Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

jamejone.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 99 posts

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#71

Post by yeahgoodok »

kirill5pol wrote: post #69
6a74 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's [1] an article on why 1440p at 27" might be better. [1] https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/

I’m pretty sure the parent knows that MacOS doesn’t support “true retina” at 4K 27” (at a reasonable size). The way MacOS handles resolution (that’s not perfect 1x or 2x scaling) is by rendering at twice the resolution you selected in settings and then downscaling to the true resolution of the monitor. So if you want to render at 1440p you render at 5k then downscale to 4K. What I believe the parent was trying to get…

I feel like the 'shimmering' when scrolling on 27@4k would drive me nuts. But to each their own.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#72

Post by aplummer »

nlh wrote: post #47
yeahgoodok wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HiDPI does look really nice. Do you use it for gaming? How does your graphics card hold up?

I've used it for gaming and it's great! I have a separate dedicated gaming PC I just built, and I can just unplug from my Mac and plug right into the Thunderbolt 3 port on the gaming PC (which, in case anyone cares or is interested, just requires a daisy chain TB3 cable to the Nvidia card - happy to give details if anyone is building a similar setup.) I haven't played much beyond 4K resolution but it works and works…

I would really like to know how you connected the monitor. I’m looking at a Bridgestone titan ridge controller to connect an Nvidia card to a Pro Display XDR - is that the route you took?

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#73

Post by yarcob »

In my opinion the best work monitor in the world is the built in monitor of the Surface Studio.

It's a 28" 3:2 monitor, resolution is 4500x3000.

Text is crisp, images are perfect, there's lots of vertical space. As an additional gimmick it has touch input and comes with a stylus.

I wish that monitor was available as an external monitor.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#74

Post by Shank »

kmike84 wrote: post #34

I'm unsure about the advice of sticking to 1440p at 27". I have a non-retina imac 27 (1440p), external LG 27" 4K USB-C monitor and a macbook pro 13 with a real "retina", and use them all regularly. For my eyes, scaling works fine with 4K - font rendering is significantly better than on 1440p imac. 13" screen on macbook pro is even better, and 5K 27" would be perfect, but that's a different price point. I'm quite happ…

At least in my experience, if you sit far/close enough, you can "overcome" the limitations of each display variant. I can definitely see the difference between 4K running 1440p at 1.5x compared to a proper 2x scale factor, though. I can tolerate 1.5x or variations in between, but I'd vastly prefer 2x. If you play with enough resolutions and look at enough displays, you'll develop a taste which cannot be quenched without an LG 5K display, which is ill-advised.

At least to my eyes, my Dell U2715H with EDID override looks worse at 1440p than my LG 27UL850-W. I'd prefer to have a 2x scale factor, but at 1.5x, I can't see scaling artifacts or I'm used to them for still text. My poor GPU can't handle this though, so all motion and movement is terrible, and thus, I can't distinguish "shimmering" from just regular poor performance.

I'm really bothered that Apple sells an LG 5K display for the price they sell it at. Pro display XDR is joke-tier pricing for a developer. Even the 5K display is too expensive. The Ilyama 5K (XB2779QQS) was sold at the $999 price point, which actually kinda makes sense, but it's gone.

So practically speaking, either shell out $1,200+ for a good display or settle non-ideal retina or 1x.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#75

Post by brigade »

aplummer wrote: post #72
nlh wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've used it for gaming and it's great! I have a separate dedicated gaming PC I just built, and I can just unplug from my Mac and plug right into the Thunderbolt 3 port on the gaming PC (which, in case anyone cares or is interested, just requires a daisy chain TB3 cable to the Nvidia card - happy to give details if anyone is building a similar setup.) I haven't played much beyond 4K resolution but it works and works…

I would really like to know how you connected the monitor. I’m looking at a Bridgestone titan ridge controller to connect an Nvidia card to a Pro Display XDR - is that the route you took?

Gigabyte you mean? It should work, but note that you really want a GPU that supports DSC (RTX 20-series or newer)

The two paths for 10bit 6k60 are either HBR2 + DSC, or 2x HBR3 streams. The 2x HBR3 streams have several gotchas - not daisy-chainable, limits the XDR USB-C ports to 2.0 speeds, requires a TB3 controller with 2 displayport inputs, and I'm not certain it even works with non-Apple TB3 firmware.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#76

Post by pivo »

6a74 wrote: post #70
kirill5pol wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m pretty sure the parent knows that MacOS doesn’t support “true retina” at 4K 27” (at a reasonable size). The way MacOS handles resolution (that’s not perfect 1x or 2x scaling) is by rendering at twice the resolution you selected in settings and then downscaling to the true resolution of the monitor. So if you want to render at 1440p you render at 5k then downscale to 4K. What I believe the parent was trying to get…

In macOS there are side effects of scaling though, notably "blurry pixels," "shimmering," and increased GPU usage.

I haven't noticed any of those issues and I've been using a variety of Macs (2013 MBP 15", 2019 MBP 13", 2019 MacMini, 2013 MacPro) with a variety of 27" and 32" 4K monitors for over a year now. The 27" 4K monitors are for me the perfect compromise between screen real estate and display quality.

I definitely don't notice blurry pixels. I don't game, so maybe that's why I don't notice increased CPU use.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#77

Post by ClumsyPilot »

yangl1996 wrote: post #6

One thing to notice is that 1440p at 27" (one main criteria set by the author) is ideal for non-Retina macOS UI. For Retina UI, stick to 5k at 27" or 4k at 21.5" (or, look for a DPI of around 218 PPI).

This inch-measuing business is very misguided

I now have a 32inch 4k monitor, and I sit further away from ot than i did with previous 24inch screen. Get a large screen, as large as your work setuo allows, your back and posture will thank you.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#78

Post by eyelidlessness »

wmf wrote: post #59
eyelidlessness wrote: post #30

I used a 27@1440[1] for years, and for a long time I thought it was the perfect size and resolution for me (and of course I love HiDPI, a 27@2880 would be great too; but I actually prefer to keep a low DPI screen for web/visual work so I can see what a lot of the world sees). On a lark, last year I bought a 42.5@2160 (4k)[2], with the intention of using it primarily for tv/movies at that size, not knowing whether it…

38" monitors solve the vertical height problem while providing almost as much space. And they're curved so you look like you're in The Future.

I considered that, but this screen is my only tv as well so that tipped the scales for the full 42”.

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#79

Post by alisonkisk »

kirill5pol wrote: post #69
6a74 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's [1] an article on why 1440p at 27" might be better. [1] https://bjango.com/articles/macexternaldisplays/

I’m pretty sure the parent knows that MacOS doesn’t support “true retina” at 4K 27” (at a reasonable size). The way MacOS handles resolution (that’s not perfect 1x or 2x scaling) is by rendering at twice the resolution you selected in settings and then downscaling to the true resolution of the monitor. So if you want to render at 1440p you render at 5k then downscale to 4K. What I believe the parent was trying to get…

1440p (2560x1440) is 5K pixel-doubled. (27" iMac)

1080p is 4K pixel-doubled (21.5" iMac) (or 5K downscaled and pixel-doubled).

Re: The Ultimate MacBook+PC Monitor Showdown

#80

Post by alisonkisk »

MatmaRex wrote: post #62
yangl1996 wrote: post #6

One thing to notice is that 1440p at 27" (one main criteria set by the author) is ideal for non-Retina macOS UI. For Retina UI, stick to 5k at 27" or 4k at 21.5" (or, look for a DPI of around 218 PPI).

> 4k at 21.5" Does that exist? I have never seek a 4k (or better) display smaller than 24", and I'd love to buy one.

Well the 21.5" Retina iMac has it.

And LG has a standalone.

Post reply on HN