13" MacBook Pro – do you use display scaling?

[macintoshmac]

I'm on 1680x1050 when mobile, 1440x900 when hooked up to the LG 5K display.

Is the improved performance on Mojave due to the removal of sub-pixel AA?

Apple only knows what causes the improved performance of 1680 on Mojave but who are we to care so long as it just works!

 

[maflynn]

Use what works for you, I turn on scaling and turn it off on my 15" MBP depending on what I'm doing.

 

[Hakiroto]

Use what works for you, I turn on scaling and turn it off on my 15" MBP depending on what I'm doing.

Yeah, that's good advice. I wasn't looking to make my own decision based on the choices of others; I was just simply curious as I know a few people who don't even know the choice is there. I already have what works for me.

 

[Kristine]

I use 1920 x 1200. Anything else looks 'chunky'.

 

[MrGimper]

Just been doing some playing and got 1920x1200 HiDPI working on Mojave. These are some manual steps and do not utilise SwitchResX to add the resolution. You will need a tool like RDM or QuickRes to select the new resolution once you have enabled it. Note this configuration will be overwritten with subsequents betas/updates so you'll have to go thru the process again.

You need to follow the manual steps here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/2ia242/enabling_1920_x_1200_hidpi_resolution_on_the_13/

On recent versions of macOS, the path /System/Library/Displays/Overrides/ doesn't exist. Use this path instead,
/System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides

You will need to "csrutil disable" to be able to overwrite the file in
/System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides, and I suggest you make a backup of the original, and "csrutil enable" once you have copied the files and tested all is working.

* I take no responsibility if you stack your machine *

 

[Kristine]

On recent versions of macOS, the path /System/Library/Displays/Overrides/ doesn't exist. Use this path instead,
/System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides

You will need to "csrutil disable" to be able to overwrite the file in
/System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides, and I suggest you make a backup of the original, and "csrutil enable" once you have copied the files and tested all is working.

* I take no responsibility if you stack your machine *

This method works fine on my 13" and is how I did mine.

 

[Beau10]

On recent versions of macOS, the path /System/Library/Displays/Overrides/ doesn't exist. Use this path instead,
/System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides

Nice! I used to do it this way before the change, did not see that Overrides was moved there.

 

[BigMcGuire]

Are you saying that when the new Mac OS update comes through it will undo what I did with SwitchResX and I'll need to re-add 1920x1200 HiDPI? Or just if you do it manually?

 

[Beau10]

Are you saying that when the new Mac OS update comes through it will undo what I did with SwitchResX and I'll need to re-add 1920x1200 HiDPI? Or just if you do it manually?

Yes, major OS updates wipe out the setting as it's a system level display profile. This is essentially what SwitchResX is doing behind the scenes when you add the resolution.

Per your comment above "I found that when uninstalling SwitchResX it would revert everything to default settings and remove the resolution" - there's a button toward the bottom of the custom display panel that persists your settings to system.

 

[macintoshmac]

Guys how are you using 1920! The text is rather too small, although legible. Also, using the reddit method, I got it in my system preferences as well. Wondering if this would survive beta updates or not.

 

[BigMcGuire]

Guys how are you using 1920! The text is rather too small, although legible. Also, using the reddit method, I got it in my system preferences as well. Wondering if this would survive beta updates or not.

It is small, but like Beau10 said, it's definitely at my limit, but I find the 1920x1200 HiDPI doable, especially if I don't use an external keyboard and keep my monitor closer to me. But I've never had problems with small text, but I am 32.

 

[macintoshmac]

It is small, but like Beau10 said, it's definitely at my limit, but I find the 1920x1200 HiDPI doable, especially if I don't use an external keyboard and keep my monitor closer to me. But I've never had problems with small text, but I am 32.

It is doable, yes, very. I turned 32 this March, too.

 

[TinaBelcher]

I did that on my old mbp 2013 13-inch and it didn’t feel natural or pleasant on the eye, so I got the 15-inch 2018 model and it feels much better, at least for me.

 

[estabya]

I used 1680x1050 when I used a 2014 13" rMBP. I also use it now with my 2016 rMB. I can get by with 1440x900 for most tasks, but the added space really comes in handy in the Jetbrains IDE's I use for development.

 

[bevsb2]

I used 1440x900 on my 15" 2016 and now on my 15" 2018. It's easier on older eyes.

 

[BigMcGuire]

Yeah, as much as I like the space of 1920x1200, my eyes are much happier with 1680x1050. That and knowing I won't have to be booting into recovery to CSRUTIL disable all the time... I am lazy. But I do love the space in 1920.

 

[macintoshmac]

Yeah, as much as I like the space of 1920x1200, my eyes are much happier with 1680x1050. That and knowing I won't have to be booting into recovery to CSRUTIL disable all the time... I am lazy. But I do love the space in 1920.

Which reminds me to re-enable my CSRUTIL.

 

[Nozuka]

Finally got my MBP 13''.

After switching to 1680x1050 the text did not look as clean to me.

So i went back to the default setting. (Which is 1440 x 900)
Looks better to me.

 

[BigMcGuire]

Help me out here. I'm confused. What's best for internal resources? (CPU/Memory/FPS in games) -- 1440, 1680, 1920? Especially if the screen is a native 2560x resolution ?

1440 is HUGE with no space, feels like my cheap dell laptop space wise - but text is really really readable. I'm stuck between 1680x and 1920x. Macbook Pro 13' does some doubling pixel stuff on the 1440 right? (Sorry, at work and kinda lazy atm). (Double Pixel Density?)

 

[estabya]

Help me out here. I'm confused. What's best for internal resources? (CPU/Memory/FPS in games) -- 1440, 1680, 1920? Especially if the screen is a native 2560x resolution ?

1440 is HUGE with no space, feels like my cheap dell laptop space wise - but text is really really readable. I'm stuck between 1680x and 1920x. Macbook Pro 13' does some doubling pixel stuff on the 1440 right? (Sorry, at work and kinda lazy atm). (Double Pixel Density?)

As far as pure image quality goes the ideal resolution setting you would want to use is 1280x800 because it is exactly half the pixels horizontally and vertically as the actual screen. This allows Mac OS to render the UI by just doubling the size of all elements while still giving a crisp image.

When you deviate from that resolution you get into more complex methods of rendering the image that require different scaling tricks to product a clear image. For example, 2560x1600 doesn't divide evenly into 1680x1050, so (from what I understand) the image is basically rendered and scaled using supersampling. So the image will render at 3360x2100 (1680x1050 doubled on both axes) and then be scaled down to 2560x1600 before being displayed.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6

 

[BigMcGuire]

As far as pure image quality goes the ideal resolution setting you would want to use is 1280x800 because it is exactly half the pixels horizontally and vertically as the actual screen. This allows Mac OS to render the UI by just doubling the size of all elements while still giving a crisp image.

When you deviate from that resolution you get into more complex methods of rendering the image that require different scaling tricks to product a clear image. For example, 2560x1600 doesn't divide evenly into 1680x1050, so (from what I understand) the image is basically rendered and scaled using supersampling. So the image will render at 3360x2100 (1680x1050 doubled on both axes) and then be scaled down to 2560x1600 before being displayed.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/6023/the-nextgen-macbook-pro-with-retina-display-review/6

Wow, that was as complicated as I thought it would be.

Quote from Article:
"If you select the 1680 x 1050 or 1920 x 1200 scaling modes, Apple actually renders the desktop at 2x the selected resolution (3360 x 2100 or 3840 x 2400, respectively), scales up the text and UI elements accordingly so they aren’t super tiny (backing scale factor = 2.0), and downscales the final image to fit on the 2880 x 1800 panel."

So anything over the 1440x results in the 2x rendering which is why they recommend 1440x for the MBP 13. OK this makes sense now (hence: Default for Display) - and probably easiest on resources. Wow is the text sharp at that resolution. lol.

 

[curmudgeonette]

So anything over the 1440x results in the 2x rendering which is why they recommend 1440x for the MBP 13. OK this makes sense now (hence: Default for Display) - and probably easiest on resources.

All the resolutions result in 2x rendering (except presumably 2560x1600 on the 13"). It is the downscaling that you can avoid by using 1280x800 on the 13" and 1440x900 on the 15". Today's "Default for Display" actually causes downscaling! I presume they picked the default to compete with Windows laptops that have HighDefinition (but not retina) displays.

 

[littlepud]

I use 1440x900 on my 15” because the integer scaling (or non-scaling) looks way better with super sharp text, even though I do like the extra screen real estate of 1680x1050. I just wish the retinal panel’s native resolution was 3360x2100 instead of 2880x1800.

 

[throAU]

It depends what i am doing.

I adjust it to suit what i am doing. So yes, i use display scaling.

 

[Steve121178]

1680x1050 for me works best. Anything less is too cramped.