24 iMac M1 display vs UltraFine 24 4k

[ignic]

Hello everybody!

Can anyone with a new 24'' iMac M1 and an UltraFine 24'' (24MD5KL) monitor comment on the difference between the two displays? Is the iMac screen better or are they similar? Is the 4.5k resolution noticeable compared to 4k?

My doubts are because I have a Mac mini M1 with the Ultrafine 24 and I don't know if the jump to the iMac is worth it with respect to the screen.

Thank you!

 

[LiE_]

The screen on the new iMac is better.

24" M1 iMac
Native: 4480 x 2520
Retina: 2,240 x 1,260
PPI: 218.73 pixels per inch

24" LG UltraFine
Native: 3840 x 2160
Retina: 1920 x 1,080
PPI: 185.9 pixels per inch

To me 1920 x 1080 on 24" is OK, but it's not much space to get things done. The 2240 x 1260 is a really nice bump in usable space on the same 24" size.

Here is my 24" UltraFine setup:

and my updated iMac setup:

 

[tornado99]

To me 1920 x 1080 on 24" is OK, but it's not much space to get things done. The 2240 x 1260 is a really nice bump in usable space on the same 24" size.

How about the quality of text and the UI in general. Are fonts any sharper/more readable with the iMac?

If you open up TextEdit and type a few lines what is the smallest comfortable font size on each of the displays?

 

[LiE_]

How about the quality of text and the UI in general. Are fonts any sharper/more readable with the iMac?

If you open up TextEdit and type a few lines what is the smallest comfortable font size on each of the displays?

It is sharper 100%, the higher PPI ensures that.

 

[blairh]

Hello everybody!

Can anyone with a new 24'' iMac M1 and an UltraFine 24'' (24MD5KL) monitor comment on the difference between the two displays? Is the iMac screen better or are they similar? Is the 4.5k resolution noticeable compared to 4k?

My doubts are because I have a Mac mini M1 with the Ultrafine 24 and I don't know if the jump to the iMac is worth it with respect to the screen.

Thank you!

The higher PPI of the iMac means sharper text and I believe it would be very noticeable compared to the LG. I would get the iMac if I were deciding between both panels. Whether you should ditch your setup for an iMac is entirely up to you.

 

[tornado99]

It is sharper 100%, the higher PPI ensures that.

Not necessarily. Assuming both monitors are viewed at 20" the Ultrafine has a visual density of 70 ppd, and the iMac has a visual density of 82 ppd (pixels per degree).

They are both well above the threshold of a human with 20:20 vision, which is 60 ppd. In fact Steve Jobs defined Retina as even lower, at 57 ppd.

Perhaps the iMac has a better contrast ratio? because according to the science they both have more than enough pixels to qualify as Retina!

Also, another factor not often mentioned is that the iMacs have a glass panel laminated onto the lcd with no air gap, and a sophisticated antireflection coating. Whereas the Ultrafines have a sheet of plastic stuck in front, with an air gap, and the plastic itself has to be engineered to cope with reflections. Obviously the full lamination is a superior technology.

 

[johnscully]

Had a 21 inch retina iMac and the LG UltraFine 4K (23.7 inch) side by side. The difference is huge. The iMac is so much sharper. I returned the LG as it clearly didn't qualify as "retina".

 

[ignic]

Hi, thanks for the answers and the photos, now I'm more envious of upgrading to the iMac.

I normally use the Ultrafine 24 scaled to 2560x1440 as the 1080p retina resolution has very little workspace.

What scaled resolutions does the new iMac support? I have not been able to find them anywhere.

Maybe I upgrade to the new iMac and keep the Ultrafine as a second monitor until I can sell it.

 

[coso]

If I set my 27" 4K to 2560x1440 equivalent my eyes hurt, everything is so small (and I'm a young adult with over 20/20 vision), I don't know how you manage it on a 24". In fact I hope the 24" iMac hasn't everything too small already...

 

[tornado99]

The new iMac supports the following virtual resolutions:

4480x2520
2560x1440
2240x1260
1920x1080
...

I have just viewed a model in an Apple store. Some observations:

• 2560x1440 is just too uncomfortable. I think this is partly because you naturally move your head closer to the display to read the smaller text, and as it is 24" it overfills your field of vision.
• 2240x1260 is nice.
• 1920x1080 is a bit pointless, nothing gained over 2240
• The sharpness difference between those 3 modes is very small. Perhaps Big Sur has made some adjustments over Catalina, where the exact doubled mode was always sharper.
• The difference in sharpness/quality between the 4.5K iMac and my 4K 185 dpi monitor at home is small. Certainly not the "huge difference" others are seeing.
• The difference in screen real estate between 4.5K and 4K is more of an improvement, but doesn't match the old iMac 5K. If you don't have any HiDPI monitor, then I would probably go for the iMac.

 

[Gelam]

The screen on the new iMac is better.

24" M1 iMac
Native: 4480 x 2520
Retina: 2,240 x 1,260
PPI: 218.73 pixels per inch

24" LG UltraFine
Native: 3840 x 2160
Retina: 1920 x 1,080
PPI: 185.9 pixels per inch

To me 1920 x 1080 on 24" is OK, but it's not much space to get things done. The 2240 x 1260 is a really nice bump in usable space on the same 24" size.

Here is my 24" UltraFine setup:

View attachment 1781928


and my updated iMac setup:

View attachment 1781925

Gotta say that is a really great minimalist setup. LOVE IT! Is it this clean even while actually working?

What happens to your Ultrafine 4k now? I ordered one and it's coming tomorrow, looking forward to use it.

 

[EntropyQ3]

Gotta say that is a really great minimalist setup. LOVE IT! Is it this clean even while actually working?

Bwahahah! 😀😆🤣🤣

 

[jungleghost]

Had a 21 inch retina iMac and the LG UltraFine 4K (23.7 inch) side by side. The difference is huge. The iMac is so much sharper. I returned the LG as it clearly didn't qualify as "retina".

LoL. ********. The iMac has only 17% more ppi. In comparison, an iMac 27" 5K has almost 50% more ppi than a 27" 4K monitor, and the difference it's not huge. It's noticeable, but no way it's that big. Even less in your comparison.

 

[tornado99]

Qualifying as "retina" is a meaningless criteria because Apple choose 220ppi to avoid fractional scaling issues, not because human eyeballs are able to tell the difference between that and lower ppi's (unless you are a teenager).

For most people the limit of detail your eyes can resolve will lie somewhere between 160-200 ppi on a desktop monitor at a normal viewing distance. Normally lower as you get older!

 

[jungleghost]

Yes, but I've already tried 27" 4K, and for me just isn't sharp enough.

 

[johnscully]

LoL. ********. The iMac has only 17% more ppi. In comparison, an iMac 27" 5K has almost 50% more ppi than a 27" 4K monitor, and the difference it's not huge. It's noticeable, but no way it's that big. Even less in your comparison.

Had them side by side at a normal viewing distance on my desk. The difference was huge - even with just 17 percent difference. Annoyed me as letters looked pixelated and blurry on the LG in comparison to the much sharper letters on the iMac screen, especially with smaller font sizing. Would Never buy anything below 218 ppi anymore.

 

[tornado99]

@johnscully , sorry but i find it hard to believe that 160 ppi would look blurry given the Physics of human vision. I suspect one of the following:

• The LG was set to a fractionally scaled mode ("more space"), rather than exact pixel-doubled
• The LG was in a non-HiDPI mode
• You like to sit very close to your computer screen (<< 2ft)

 

[coso]

My 4K display in full HD mode with macOS is quite as sharp as my 24" iMac at normal viewing distance, for what it's worth

 

[johnscully]

@johnscully , sorry but i find it hard to believe that 160 ppi would look blurry given the Physics of human vision. I suspect one of the following:

• The LG was set to a fractionally scaled mode ("more space"), rather than exact pixel-doubled
• The LG was in a non-HiDPI mode
• You like to sit very close to your computer screen (<< 2ft)

The display settings where correct – maybe my sitting distance to the screen plays a role (can't measure now as I'm not at home). But I guess I'm just sensitive about the sharpness. Wanted to have a work setup of a MacBook Pro connected to an external display – but no display was sharp enough for my taste (all had correct settings). Tried models from Dell, Eizo, the LG UltraFine 4K...Just the 5K LG was good enough, but that screen had other problems so I returned it too. Finally bought the iMac (in addition to my MacBook Pro) just because of the display sharpness. The only other display option would have been Apples 6K display, but it's wayyyy too expensive for me.

 

[jungleghost]

The display settings where correct – maybe my sitting distance to the screen plays a role (can't measure now as I'm not at home). But I guess I'm just sensitive about the sharpness. Wanted to have a work setup of a MacBook Pro connected to an external display – but no display was sharp enough for my taste (all had correct settings). Tried models from Dell, Eizo, the LG UltraFine 4K...Just the 5K LG was good enough, but that screen had other problems so I returned it too. Finally bought the iMac (in addition to my MacBook Pro) just because of the display sharpness. The only other display option would have been Apples 6K display, but it's wayyyy too expensive for me.

I guess I'm just sensitive for sharpness too. I returned my Dell 27" 4K cause just isn't sharp enough too my eyes. But I really though that the LG Ultrafine 4K will be. In that case, what do you think about the 21.5 4K iMac? Really want a bigger screen than my 13" Mac, bigger than de 16", but not as big as the 27". Do you think the 21.5 4K is good enough? I'm searching for it, because in my country, the iMac 21.5 2019 4K i7 it's half the price of the base iMac M1.

 

[tornado99]

@jungleghost , i already posted about this monitor which I use. It's 185 dpi. So if 160dpi doesn't cut it, perhaps that might. To my eyes it's indistinguishable from 220dpi.

A 4K 24 inch matte "Retina" Display does exist, and I just bought one! [Review]

I have been on the hunt for a 4K 24 inch monitor, and finally I found one! The Electriq Eiq-244kMHDR. It has a light matte AG coating, 10 bit IPS panel, 300 nits, and costs £140 ($190). Text looks ultra-smooth like a printed page on this screen! It works perfectly with my Mac and is detected...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[jungleghost]

@jungleghost , i already posted about this monitor which I use. It's 185 dpi. So if 160dpi doesn't cut it, perhaps that might. To my eyes it's indistinguishable from 220dpi.

A 4K 24 inch matte "Retina" Display does exist, and I just bought one! [Review]

I have been on the hunt for a 4K 24 inch monitor, and finally I found one! The Electriq Eiq-244kMHDR. It has a light matte AG coating, 10 bit IPS panel, 300 nits, and costs £140 ($190). Text looks ultra-smooth like a printed page on this screen! It works perfectly with my Mac and is detected...

forums.macrumors.com

I've seen your post. But I live in Brazil, for me to import a Chinese monitor like this, it would take about 3 months or more, and I would be taxed, it would be the price of an iMac.

 

[johnscully]

In that case, what do you think about the 21.5 4K iMac?

That's exactly the iMac I bought – and I love it. If the performance and screen size is good enough for your needs it's a very capable machine. Plus the 21.5 has way better viewing angles than the iMac 24 M1 (the sharpness is the same though), so I like the display of the 21.5 more than the 24 inch version. Compared the two models side by side on my desk.

 

[jungleghost]

That's exactly the iMac I bought – and I love it. If the performance and screen size is good enough for your needs it's a very capable machine. Plus the 21.5 has way better viewing angles than the iMac 24 M1 (the sharpness is the same though), so I like the display of the 21.5 more than the 24 inch version. Compared the two models side by side on my desk.

What would you have to say about the comparison between machines in general? I think the 21.5 is much prettier than the 24.
Is the screen of the previous one really better? Could you take a picture of them (since you have side by side)?
I think I'll end up going to the previous one, as it costs half the price in Brazil.

 

[pmiles]

The screen on the new iMac is better.

24" M1 iMac
Native: 4480 x 2520
Retina: 2,240 x 1,260
PPI: 218.73 pixels per inch

24" LG UltraFine
Native: 3840 x 2160
Retina: 1920 x 1,080
PPI: 185.9 pixels per inch

To me 1920 x 1080 on 24" is OK, but it's not much space to get things done. The 2240 x 1260 is a really nice bump in usable space on the same 24" size.

Here is my 24" UltraFine setup:

View attachment 1781928


and my updated iMac setup:

View attachment 1781925

What happened to your plant?