Honestly, I thought your first video about this topic was rather clear, makes good sense. Message is unless you can accommodate a monitor with minimal size of 32” in 16:9, don’t bother getting 4K. I am using dual monitors - one is the Dell P2715Q 27 inch 4K and a Dell U2415 24 inch 2K and am experiencing the same problem with the 4K monitor and wondered why I even bothered spending the money on it. My desk size can only have two monitors no larger than 27’. Really appreciate your vid and now making this follow up response to the naysayers. Thank you
@@walkmanbg I would like to know too. By the way, did you purchase your 24-25 inch 1440p monitor? Did you need to scale? What is your assessment of working with two monitors with different resolutions?
@@n2o2co2h2o I got 2x27 4k and scale it to 2308 x something. Using Better Display software, it looks great! 1440p scaling on 27 is too small for me, 1080p too large even though it is the default one and looks great!
Your explanation in the other video was perfect, maybe some people are too lazy to pay attention. I've looked for this answer for a long time. I have a 2019 MacBook pro with the intel i9. For years I've been wanting to upgrade my 27 inch Thunderbolt display which is 1440p, to a 4K monitor. The Thunderbolt display is a a great monitor but by now it is ancient. Back in march, I finally got a 27 inch LG 4k monitor. BUT, after first time hooking it up, the performance was so underwhelming that I literally disconnected the monitor, placed it back in the box, and never used it. I do photo and video editing. I was hoping that maybe later getting an m1 chip MacBook could solve the issue.
Which operating system you use is a personal choice. Cannot really switch between and Mac OS just because of scaling issues just like most of us aren’t switching between Android and iOS every fewm months, so I don’t understand those comments at all. Just seems like a way to take a dig at Apple products. Now I’ll watch the rest of the video…
I switched to apple because of the stability issues of windows also when it comes better portability, better looking UI, no blue screen green screen circus from updates apple is way better for photo and video editing ... People taking a dig at apple products makes no sense in my opinion... Windows UI and everything looks very cheap in my opinion
You shouldn’t apologize you were exactly right 4K is totally useless on a Mac Book Air. Proper scaling is everything. On 4/10/24 I bought a 27 inch ASUS PA278CV For $249 on Amazon plugged it into my MacBook Air M1 worked perfectly right out of the box. It came with a USB-C connection and cable, so it charges my MacBook with 65 W of power. The 1440 scaling is perfect and the colors are great. It came with a three-year warranty and a guarantee of pixels who could ask for more only $249?💻🖥️🤪 I tried the Dell 27 inch 4K $299 monitor put it back in the box after two hours of use. As you had stated, the scaling had the Goldilocks syndrome,never seemed quite right too small or too big plus the colors were washed out compared to the ASUS. Also, the Dell only had a one-year warranty makes you wonder if they know some thing we don’t. You only get the three-year warranty if you bump up to the more costly $400 and up monitors.👺🖥️
Mac has a tendency to set 4K displays to scale with LoDPI (non-retina). This makes the image quality slightly blurry and makes the text especially not crisp. The app betterdisplay forces HiDPI (retina) mode which tremendously improves the crispness of the images and especially makes the text sharp similar to native macbook and ipad dispalys. I highly recommend it as it will solve most mac image quality issues.
3rd party app *BetterDisplay* HighDPI modes that supports ALL displays is the correct answer here. Also look for 3:2 aspect ratio 4k 10-bit color display with high pixel density or even 28” 2k display low pixel density to suit your needs. For video editing and 3D work *so* much nonsense. All video editing and 3D software “scales” via virtual displays and frame buffers. These workloads demand massive amounts of I/O, GPU and CPU to perform well with 4kUHD or 1080pHD video files and output. That’s why PC laptops have RTX or 10+ GPU cores (Pro, Max) to handle these tasks. Windows “300%” scaling on 15” >200ppi and smaller displays on Surface, 4k, 5k displays is not fun to configure and no picnic for my myopic (-6sphere) eyes.
Agreed. That is the app that saved my day... Fiddeling with the DPI made the image "workable" for text. Even text is horrible without that program. And I saw that this "featre" was build into MacOS but was taken out! That is soooooo crappy move my Apple. That comment alone made me anry and almost selling my m3 and go virtual on MacOS. It's fustrating that Windows and Mac world is not more aligned here.
I think people are missing the main point here, which is the PHYSICAL PIXELS of the monitor. This problem is not about PPI, but about scaling physical pixels. A 4K monitor has 3840 x 2160 pixels, which are micro points of light. When you reduce the resolution to 1080p (1920x1080), you basically use 2 physical pixels from your monitor to represent 1px of the image. The quality gets much better, and that's called RETINA. Now if you scale a 4K monitor to 1440p (2550x1440), you are telling your monitor to use 1.5 physical pixels from it to represent 1px of the image. But there's no such thing as 1.5 physical pixels! Each pixel is one point of light. You can use 2, 3, or more, but you can't use half or any decimal. That's why 5K is the retina display for 1440p resolution. I'm just wondering how Windows handles this...
I liked your previous video and agree 100%. Had exactly the same issue on my mac and I thought I was crazy. Rude people should just stop complaining and go out and buy the 4K monitor. It's their money, so they can waste it if they want to. It helped me and I am sure there are others like me. Thanks!
Not positive, but I think the comment at 11:48 about scaling on the monitor about running at lower-than-native resolution isn't saying you can change the native resolution, or that there isn't scaling involved at all, but rather that the scaling happens on the monitor rather than on your computer. Displays have built in scaling so that a device can send a, say, 1080p signal to a 4k display, and it can still display it using the entire monitor, rather than having a small image in the center with black boxes on all sides. Display scaling _tends_ to be worse than GPU (/CPU, if the device has integrated graphics) scaling, but it does mean that it doesn't have a performance cost to the computer. I think whether this is a viable resolution really depends on the monitor. Some high end monitors have great display scaling, to the point you might even prefer it to the mac scaling, but I don't know whether your 4k monitor was one of them.
Honestly, I never thought about this at all when considering a monitor. I just picked up one of the new Mac Mini M2 Pro and now looking to pair a decent monitor and was just thinking 4k all the way. Even though I'm pretty sure this new machine will handle the upscaling and then downscaling just fine, I just don't like the fact that it would have to do that at all and use unnecessary burden on the system, however unnoticeable it may be. So I understood your original video to mean that 4K isn't always as cut and dry as it seems, which to someone like me (not an expert tech person) it at least gave me some pause to consider screen size as well as resolution. For a system as optimized as apple's new hardware, I don't like the idea of things not being as optimized as possible (as in, performing extra tasks all the time because I chose a less that optimal configuration). So thanks for the original video and this one.
Given that Apple appears to target 110 dpi for system menus and windows, anything that departs too far from that results in text that are too big or too small. What I noticed is that focusing on the vertical lines of physical pixels per screen size helps to simplify things. Potential problems can happen with 4k screens which has 2160 vertical lines. On a 27 in monitor this is around 160 dpi and on 32 in monitor, this is 140 dpi. Since they are both not anywhere near 110 dpi, scaling is needed. What is clear is that under demanding scenarios which most of us probably would not notice, performance can be compromised. How does Apple do it? On a 32 in XDR with 3384 vertical lines, Apple uses 2 lines for each display line so that it acts like a monitor with 1692 lines resulting in 108 dpi. And the 27 in Studio with 2880 vertical lines scaled to 1440 lines results in 109 dpi. Since Apple’s monitors are using 2 physical lines for each display line, you do get sharper text and dividing by 2 is a simple operation, the performance burden is minimized. What this says is that if we use a 4k monitor which has 2160 vertical lines, if it is a 32 in monitor, we need to scale it to 1692 vertical lines like the XDR. But there is no way to get to 1692 from 2160 that is evenly divisible. So there will be “shimmering” during scrolling and this operation is probably computationally more taxing than just dividing by 2. However, 2160 times 3/4 is 1620 lines and 103 dpi which should avoid “fractional” scaling and probably computationally less taxing. The text would be a bit larger than ideal but this could improve performance and visual quality. But without 3rd party software this option is not offered out of the box. For 27” monitors, this problem is potentially less problematic by using 2/3 scaling which is 2160 scaled down to 1440 for 109 dpi. Since this scaling is evenly divisible, 3 physical lines per 2 display lines, we should experience less visual distortions and hopefully less performance issues. But if one’s use is very demanding then I suppose even doing the 2/3 scaling can be a problem. I have a 4k 32” monitor like many MacBook users and I chose the 1692 line scaling option. While I have not experienced performance issues because I am not doing anything graphically intensive, I do see that it isn’t as sharp as my MacBook’s screen. But at the normal viewing distance it is “good enough” for me. But since everyone’s visual acuity is different and everyone’s requirements are unique, there is no way for anyone to say if getting a 4k 32” monitor is always good or bad. In fact, I know that some people with good eyes are perfectly comfortable with 140 dpi that result in tiny text, and use their 4k monitor at its native 2160 lines setting. I suppose if you have the cash, some would say just buy the XDR!
I agree with everything you’ve said in this video apart from the response to the question about 120hz vs 60hz. I used to be someone that thought “eh, who needs more than 60”, but now - it’s SO hard to go back once you use that high refresh rate. It’s just amazing and hard to put into words how fast everything feels. I literally feel more productive because of it. So I’d recommend to people to go for a gaming monitor that can be calibrated well for creative work - those do exist. Out of the box the colors might be whack but once you calibrate those, and get it looking identical to your macbook - it’s life changing. And I am also using a 13” m1 macbook pro 2020 version. It’s lovely using it on a high refresh monitor with good colors. I was thinking about upgrading to the 16” macbook pro to have more screen real estate, but this monitor has changed everything for me.
@@lcsmn0217 I got the Dell S2721DGF. Its black levels aren’t great, but I was able to calibrate it to look virtually identical to my MacBook Pro display, so I feel very comfortable that my colors are great while editing photos and videos, and that 165hz refresh rate is just *chef’s kiss*
@@ksc6000 On Apple page they state that MacBook Pro M1 2020 can connect up to two monitors with 60Hz, 6k. So how can you utilise 165Hz when your laptop doesn't support that? I've the same model and am researching for 27”monitor.
Apparently some people just can't comprehend retina display, not that it to be expected and you did a great job in your original video that helped me making my purchasing decision for a monitor that will be exclusively used with MainStage so I really don't want to put any extra load on my M4 Pro MBP resources.
I'm late to this discussion but I've been using a wall mounted (over my desk and using the HDMI 4:4:4 pass through) 42" 4k LG C3 as a monitor for a while and it's amazing. It scales to the "good zone" at about 105ppi. I have to lean in to less than 10 inches away before I can MAYBE see a pixel. The color and gamut is amazing as well. The HDR and brightness is among the best, easily. I currently dual use with my pallette on a 27" and workspace on the 42". I'm going to dual 42" it soon. You can get 42" C3s on sale for under $900 just about anywhere.
@Hunter King What I'd like to understand is what is the difference between "Resolution" and "UI Looks Like" in macOS System Information? It's still so so so confusing. I have a 32" UHD 3840X2160 monitor. When I select 2560x1440, macOS says "Resolution: 5120x2880, UI Looks like 2560x1440" .... why is macOS reporting the incorrect resolution of my 4K UHD monitor? It's very confusing.
It upscales to the native Mac resolution of 5k hence 5120x2880 and then halve it to hit your desired UI of 2560x1440. Your monitor's resolution is still 4k i.e. 3840x2160 but your UI's resolution is at 2560x1440 hence why your UI looks larger than keeping it at the default 3840x2160 resolution.
@@implisyt Thank you, but what do you mean when you write "native Mac resolution of 5k"? In Windows it shows me the correct resolution. What happens when I hook up a regular 1080p monitor?
I guess I’m trying to understand why macOS has to upscale to a resolution that my monitor doesn’t even support. I’m very confused why the developers of this operating system did something like this. It seems very counterproductive and counterintuitive.
@@asafblasbergvideographer Unsure about Windows however for Macs as per the video, the native resolution is 5k hence why the Apple Studio and the previously sold 27" iMac are all at 5k resolution. So if your resolution is not 5k it will upscale it to 5k first and then downscale it to your selected resolution. Which explains what you are seeing as stated in your first post.
New sub! I think you did a masterful job explaining something that I could never understand. I’m not there yet fully, but sure learned a lot from you. Thank you for taking the time to make this video! Not enough pancake though.
Just a little info on displays in general: the percentile coverage of a color space does not make it xy% accurate, it just means, the display can cover the extreme colors xy%. The spec you showed at 7:05 is a lot more informative though, as it mentions a color accuracy of DeltaE
10:53 if "double 1440p" is the sweets spot for Mac, would you say the Lg Ergo Dual Up monitor can work? It's a monitor with 2560 x 2880 (like two 1440p monitores stacked up), a roughly square resulution that delivers good real state for a vertical timeline for video editores. Thank you for the content!
I understood and related to your first video as helping me understand my dilemma with a 4K 27" Dell monitor and my Mac Mini. Thanks for addressing the questions!
I also came here for an answer to the Ultrawide question, everything I've read says that all we need to search for is Pixel Density per Inch (PPI) of the display to be 109 to 110 approximately. Ultrawides, are almost the same size as the 27 in vertically, but much larger horizontally so it does not affect PPI as much and still matches 109 PPI needed for proper Ui rendering in MacOs, so ultrawides are good. Still, scaled 1440p Ui might be too small for some, so you could opt for 2 options. Use the Better Display app, to scale to 1440p native resolution, at the cost of performance (not noticeable unless you do video editing) or Go for a 4k 32 in. The real state in your screen will be the same as a 1080p screen but with much better image quality, specially when consuming media, videos, photos, etc... Note: Understand this issue in general only affects how the User Interface renders, not the media content you watch.
5:58 So does 110 PPI always cause blurry text? I had the 34" AOPEN 34HC5CUR monitor which was 110 PPI, but I returned it becase it either made the text blurry, or everything super small. I tried that Better Display software but could never find a sweet spot. Currently, I use two 24" HP W243i monitors with about 94 PPI and I am very satisfied with them. No blurry text and it doesn't seem to do any scaling that uses RAM (correct me if I'm wrong). It's probably not as sharp of a resolution as others but it's a sweet spot for me. But I want the 40"+ equivalent of these monitors to have one nice big monitor on my desk. Can anybody who has a 110 PPI monitor with mac comment their experience with text and performance?
Hi, Was it an option to use 2x scaling on a 4k monitor ? As i know welll in this case UI looks bigger without any sacrifice (no performance loss, no blurry text etc ..).
I found your first video very helpful and clear and I live in Germany…so my english skills are not the best 😅. Mac-hater are everywhere and you shouldn’t answer to this. I understand your point and thank you so much 🙏🏻.
Would you recommend a 24" 1440p monitor (dual setup), or does the 110 ppi not scale to the "good zone" for 24"? Not seeing that option referenced in the Bjango article. Debating going up to a 27" 1440p, but wanted to see if I could get a crisper image by scaling dow, but dont want to negatively affect the native ppi.
Hey there! Technically the 24” will be better at a 1080p resolution, I would personally go for a 27” 1440p if you can afford it! You get a lot more for your money and when I put mine beside my 24” 1080p screen, it’s actually hilarious how much different they are
@@itshunterking I'm trying both a 24" and 27" out now at 1440p to see which one I should go with for a dual setup - using the Asus ProArt display from your last video for the 27". Are there Mac display settings I should switch on for a Mac color profile and to make sure it is running as smoothly as possible? Whenever I turn on the "High Dynamic Range" with 75 Hz, the screen gets way dimmer even on highest brightness.
@@colewilger9624 How has your experience been with the 24-inch monitor at 1440p? For those who need to work reading graphics, texts and browsing the internet, do you think it will be necessary to adjust the scale as the size of the letters may become too small?
I thought the first video was great. You explained the issue in incredible depth at a fast pace, so in order to benefit from the research you did (God bless you, you saved me from pulling my hair out trying to run that whole thing down) the listener had to pay attention, but also not get caught up in the details which were just part of the overall explanation. I'm not the sharpest knife in the ... the ... drawer (see!) and I understood it completely. The thing I came away with most, is that you really take the time to know your shit and can explain it in a relatable understandable manner. Peace
I just got a 1440 27inch display. Looks great. Works great. On a 14 inch MBP M1 max. I saved a good bit of money over the Studio Display, but still sort of wish I sprang for it. This is an Eizo Color Edge with Adobe RGB and hardware calibration, so better in some ways than the Apple Display, but it is not nearly as nice to look at as the MBP screen or my old 5k iMac. Beautiful calibration and print matching however, which are more important to me overall.
Just ordered a 27" 4K display and happened to watch your previous video. I have a 13-inc M1 MacBook Pro too. Definitely have to scale it to 1440 or a bit lower. Your video really helps. Thank you.
Thanks. Can I confirm something: can macs always just put one pixel to one pixel (retina off)? Like as long as you don’t want retina, the only remaining consideration is dpi? And if you do want retina, then halve the dimensions and continue as you were?
I bought a 2560x1440 32 inch gaming monitor over a 4K 32 inch after watching your video explaining why you returned your 4K monitor. By god the text is horrible but everything else is just fine. Now I have to switch to 4K.
@@theowhite So opting for 32 inch 4K monitor solves this issue? I am using a M2max MBP and am a video editor. Working on 4k video files almost all the time!
@@astronautonroad1 32" 4k monitors are 138ppi whereas 32" 1440p monitors are only 93ppi. So yes the 4k monitor is much crisper. I have one and am very satisfied by how sharp everything looks, even when I use the monitor at a scaled resolution it looks lovely. The only caveat to this is that scaling the monitor to 1440p puts an extra load on the graphics card, so ideally you'd have a 32" 5k 2880p monitor so that scaling to 1440p was a simpler operation and less taxing on the graphics card. But there's not many options and they're much pricier, plenty of video editors use 32" 4k monitors happily. Other option is getting a 40" 4k (110ppi) which is large enough not to need scaling.
@@theowhite Thank you for the clarification! However, scaling does impact the performance of the machine, right? Is it possible to lower the resolution to reduce the GPU workload during rendering or editing?
@@astronautonroad1 Right. Yes you could set the scaling to 1080p in system preferences, which would be a less taxing scaling, but it would make the UI large so you'd fit less windows on your screen at once. You can lower the resolution of the video you're editing in your editing software if your computer is running slow, which is probably a better option, though you might not need to do it. A lot of people are happy to do video production on 4k 32" monitors, but I'm not a professional editor so I'm at the extent of my knowledge on this one for you.
I was hoping you'd talk about people's response videos to your last vid. I saw a few people who ran tests with a 27inch 4k monitor scaled at different resolutions and found no performance issues at all.
Thanks you for both these videos; timing couldn't be better. Looked at the 1440p monitor to go with my M2 Mac mini but unlike many others it doesn't have 10bit. Is that a problem for you. Looking to use with 10bit drone footage. Best to you, great job.
Thanks for the followup video. Question: If I don't mind small texts/icons. Running at native resolution (no scaling), which one do you recommend? 1440p or 4k, on 27inch. Mostly used for photo editing.
I use 24" 1920x1080p as an external monitor for my MacBook Air M1 and it doesn't look blurry at all. And I edit videos every days on it since 2021 and never experienced any performance issues neither. I wanted to buy a 4k monitor tho but now I'm not sure If it's a good idea 😅
Hi. So I had problems with my DELL 4K monitor (flickering sometimes, ghosting other times) and I purchased the Asus you recommend. It works perfect, just the USB-C stopped working after a week or so. ASUS doesnt provide support for MAC, they couldnt help me. With HDMI it works, but I would prefer the USB-C for my setup... - any advice? ideas?
Awesome follow up to the original video on this topic. Your video editing is also getting better as demonstrated from the original video into this follow up video. Keep up the good work.
that is my thing. I use today a Ryzen 9 3900x windows 10 ...and I just bought a 4k Proart 27'' ....But I pretend to buy a M2 16gb macmini. I most use Indesign and Photoshop / lightroom. Do you think its better to return?
I find the standard font size on MacOS too small. That's why I use 4k 27 inch at Default (with no scaling) because it increase the font size. I am probably in the minority but its valid to say the default 1080p is the best size for me.
Hi. I just wanted to ask does the colors of your macbook screen match your monitor? From what I've seen in most cases, the screen and monitor colors differ unless the monitor has some kind of a mac mode or something like that.
Yea, I tried a 43" 4K. Native was still too small for the interface elements. I mean, it was OK, but still rough. I did not want the 1920x1080 native scale. Everything was too huge. Scaling was wonky. The intermediate scales were fuzzy and I did pick up some lag/flicker. I went back to some old 2007 Apple Cinema Display 30" and my eyes were so much happier. So, I am sticking with 2560x1600 displays until 6k displays are more common. I am not gaming...so I need height as well as width.
I am still supper confused. As people are saying that a native 27inch 2k monitor configured on 1440p res looks better then the 27inch 4k set on the same res o.0 ???
My friend, you did a great great GREAT job explaining in the previous video, so do not mind about many of those comments. Bests regards forma Venezuelan viewer!
It all depends on whether you want to scale to 1080P or 1440P. If to 1080P, then a 4k screen is a good choice, giving you clearer fonts than 2k without causing hardware consumption. If to 1440p, then 4k screen is not a good choice, 1440p or 5k is.
Im really confused i want to buy a wide monitor but i’ll be using it with a mac studio , but i want it to look good if i spend that kinda money , I’ve never had issues with 1080p monitors so i might be ok , as I’m no gear snob , i just want something that works ..
All it is, is that you like 2560x1440 rendered natively on a 27" screen and expect things to be rendered at that size, while your Mac can actually cope with running Blender like that. Which makes sense because for years Apple shipped 27” displays and iMacs with exactly that size and resolution combination, and then they doubled it to 5K. What you actually needed if you wanted to go 4K was a 5K 27" monitor and to run at 200% scaling so you get the crisp image of 5K and the 1440p 27” UI sizing you expect. What you don't like is 1920x1080 UI scaling at 27" because things are bigger than you expect, and you don't like native 4K scaling at 27" because things are smaller than you expect. Apple "choose weird resolutions like 5K" because it allows you to display a full resolution 4K image with UI controls around the video.
im currently looking for a monitor to use in blender as well and your videos provided a ton of answers. one question i still have is, did you try and change the scaling preferences within blender on the 4k monitor? im thinking that would give a win/win of 4k resolution as well as solving the small icon issue within blender
Actually your original video on the subject helped clarify and emphasize something very important regarding the subject at hand, namely that there is a performance hit when using 4K monitors on a macbook when the scaling comes into play. AND when you are pushing the system to its limits This was critical in understanding the larger topic of not having the 6K studio monitor for Mac.
Hi, can anyone help.. does 24inches 2k monitor works well for mac? with mac m2 air. I am currently using 21.5 1080p monitor and text clarity isnt that great.
Hi sir. Did you buy the 24 inch 1440p monitor? If so, how has your experience been? I'm interested in one like this, however, I'm still uncomfortable because I think the size of the letters could become so small that I need to adjust the scale. I already use two 24" 1080p monitors and the third would be this 24-inch 1440p monitor. We don't have many opinions on this.
I don’t have any scaling options on my Asus monitor running Ventura. It’s annoying, so when I have to work on certain things, i just switch from 1440p to 1080p.
My m2 MBP has an issue when connecting it to external monitors, the screen starts flickering or refreshing in a weird way, would you know why this happens? Also on a 27 inch 4K BenQ monitor, connected via an usb c to display port cable
Hoping to get a response, I have a 31.5" diagonal 4K monitor with a resolution of 3008x1692, using the calculator it gives me 109.56ppi which would be about perfect correct? The size of the menus all look good but the text is still a little blurry. Also, I noticed in Lightroom classic that the fan runs a little erratically on my M2 Mac Mini 24gb/1TB. Also for some reason every once in a while in Lightroom classic I have screen flickering.
Hello, thanks for the information. I bought the same monitor and I have a question, what color profile do you use for the monitor? (options from display settings) Are you using the default PA278CV or the Generic RGB Profile? Also which of the monitor's presets are you using? Thanks!
I'm looking for a monitor more for music production basically only using Logic Pro just want a bigger screen to edit on I have a MacBook Pro M3 pro chip
Music production doesn’t take up much GPU usage so you can use pretty much anything! I’ve noticed with music production I actually find myself wanting a slightly higher resolution than 1440p, I’d run a 4k if you can!
Thanks for the videos! Something I just thought of now. In this video when you say 5k will be better than 4k. In terms of scaling, that only applies if you're using it scaled down to the 1440p right? If you use the 5k natively, then everything will be even smaller than it was on the 4k native right?
I just saw your video and 4k on the C3, for me the font is still too small, and I only get HdR settings in 1080p which is something I don't understand still.. I have been using a pc for the c3 now since I got it a week after Black Friday. MAC gatekeepers so much shit its annoying a f. I am running a m2 max , MacBook Pro with 96 gb of ram so I doubt I will have the issue you had, but the scaling is still . DUMB.
In FCPX (I don't know about other NLEs), its very confusing. With my 4k monitor in 4k, it shows the video at real resolution vs screen resolution : 1/4 of the screen for a 1080p video when selecting 100% size in the viewer. And when I scale, always keeping the viewer at 100%, everything is bigger...except the viewer video. Which is now about 1/6 of the screen. It is 960x540, when I try to screenshot it. I'm not saying the math isn't logical in the scaling process, but for a working point of view, its a deal breaker.
So do we get the 4k and scale down or just buy the 1440 , the 1440 is 150$ less more then happy to buy that one , I’ll be using it to video edit with my M1 Max
Watch the first video I posted about this for a deeper explanation! But scaling down the 4k is what’s causing an issue. So I would get the native 1440p if performance is your top priority
@@itshunterking I purchased a used apple studio display instead , all the scaling down talk gave me a headache , I love my display , it mirrors my M1 Max , it’s big and beautiful screen , I got a pretty good deal , they are 2300$ new in canada and I got a 4 month old one for 1400$
Good day dear sir.... i am considering to buy a second screen for my macbook pro 14m1. So i see that people praise the > LG 27UP850-W < and i was thinking to buy it right away tbh, but then i found 1 more option which is praised very much by other people as well.... wanted to ask what you think about it > Dell UltraSharp U2723QE < ?? would appreciate your response very highly sir! Also if i would like to go to 32 inch .... is there any advice for monitor you would like to provide for me ?? cause as much as i have researched i couldn't find LG 27UP850-W in 32 inches..... thanks in advance sir , your channel is great! (i am not a native english speaker sorry if i made some mistakes)
The '27' in 27UP850 stands for 27 Inch. Iso you cant enter that model number into a search and expect 32 inch monitors. The naming structure would mean that you would be looking for model numbers starting with 32... does that make sense?
Well explained, now it all makes sense to me. In all fairness, though, and as much as I cannot stand windows: the mac os scaling/resolution settings always felt inferior, but apparently they do so for a reason.
Thanks a lot for these technicals infos. I'm about to buy a MB pro M2. What I've understood from your advices is the LG UltraFine™ 27MD5KLP-B would be a good option with the Mac since it is in the retina zone. I edit a lot of 4k, 6k videos and use After effects also all the time.
If I’m honest, I initially disliked the video. I figured that if RUclips rated shorter videos better, it could have been a 5 minute video instead of 15. But, I watched it again later and with more patience, and appreciated the detail you went into. The Bjango article was a cool find.
If 1440p is great then why my Lenovo p24h-20 with 2560x1440 gives me blurry text on the default resolution when connected to MacBook m2 pro but when I connect it to my Lenovo laptop everything is great? I just don’t get it
What size is the monitor? What resolution scaling are you using? There’s a lot of factors that go into this. Also PC is a lot more streamlined in terms of scaling the displays
@@itshunterking funny thing is I don’t have a choice of scaling. I do have a choice when I connect my 4K TV but with this I just get a choice of resultion list. It’s a 24 inch and it’s hard to work on the default 2560x1440 it’s just too small and a bit blurry to.
Don’t listen to anyone claiming to use native 4k resolution on a 27” and find it comfortable. If they do, then they don’t use it to anything besides firing up a game or to binge netflix. You can manage to get into that even with small text and buttons. But then you’re pretty much using your monitor as a television/gaming monitor. You’re not doing any productivity on it.
A 2k monitor in 27 inch is similar to a LED Cinema Display 27" monitor (10 year ago) made by Apple. It is a non-retina display but it is clear for a sharp font. That's why 2k at 27 inch is a decent resolution in this case.
Many photographers who edit photos to print (as opposed to sharing on social media) prefer to use a 2K monitor such as the BenQ 270c. A 2K monitor is an excellent option. I love mine.
Personally, I'd much rather have the crispness of 4k and then turn it up to 1080p scaling when I need to do something GPU heavy tbh. Like yeah, it's a bit too large, but I could just change it back when I'm done.
I fund the video to address my blury text with mac very good. I've never understod the reason for it. Yes. Windows just works! That pains me. I'm a heavy user of both systems all the time and the Windows is SUPER crisp. Mac is not. While the mac is double the $$$. I found some cheap software that corrects the issue on 4k. At least it's doing a VERY good job. Now it's fine with the mac. I had to fiddle with the settings but now it's fine. I hate that we cant have more options in the 5k space. I have searched the internet - even went to china searhing - by a brand that does 5k but the reviews where VERY bad of the compagny. So that is a no go. The only 5k is the S9 at the moment. And that also lacks some features and apperanly the monitor is buggy. Hard to color calibrate and even "forgets" it's calibration when unplugging. So your video made me seriously think 1440p as I just care about the sharpness. Not the smoothness. Im on a small laptop with 1080p windows and I like the way text is showing up. Yes I can see pixels. So what. And 1440 is half the price of 4k. There are a lot of 1440 options. And I still might even go there. Assuming that $$$ is not an option and Apple Displays are NEVER an option. Just for the lack of integration of devices other than mac. We are some that uses both mac and windows 50/50 of the time. So thanks for the video! You made my day more clear with the scaling. And I have looked at 1920x1080 sceens for MANY years. I dont care. It's sharp. But if the content is fuzzy I get fustrated. Now I know why on a mac.
Thank you. I bought a 1440p monitor after watching your first video. If one doesn't want to spend money on high price products, one must compromise on one thing or another. Like you, I chose to save money rather than going for a 5k. Many thanks.
@@YTTerm Thanks, I do not do the art works either, and was wondering if the text is clear enough for daily use such as browsing, office stuff etc. :D Which model did you choose?
Your explanation in the previous video was spot on, I learned a lot from it and you've saved me from making a bad purchase.
I really liked how you handled the comments by stating your opinion and usabiliy...and not imposing your view on others...really nice
Yes, great response!
Honestly, I thought your first video about this topic was rather clear, makes good sense. Message is unless you can accommodate a monitor with minimal size of 32” in 16:9, don’t bother getting 4K. I am using dual monitors - one is the Dell P2715Q 27 inch 4K and a Dell U2415 24 inch 2K and am experiencing the same problem with the 4K monitor and wondered why I even bothered spending the money on it. My desk size can only have two monitors no larger than 27’. Really appreciate your vid and now making this follow up response to the naysayers. Thank you
How do you scale the 2k 24 inch monitor and does it work good? I am thinking of getting 24-25 inch at 1440p and then scale it a bit if needed.
@@walkmanbg I would like to know too. By the way, did you purchase your 24-25 inch 1440p monitor? Did you need to scale? What is your assessment of working with two monitors with different resolutions?
@@n2o2co2h2o I got 2x27 4k and scale it to 2308 x something. Using Better Display software, it looks great!
1440p scaling on 27 is too small for me, 1080p too large even though it is the default one and looks great!
Your explanation in the other video was perfect, maybe some people are too lazy to pay attention. I've looked for this answer for a long time. I have a 2019 MacBook pro with the intel i9. For years I've been wanting to upgrade my 27 inch Thunderbolt display which is 1440p, to a 4K monitor. The Thunderbolt display is a a great monitor but by now it is ancient. Back in march, I finally got a 27 inch LG 4k monitor. BUT, after first time hooking it up, the performance was so underwhelming that I literally disconnected the monitor, placed it back in the box, and never used it. I do photo and video editing. I was hoping that maybe later getting an m1 chip MacBook could solve the issue.
How much RAM does your Mac have?
Which operating system you use is a personal choice. Cannot really switch between and Mac OS just because of scaling issues just like most of us aren’t switching between Android and iOS every fewm months, so I don’t understand those comments at all. Just seems like a way to take a dig at Apple products. Now I’ll watch the rest of the video…
I switched to apple because of the stability issues of windows also when it comes better portability, better looking UI, no blue screen green screen circus from updates apple is way better for photo and video editing ... People taking a dig at apple products makes no sense in my opinion... Windows UI and everything looks very cheap in my opinion
After Pt. 1: Im definitely going to buy 27 2k.
After Pt. 2 05:57 : Meh, here we go again
Lol, yup. What monitor did you end up going with?
@@jasras5003 with 27 4k LG 27UP850-W. I use scaling to 2k, everything looks great
You shouldn’t apologize you were exactly right 4K is totally useless on a Mac Book Air. Proper scaling is everything. On 4/10/24 I bought a 27 inch ASUS PA278CV For $249 on Amazon plugged it into my MacBook Air M1 worked perfectly right out of the box. It came with a USB-C connection and cable, so it charges my MacBook with 65 W of power. The 1440 scaling is perfect and the colors are great. It came with a three-year warranty and a guarantee of pixels who could ask for more only $249?💻🖥️🤪
I tried the Dell 27 inch 4K $299 monitor put it back in the box after two hours of use. As you had stated, the scaling had the Goldilocks syndrome,never seemed quite right too small or too big plus the colors were washed out compared to the ASUS. Also, the Dell only had a one-year warranty makes you wonder if they know some thing we don’t. You only get the three-year warranty if you bump up to the more costly $400 and up monitors.👺🖥️
that video about the 1440p monitor had no "waffle" at all! it was that video that brought me here. you did great bro. dont feed the trolls!
Mac has a tendency to set 4K displays to scale with LoDPI (non-retina). This makes the image quality slightly blurry and makes the text especially not crisp. The app betterdisplay forces HiDPI (retina) mode which tremendously improves the crispness of the images and especially makes the text sharp similar to native macbook and ipad dispalys. I highly recommend it as it will solve most mac image quality issues.
3rd party app *BetterDisplay* HighDPI modes that supports ALL displays is the correct answer here. Also look for 3:2 aspect ratio 4k 10-bit color display with high pixel density or even 28” 2k display low pixel density to suit your needs. For video editing and 3D work *so* much nonsense. All video editing and 3D software “scales” via virtual displays and frame buffers. These workloads demand massive amounts of I/O, GPU and CPU to perform well with 4kUHD or 1080pHD video files and output. That’s why PC laptops have RTX or 10+ GPU cores (Pro, Max) to handle these tasks. Windows “300%” scaling on 15” >200ppi and smaller displays on Surface, 4k, 5k displays is not fun to configure and no picnic for my myopic (-6sphere) eyes.
@@juanminton1603 I agree, you made some good points 😊
Agreed. That is the app that saved my day... Fiddeling with the DPI made the image "workable" for text. Even text is horrible without that program. And I saw that this "featre" was build into MacOS but was taken out! That is soooooo crappy move my Apple. That comment alone made me anry and almost selling my m3 and go virtual on MacOS. It's fustrating that Windows and Mac world is not more aligned here.
I think people are missing the main point here, which is the PHYSICAL PIXELS of the monitor. This problem is not about PPI, but about scaling physical pixels. A 4K monitor has 3840 x 2160 pixels, which are micro points of light. When you reduce the resolution to 1080p (1920x1080), you basically use 2 physical pixels from your monitor to represent 1px of the image. The quality gets much better, and that's called RETINA.
Now if you scale a 4K monitor to 1440p (2550x1440), you are telling your monitor to use 1.5 physical pixels from it to represent 1px of the image. But there's no such thing as 1.5 physical pixels! Each pixel is one point of light. You can use 2, 3, or more, but you can't use half or any decimal. That's why 5K is the retina display for 1440p resolution.
I'm just wondering how Windows handles this...
So Retina is basically just integer scaling, or is it a bit more complicated?
I liked your previous video and agree 100%. Had exactly the same issue on my mac and I thought I was crazy. Rude people should just stop complaining and go out and buy the 4K monitor. It's their money, so they can waste it if they want to. It helped me and I am sure there are others like me. Thanks!
Not positive, but I think the comment at 11:48 about scaling on the monitor about running at lower-than-native resolution isn't saying you can change the native resolution, or that there isn't scaling involved at all, but rather that the scaling happens on the monitor rather than on your computer.
Displays have built in scaling so that a device can send a, say, 1080p signal to a 4k display, and it can still display it using the entire monitor, rather than having a small image in the center with black boxes on all sides. Display scaling _tends_ to be worse than GPU (/CPU, if the device has integrated graphics) scaling, but it does mean that it doesn't have a performance cost to the computer. I think whether this is a viable resolution really depends on the monitor. Some high end monitors have great display scaling, to the point you might even prefer it to the mac scaling, but I don't know whether your 4k monitor was one of them.
Honestly, I never thought about this at all when considering a monitor. I just picked up one of the new Mac Mini M2 Pro and now looking to pair a decent monitor and was just thinking 4k all the way. Even though I'm pretty sure this new machine will handle the upscaling and then downscaling just fine, I just don't like the fact that it would have to do that at all and use unnecessary burden on the system, however unnoticeable it may be. So I understood your original video to mean that 4K isn't always as cut and dry as it seems, which to someone like me (not an expert tech person) it at least gave me some pause to consider screen size as well as resolution. For a system as optimized as apple's new hardware, I don't like the idea of things not being as optimized as possible (as in, performing extra tasks all the time because I chose a less that optimal configuration). So thanks for the original video and this one.
I’m in the same situation. Just about to buy a Mac Mini M2. Which monitor did you go with for your M2 Pro?
@@supersonic79 ha, wish I could help. still haven’t bought one! Budget changed and waiting until I can get something worth it
@@jarbird83 Whoa, we have a similar username. I thought it was mine at first lol. A year later, did you finally buy your monitor? If so, which one?
Given that Apple appears to target 110 dpi for system menus and windows, anything that departs too far from that results in text that are too big or too small. What I noticed is that focusing on the vertical lines of physical pixels per screen size helps to simplify things. Potential problems can happen with 4k screens which has 2160 vertical lines. On a 27 in monitor this is around 160 dpi and on 32 in monitor, this is 140 dpi. Since they are both not anywhere near 110 dpi, scaling is needed. What is clear is that under demanding scenarios which most of us probably would not notice, performance can be compromised.
How does Apple do it? On a 32 in XDR with 3384 vertical lines, Apple uses 2 lines for each display line so that it acts like a monitor with 1692 lines resulting in 108 dpi. And the 27 in Studio with 2880 vertical lines scaled to 1440 lines results in 109 dpi. Since Apple’s monitors are using 2 physical lines for each display line, you do get sharper text and dividing by 2 is a simple operation, the performance burden is minimized.
What this says is that if we use a 4k monitor which has 2160 vertical lines, if it is a 32 in monitor, we need to scale it to 1692 vertical lines like the XDR. But there is no way to get to 1692 from 2160 that is evenly divisible. So there will be “shimmering” during scrolling and this operation is probably computationally more taxing than just dividing by 2. However, 2160 times 3/4 is 1620 lines and 103 dpi which should avoid “fractional” scaling and probably computationally less taxing. The text would be a bit larger than ideal but this could improve performance and visual quality. But without 3rd party software this option is not offered out of the box.
For 27” monitors, this problem is potentially less problematic by using 2/3 scaling which is 2160 scaled down to 1440 for 109 dpi. Since this scaling is evenly divisible, 3 physical lines per 2 display lines, we should experience less visual distortions and hopefully less performance issues. But if one’s use is very demanding then I suppose even doing the 2/3 scaling can be a problem.
I have a 4k 32” monitor like many MacBook users and I chose the 1692 line scaling option. While I have not experienced performance issues because I am not doing anything graphically intensive, I do see that it isn’t as sharp as my MacBook’s screen. But at the normal viewing distance it is “good enough” for me. But since everyone’s visual acuity is different and everyone’s requirements are unique, there is no way for anyone to say if getting a 4k 32” monitor is always good or bad.
In fact, I know that some people with good eyes are perfectly comfortable with 140 dpi that result in tiny text, and use their 4k monitor at its native 2160 lines setting. I suppose if you have the cash, some would say just buy the XDR!
I agree with everything you’ve said in this video apart from the response to the question about 120hz vs 60hz. I used to be someone that thought “eh, who needs more than 60”, but now - it’s SO hard to go back once you use that high refresh rate. It’s just amazing and hard to put into words how fast everything feels. I literally feel more productive because of it. So I’d recommend to people to go for a gaming monitor that can be calibrated well for creative work - those do exist. Out of the box the colors might be whack but once you calibrate those, and get it looking identical to your macbook - it’s life changing. And I am also using a 13” m1 macbook pro 2020 version. It’s lovely using it on a high refresh monitor with good colors. I was thinking about upgrading to the 16” macbook pro to have more screen real estate, but this monitor has changed everything for me.
so which monitor did you get?
@@lcsmn0217 I got the Dell S2721DGF. Its black levels aren’t great, but I was able to calibrate it to look virtually identical to my MacBook Pro display, so I feel very comfortable that my colors are great while editing photos and videos, and that 165hz refresh rate is just *chef’s kiss*
@@ksc6000 On Apple page they state that MacBook Pro M1 2020 can connect up to two monitors with 60Hz, 6k. So how can you utilise 165Hz when your laptop doesn't support that? I've the same model and am researching for 27”monitor.
@@justalostlocal If you use 2 monitors, I don’t think they can be set to high refresh. I only use one monitor.
@@ksc6000 yeah, makes sense thanks.
Apparently some people just can't comprehend retina display, not that it to be expected and you did a great job in your original video that helped me making my purchasing decision for a monitor that will be exclusively used with MainStage so I really don't want to put any extra load on my M4 Pro MBP resources.
I'm late to this discussion but I've been using a wall mounted (over my desk and using the HDMI 4:4:4 pass through) 42" 4k LG C3 as a monitor for a while and it's amazing. It scales to the "good zone" at about 105ppi. I have to lean in to less than 10 inches away before I can MAYBE see a pixel.
The color and gamut is amazing as well. The HDR and brightness is among the best, easily.
I currently dual use with my pallette on a 27" and workspace on the 42". I'm going to dual 42" it soon. You can get 42" C3s on sale for under $900 just about anywhere.
@Hunter King What I'd like to understand is what is the difference between "Resolution" and "UI Looks Like" in macOS System Information? It's still so so so confusing. I have a 32" UHD 3840X2160 monitor. When I select 2560x1440, macOS says "Resolution: 5120x2880, UI Looks like 2560x1440" .... why is macOS reporting the incorrect resolution of my 4K UHD monitor? It's very confusing.
It upscales to the native Mac resolution of 5k hence 5120x2880 and then halve it to hit your desired UI of 2560x1440. Your monitor's resolution is still 4k i.e. 3840x2160 but your UI's resolution is at 2560x1440 hence why your UI looks larger than keeping it at the default 3840x2160 resolution.
@@implisyt Thank you, but what do you mean when you write "native Mac resolution of 5k"? In Windows it shows me the correct resolution. What happens when I hook up a regular 1080p monitor?
I guess I’m trying to understand why macOS has to upscale to a resolution that my monitor doesn’t even support. I’m very confused why the developers of this operating system did something like this. It seems very counterproductive and counterintuitive.
@@asafblasbergvideographer Unsure about Windows however for Macs as per the video, the native resolution is 5k hence why the Apple Studio and the previously sold 27" iMac are all at 5k resolution. So if your resolution is not 5k it will upscale it to 5k first and then downscale it to your selected resolution. Which explains what you are seeing as stated in your first post.
@@implisyt OK thanks. So I guess I have to buy 5K screens.
New sub! I think you did a masterful job explaining something that I could never understand. I’m not there yet fully, but sure learned a lot from you. Thank you for taking the time to make this video! Not enough pancake though.
Just so you know: Windows have lots of problems with scaling too.
Correct…the same people turning a blind eye or are just absolutely ignorant bash this guy for sticking with Apple 😂.
Yes but it has better gpu to handle the issue
Just a little info on displays in general: the percentile coverage of a color space does not make it xy% accurate, it just means, the display can cover the extreme colors xy%. The spec you showed at 7:05 is a lot more informative though, as it mentions a color accuracy of DeltaE
10:53 if "double 1440p" is the sweets spot for Mac, would you say the Lg Ergo Dual Up monitor can work? It's a monitor with 2560 x 2880 (like two 1440p monitores stacked up), a roughly square resulution that delivers good real state for a vertical timeline for video editores. Thank you for the content!
6:12 Purpose was suitable for his modeling, but at 1440 hz on 27inch monitor, he used scaling up to make UI menu text more legible.
I understood and related to your first video as helping me understand my dilemma with a 4K 27" Dell monitor and my Mac Mini. Thanks for addressing the questions!
does that mean a 34 inch 4k monitor work as good as the 27 inch 1440p one?
I also came here for an answer to the Ultrawide question, everything I've read says that all we need to search for is Pixel Density per Inch (PPI) of the display to be 109 to 110 approximately. Ultrawides, are almost the same size as the 27 in vertically, but much larger horizontally so it does not affect PPI as much and still matches 109 PPI needed for proper Ui rendering in MacOs, so ultrawides are good.
Still, scaled 1440p Ui might be too small for some, so you could opt for 2 options.
Use the Better Display app, to scale to 1440p native resolution, at the cost of performance (not noticeable unless you do video editing)
or
Go for a 4k 32 in. The real state in your screen will be the same as a 1080p screen but with much better image quality, specially when consuming media, videos, photos, etc...
Note: Understand this issue in general only affects how the User Interface renders, not the media content you watch.
5:58 So does 110 PPI always cause blurry text? I had the 34" AOPEN 34HC5CUR monitor which was 110 PPI, but I returned it becase it either made the text blurry, or everything super small. I tried that Better Display software but could never find a sweet spot. Currently, I use two 24" HP W243i monitors with about 94 PPI and I am very satisfied with them. No blurry text and it doesn't seem to do any scaling that uses RAM (correct me if I'm wrong). It's probably not as sharp of a resolution as others but it's a sweet spot for me. But I want the 40"+ equivalent of these monitors to have one nice big monitor on my desk. Can anybody who has a 110 PPI monitor with mac comment their experience with text and performance?
Hi,
Was it an option to use 2x scaling on a 4k monitor ?
As i know welll in this case UI looks bigger without any sacrifice (no performance loss, no blurry text etc ..).
I found your first video very helpful and clear and I live in Germany…so my english skills are not the best 😅.
Mac-hater are everywhere and you shouldn’t answer to this. I understand your point and thank you so much 🙏🏻.
Would you recommend a 24" 1440p monitor (dual setup), or does the 110 ppi not scale to the "good zone" for 24"? Not seeing that option referenced in the Bjango article. Debating going up to a 27" 1440p, but wanted to see if I could get a crisper image by scaling dow, but dont want to negatively affect the native ppi.
I have the same question.
@@vladibarraza I guess we’ll never know
Hey there! Technically the 24” will be better at a 1080p resolution, I would personally go for a 27” 1440p if you can afford it! You get a lot more for your money and when I put mine beside my 24” 1080p screen, it’s actually hilarious how much different they are
@@itshunterking I'm trying both a 24" and 27" out now at 1440p to see which one I should go with for a dual setup - using the Asus ProArt display from your last video for the 27". Are there Mac display settings I should switch on for a Mac color profile and to make sure it is running as smoothly as possible? Whenever I turn on the "High Dynamic Range" with 75 Hz, the screen gets way dimmer even on highest brightness.
@@colewilger9624 How has your experience been with the 24-inch monitor at 1440p? For those who need to work reading graphics, texts and browsing the internet, do you think it will be necessary to adjust the scale as the size of the letters may become too small?
I thought the first video was great. You explained the issue in incredible depth at a fast pace, so in order to benefit from the research you did (God bless you, you saved me from pulling my hair out trying to run that whole thing down) the listener had to pay attention, but also not get caught up in the details which were just part of the overall explanation. I'm not the sharpest knife in the ... the ... drawer (see!) and I understood it completely. The thing I came away with most, is that you really take the time to know your shit and can explain it in a relatable understandable manner. Peace
I just got a 1440 27inch display. Looks great. Works great. On a 14 inch MBP M1 max. I saved a good bit of money over the Studio Display, but still sort of wish I sprang for it. This is an Eizo Color Edge with Adobe RGB and hardware calibration, so better in some ways than the Apple Display, but it is not nearly as nice to look at as the MBP screen or my old 5k iMac. Beautiful calibration and print matching however, which are more important to me overall.
M1 only support 60Hz anyway, I think you need to go up to M2/M3 to get support for 120Hz output from the ports
Bro thank you for the info. I'm glad that you made this second video. Haters will hate with or without us 😜
Just ordered a 27" 4K display and happened to watch your previous video. I have a 13-inc M1 MacBook Pro too. Definitely have to scale it to 1440 or a bit lower. Your video really helps. Thank you.
Thanks. Can I confirm something: can macs always just put one pixel to one pixel (retina off)? Like as long as you don’t want retina, the only remaining consideration is dpi? And if you do want retina, then halve the dimensions and continue as you were?
Of course, you can turn retina off easily on screen settings and choose a different resolution
I bought a 2560x1440 32 inch gaming monitor over a 4K 32 inch after watching your video explaining why you returned your 4K monitor. By god the text is horrible but everything else is just fine. Now I have to switch to 4K.
his video was specific to 27inch monitors, which has roughly 110ppi at 1440p - this is not the cases for 32inch
@@theowhite So opting for 32 inch 4K monitor solves this issue? I am using a M2max MBP and am a video editor. Working on 4k video files almost all the time!
@@astronautonroad1 32" 4k monitors are 138ppi whereas 32" 1440p monitors are only 93ppi. So yes the 4k monitor is much crisper. I have one and am very satisfied by how sharp everything looks, even when I use the monitor at a scaled resolution it looks lovely. The only caveat to this is that scaling the monitor to 1440p puts an extra load on the graphics card, so ideally you'd have a 32" 5k 2880p monitor so that scaling to 1440p was a simpler operation and less taxing on the graphics card. But there's not many options and they're much pricier, plenty of video editors use 32" 4k monitors happily. Other option is getting a 40" 4k (110ppi) which is large enough not to need scaling.
@@theowhite Thank you for the clarification! However, scaling does impact the performance of the machine, right? Is it possible to lower the resolution to reduce the GPU workload during rendering or editing?
@@astronautonroad1 Right. Yes you could set the scaling to 1080p in system preferences, which would be a less taxing scaling, but it would make the UI large so you'd fit less windows on your screen at once. You can lower the resolution of the video you're editing in your editing software if your computer is running slow, which is probably a better option, though you might not need to do it. A lot of people are happy to do video production on 4k 32" monitors, but I'm not a professional editor so I'm at the extent of my knowledge on this one for you.
I’m sitting here with my new Apple Mac Studio and trying to sell my old all in one Mac , can I just use the old Mac that is 5k with studio?
Is this scaling thing a Mac OS thing /linux thing? Or is it Apple wanting to sell more retina displays?
I was hoping you'd talk about people's response videos to your last vid. I saw a few people who ran tests with a 27inch 4k monitor scaled at different resolutions and found no performance issues at all.
Thanks you for both these videos; timing couldn't be better. Looked at the 1440p monitor to go with my M2 Mac mini but unlike many others it doesn't have 10bit. Is that a problem for you. Looking to use with 10bit drone footage. Best to you, great job.
Are there differences in the mac models...I have a Mac Mini M1
Thanks for the followup video. Question: If I don't mind small texts/icons. Running at native resolution (no scaling), which one do you recommend? 1440p or 4k, on 27inch. Mostly used for photo editing.
I use 24" 1920x1080p as an external monitor for my MacBook Air M1 and it doesn't look blurry at all. And I edit videos every days on it since 2021 and never experienced any performance issues neither. I wanted to buy a 4k monitor tho but now I'm not sure If it's a good idea 😅
Hi. So I had problems with my DELL 4K monitor (flickering sometimes, ghosting other times) and I purchased the Asus you recommend.
It works perfect, just the USB-C stopped working after a week or so. ASUS doesnt provide support for MAC, they couldnt help me. With
HDMI it works, but I would prefer the USB-C for my setup... - any advice? ideas?
My advice, return the monitor and get one that works. You shouldn’t keep a broken monitor if there is warranty support to utilize.
Do you have any pictures of what the ui looks like on your monitor with your settings?
Awesome follow up to the original video on this topic. Your video editing is also getting better as demonstrated from the original video into this follow up video. Keep up the good work.
that is my thing. I use today a Ryzen 9 3900x windows 10 ...and I just bought a 4k Proart 27'' ....But I pretend to buy a M2 16gb macmini.
I most use Indesign and Photoshop / lightroom. Do you think its better to return?
I find the standard font size on MacOS too small. That's why I use 4k 27 inch at Default (with no scaling) because it increase the font size. I am probably in the minority but its valid to say the default 1080p is the best size for me.
Hi. I just wanted to ask does the colors of your macbook screen match your monitor? From what I've seen in most cases, the screen and monitor colors differ unless the monitor has some kind of a mac mode or something like that.
Yea, I tried a 43" 4K. Native was still too small for the interface elements. I mean, it was OK, but still rough. I did not want the 1920x1080 native scale. Everything was too huge. Scaling was wonky. The intermediate scales were fuzzy and I did pick up some lag/flicker. I went back to some old 2007 Apple Cinema Display 30" and my eyes were so much happier. So, I am sticking with 2560x1600 displays until 6k displays are more common. I am not gaming...so I need height as well as width.
So what 24ish inch monitor would be good for MacBook?
not enough syrup 🤣? Loved the initial video. Love how people feel they have to complain about things they consume for free.
i realise I am late to this follow up. I enjoyed your first but blimey, the FCP comment, you really do just wnt to start a fight!!! Nice job
I am still supper confused. As people are saying that a native 27inch 2k monitor configured on 1440p res looks better then the 27inch 4k set on the same res o.0 ???
My friend, you did a great great GREAT job explaining in the previous video, so do not mind about many of those comments. Bests regards forma Venezuelan viewer!
It all depends on whether you want to scale to 1080P or 1440P. If to 1080P, then a 4k screen is a good choice, giving you clearer fonts than 2k without causing hardware consumption.
If to 1440p, then 4k screen is not a good choice, 1440p or 5k is.
Im really confused i want to buy a wide monitor but i’ll be using it with a mac studio , but i want it to look good if i spend that kinda money , I’ve never had issues with 1080p monitors so i might be ok , as I’m no gear snob , i just want something that works ..
All it is, is that you like 2560x1440 rendered natively on a 27" screen and expect things to be rendered at that size, while your Mac can actually cope with running Blender like that. Which makes sense because for years Apple shipped 27” displays and iMacs with exactly that size and resolution combination, and then they doubled it to 5K. What you actually needed if you wanted to go 4K was a 5K 27" monitor and to run at 200% scaling so you get the crisp image of 5K and the 1440p 27” UI sizing you expect. What you don't like is 1920x1080 UI scaling at 27" because things are bigger than you expect, and you don't like native 4K scaling at 27" because things are smaller than you expect. Apple "choose weird resolutions like 5K" because it allows you to display a full resolution 4K image with UI controls around the video.
is the 34” curve pro art model be ok for m1 pro 16g ? just for day trading looking at charts
Why don´t you use a app that scales the UI for the res you want? Like the SwitchResX ?
Will that still push the system?
Hello, what exact cable are you using? 😊
Is a 24 inch 2k monitor a good choice for the mac mini m1?
The link to your current display doesn't work and you don't mention the one you bought and didn't do a review - which monitor did you buy.
im currently looking for a monitor to use in blender as well and your videos provided a ton of answers. one question i still have is, did you try and change the scaling preferences within blender on the 4k monitor? im thinking that would give a win/win of 4k resolution as well as solving the small icon issue within blender
Actually your original video on the subject helped clarify and emphasize something very important regarding the subject at hand, namely that there is a performance hit when using 4K monitors on a macbook when the scaling comes into play. AND when you are pushing the system to its limits This was critical in understanding the larger topic of not having the 6K studio monitor for Mac.
Hi, can anyone help.. does 24inches 2k monitor works well for mac? with mac m2 air. I am currently using 21.5 1080p monitor and text clarity isnt that great.
Hi sir. Did you buy the 24 inch 1440p monitor? If so, how has your experience been? I'm interested in one like this, however, I'm still uncomfortable because I think the size of the letters could become so small that I need to adjust the scale. I already use two 24" 1080p monitors and the third would be this 24-inch 1440p monitor. We don't have many opinions on this.
Could I expect to see performance issues on my m2 max mbp with the LG 40 inch ultra wide?
I don’t have any scaling options on my Asus monitor running Ventura. It’s annoying, so when I have to work on certain things, i just switch from 1440p to 1080p.
My m2 MBP has an issue when connecting it to external monitors, the screen starts flickering or refreshing in a weird way, would you know why this happens? Also on a 27 inch 4K BenQ monitor, connected via an usb c to display port cable
Hoping to get a response, I have a 31.5" diagonal 4K monitor with a resolution of 3008x1692, using the calculator it gives me 109.56ppi which would be about perfect correct? The size of the menus all look good but the text is still a little blurry. Also, I noticed in Lightroom classic that the fan runs a little erratically on my M2 Mac Mini 24gb/1TB. Also for some reason every once in a while in Lightroom classic I have screen flickering.
In other words, Adobe software is trash. What’s new?
Hello, thanks for the information.
I bought the same monitor and I have a question, what color profile do you use for the monitor? (options from display settings)
Are you using the default PA278CV or the Generic RGB Profile?
Also which of the monitor's presets are you using?
Thanks!
What about 3440 x 1440 ultra wide monitors?
Can someone recommend best 27" Monitor for Mac Studio Silicon under $1,000? Cheers!
I'm looking for a monitor more for music production basically only using Logic Pro just want a bigger screen to edit on I have a MacBook Pro M3 pro chip
Music production doesn’t take up much GPU usage so you can use pretty much anything! I’ve noticed with music production I actually find myself wanting a slightly higher resolution than 1440p, I’d run a 4k if you can!
Asus ProArt 278cv 1440p - you can't plug that one in to Macbook Pro M4.
Thanks for the videos! Something I just thought of now. In this video when you say 5k will be better than 4k.
In terms of scaling, that only applies if you're using it scaled down to the 1440p right? If you use the 5k natively, then everything will be even smaller than it was on the 4k native right?
I just saw your video and 4k on the C3, for me the font is still too small, and I only get HdR settings in 1080p which is something I don't understand still.. I have been using a pc for the c3 now since I got it a week after Black Friday. MAC gatekeepers so much shit its annoying a f.
I am running a m2 max , MacBook Pro with 96 gb of ram so I doubt I will have the issue you had, but the scaling is still . DUMB.
What do you say if I am looking for a 19 to 21 inch monitor for mac studio max m1? thank you
Well, I loved your video about scaling, I found it very helpful!
You saved me days of frustration (and $) and I am so grateful. Thanks for the Q&A as well... This is about learning the secret sauce of tech....
In FCPX (I don't know about other NLEs), its very confusing. With my 4k monitor in 4k, it shows the video at real resolution vs screen resolution : 1/4 of the screen for a 1080p video when selecting 100% size in the viewer. And when I scale, always keeping the viewer at 100%, everything is bigger...except the viewer video. Which is now about 1/6 of the screen. It is 960x540, when I try to screenshot it.
I'm not saying the math isn't logical in the scaling process, but for a working point of view, its a deal breaker.
So do we get the 4k and scale down or just buy the 1440 , the 1440 is 150$ less more then happy to buy that one , I’ll be using it to video edit with my M1 Max
Watch the first video I posted about this for a deeper explanation! But scaling down the 4k is what’s causing an issue. So I would get the native 1440p if performance is your top priority
@@itshunterking I purchased a used apple studio display instead , all the scaling down talk gave me a headache , I love my display , it mirrors my M1 Max , it’s big and beautiful screen , I got a pretty good deal , they are 2300$ new in canada and I got a 4 month old one for 1400$
I had the gigabyte fO48U and it was really nice, but 4k resolution but I always found myself resizing everything back larger
Good day dear sir.... i am considering to buy a second screen for my macbook pro 14m1. So i see that people praise the > LG 27UP850-W < and i was thinking to buy it right away tbh, but then i found 1 more option which is praised very much by other people as well.... wanted to ask what you think about it > Dell UltraSharp U2723QE < ?? would appreciate your response very highly sir!
Also if i would like to go to 32 inch .... is there any advice for monitor you would like to provide for me ?? cause as much as i have researched i couldn't find LG 27UP850-W in 32 inches.....
thanks in advance sir , your channel is great! (i am not a native english speaker sorry if i made some mistakes)
The '27' in 27UP850 stands for 27 Inch. Iso you cant enter that model number into a search and expect 32 inch monitors. The naming structure would mean that you would be looking for model numbers starting with 32... does that make sense?
What if i had a 32 inch 4k monitor and i didn't mind the scaling at 1080p, would i experience any issues?
No, you'll be totally fine, no issues, top performance for this monitor with this setting and Mac.
Well explained, now it all makes sense to me. In all fairness, though, and as much as I cannot stand windows: the mac os scaling/resolution settings always felt inferior, but apparently they do so for a reason.
Thanks a lot for these technicals infos. I'm about to buy a MB pro M2. What I've understood from your advices is the LG UltraFine™ 27MD5KLP-B would be a good option with the Mac since it is in the retina zone. I edit a lot of 4k, 6k videos and use After effects also all the time.
i confuse to choose between ProArt279CV 4K and ProArtd 278QV 2K display for Macbookpro 16" 2019 Intel. Any suggestion?
If I’m honest, I initially disliked the video. I figured that if RUclips rated shorter videos better, it could have been a 5 minute video instead of 15. But, I watched it again later and with more patience, and appreciated the detail you went into. The Bjango article was a cool find.
How about if I use the 27" 4k monitor on it's native resolution or on 1080p?
There should not be issue in that case, right?
If 1440p is great then why my Lenovo p24h-20 with 2560x1440 gives me blurry text on the default resolution when connected to MacBook m2 pro but when I connect it to my Lenovo laptop everything is great? I just don’t get it
What size is the monitor? What resolution scaling are you using? There’s a lot of factors that go into this. Also PC is a lot more streamlined in terms of scaling the displays
@@itshunterking funny thing is I don’t have a choice of scaling. I do have a choice when I connect my 4K TV but with this I just get a choice of resultion list. It’s a 24 inch and it’s hard to work on the default 2560x1440 it’s just too small and a bit blurry to.
@@keto.masz.24 inch 1440p is not fit into the 110ppi or 220ppi resolution so … I guess your problem also prove that the 110/220ppi is true.
Don’t listen to anyone claiming to use native 4k resolution on a 27” and find it comfortable. If they do, then they don’t use it to anything besides firing up a game or to binge netflix. You can manage to get into that even with small text and buttons. But then you’re pretty much using your monitor as a television/gaming monitor. You’re not doing any productivity on it.
Hey just found out this second part video. What waffles? Lol you explained it perfectly in the first video.
Any recs for a 24” monitor for MBP aside from the UltraFine?
Literally none. Every monitor on the market sucks. They all have matte finishes.
Learned a lot from the last video!
A 2k monitor in 27 inch is similar to a LED Cinema Display 27" monitor (10 year ago) made by Apple. It is a non-retina display but it is clear for a sharp font. That's why 2k at 27 inch is a decent resolution in this case.
Many photographers who edit photos to print (as opposed to sharing on social media) prefer to use a 2K monitor such as the BenQ 270c. A 2K monitor is an excellent option. I love mine.
Personally, I'd much rather have the crispness of 4k and then turn it up to 1080p scaling when I need to do something GPU heavy tbh. Like yeah, it's a bit too large, but I could just change it back when I'm done.
I fund the video to address my blury text with mac very good. I've never understod the reason for it. Yes. Windows just works! That pains me. I'm a heavy user of both systems all the time and the Windows is SUPER crisp. Mac is not. While the mac is double the $$$. I found some cheap software that corrects the issue on 4k. At least it's doing a VERY good job. Now it's fine with the mac. I had to fiddle with the settings but now it's fine. I hate that we cant have more options in the 5k space. I have searched the internet - even went to china searhing - by a brand that does 5k but the reviews where VERY bad of the compagny. So that is a no go. The only 5k is the S9 at the moment. And that also lacks some features and apperanly the monitor is buggy. Hard to color calibrate and even "forgets" it's calibration when unplugging. So your video made me seriously think 1440p as I just care about the sharpness. Not the smoothness. Im on a small laptop with 1080p windows and I like the way text is showing up. Yes I can see pixels. So what. And 1440 is half the price of 4k. There are a lot of 1440 options. And I still might even go there. Assuming that $$$ is not an option and Apple Displays are NEVER an option. Just for the lack of integration of devices other than mac. We are some that uses both mac and windows 50/50 of the time.
So thanks for the video! You made my day more clear with the scaling. And I have looked at 1920x1080 sceens for MANY years. I dont care. It's sharp. But if the content is fuzzy I get fustrated. Now I know why on a mac.
Thank you. I bought a 1440p monitor after watching your first video. If one doesn't want to spend money on high price products, one must compromise on one thing or another. Like you, I chose to save money rather than going for a 5k. Many thanks.
Is the text blurry?
@@ensarguler7684 No, not blurry at all. I don't do art works. On the contrary, I prioritize the screen response and comfort to eyes.
@@YTTerm Thanks, I do not do the art works either, and was wondering if the text is clear enough for daily use such as browsing, office stuff etc. :D Which model did you choose?
@@ensarguler7684 Mine is PA278CV. It's good for arts, except that you can see pixels when you are REALLY close to the screen.