
I actually returned a 285 ppi matte monitor as it was worse than any of my glossies except in the pitch dark.
True, I don't know the threshold, but that's an entirely different question from what we were discussing, which was whether I can see a difference between 163 ppi and a 218 ppi (see screenshot below), and whether this is due to pixel density rather than coating.
I established I could see a difference between a 163 ppi matte and > 163 ppi matte (">" due to subpixel rendering). Since that difference would be less perceptible than the difference between a 163 ppi glossy and a 218 ppi glossy, it follows logically that I could percieve the latter as well.
So before we move onto a entirely different question, how about you first have the grace to acknowledge that I am indeed able to see what I assert I'm able to see? I think I've been very patient up to this point an addressing all your challenges to my own experience, but my patience does have its limits.
I.e., please don't move the goalposts mid-discussion. I can accept honest disagreement, but moving the goalposts ain't it.
Last edited:
Except for the fact that sharpness differences plateau at some point, as I have already pointed out.
Also, I think ppi is not a great metric to discuss monitors, as it ignores the fact that we sit further away as the device gets larger. The central vision of the human eye is most comfortable at a 30 degree FOV. But of course you can turn your head whilst working. Too much turning, and you might as well be watching a tennis match.
Using this calculator, and my real viewing distance of 50cm from my 24" 4K I get 56 degrees FOV, and 69 PPD. Maintaining that FOV for a 27" screen, and using 35cm viewing distance for a laptop I get the following:
- 13.3" MBP - 58 PPD
- 21.5" 4K iMac - 73 PPD
- 23.8" 4K - 69 PPD
- 27" 4K - 68 PPD (don't own e.g. Dough Spectrum)
- 27" 5K - 91 PPD (don't own but a colleague at work owns one e.g. ASD)
- PM 1 - 74 PPD
- PM 2 - 61 PPD
- PM 3 - 53 PPD
Adding in matte monitors introduces a significant degradation in sharpness. I returned a 285 ppi monitor with a light matte finish as it was blurry in normal daylight conditions, which is higher than 163 ppi with subpixel antialiasing.
Of course, some people will have higher visual acuity, but very few will need 91 PPD. I don't see anyone complaining their Macbook Pros are pixelated.
Last edited:
I have 2 that were purchased around the same time (April 2023) and am still happy with them as well. Considered moving to the PD2730s for the thunderbolt daisy chaining but their shipping keeps getting delayed so am going to wait and see what the next Studio Display brings as well
I've lost faith that apple will update the studio display this year.
I've gone ahead and ordered both the
ViewSonic VP2788-5K and Dell U2725QE. I'll report back my findings
I've gone ahead and ordered both the
ViewSonic VP2788-5K and Dell U2725QE. I'll report back my findings