27" 4K scaled to 1440p or just get 27" 1440p

[djc6]

I currently have a 27" LG 27UD58P-B 4K display that I run at scaled resolution of 2560x1440 to make things readable. I find this setup pretty legible.

The monitor is stating to have bad image persistence issues after 4+ years of use so I am looking to replace it. Will I notice a loss in text sharpness, or a gain in sharpness by going to a native 27" 1440p display like the ASUS ProArt PA278CV ?

I only use the display for Slack, Terminal, and Web Browser. Just work stuff.

 

[Monotremata]

If you are talking about your Mac mini in particular (exact same one over here), you'll notice a bit snappier performance as far as the graphics goes even in the OS itself by running a native 2K display. Mine had visible lag when opening windows and whatnot with my 28" 4K Samsung scaled to 2K. Runs great at 4K or 1080 but takes a hit when it scales to 2K. The Mac has to upscale the graphics to "5K" and then scale it down so the hit is pretty noticeable and that Intel GPU craps out really quick in a Mac. I bought an eGPU which fixed the scaling issue AND gave me like a 20% cpu drop in my DAW on top of it, but that could get expensive unless you've got a good card already laying around.

 

[djc6]

Yes, this is regarding my 2018 mac mini. I don't really notice any UI performance issues with my current setup.

I did enable "Reduce motion" and "Reduce transparency" in Accessibility options early on, this helped a lot with UI responsiveness when I got my mac mini right when they came out in Fall of 2018.

 

[frou]

Traditional ~100 PPI displays are worse to use in MacOS than they used to be, because subpixel font rendering was removed in Mojave. So if you are somewhat picky about text/visuals, I wouldn't step down to the non-4K panel.

 

[jdb8167]

I currently have a 27" LG 27UD58P-B 4K display that I run at scaled resolution of 2560x1440 to make things readable. I find this setup pretty legible.

The monitor is stating to have bad image persistence issues after 4+ years of use so I am looking to replace it. Will I notice a loss in text sharpness, or a gain in sharpness by going to a native 27" 1440p display like the ASUS ProArt PA278CV ?

I only use the display for Slack, Terminal, and Web Browser. Just work stuff.

I had a 27” 2560x1440 Thunderbolt Display connected to my M1 MacBook Air that I replaced with an LG 24” 4K display scaled to the same 2560x1440 and the difference is very noticeable.

 

[roman.stapunov]

Difference is very noticeable. 4K scaled to 2560x1440 is much much better. I had both connected to Mac mini in the same time.

 

[djc6]

Thanks! I've only had an HP Z24Rw 1080p monitor and the LG 27UD58P-B 4K. Not sure I've ever laid eyes on a 1440p monitor so wasn't sure what to expect.

 

[InuNacho]

Traditional ~100 PPI displays are worse to use in MacOS than they used to be, because subpixel font rendering was removed in Mojave. So if you are somewhat picky about text/visuals, I wouldn't step down to the non-4K panel.

Maybe I'm blind but on my Dell U3011 and U2410 which only have around 100 PPI I can't see the font rendering issue. I'm about a foot away from both screens too.

 

[frou]

Maybe I'm blind but on my Dell U3011 and U2410 which only have around 100 PPI I can't see the font rendering issue. I'm about a foot away from both screens too.

It's just a bit blockier looking because greyscale antialiasing can only use full pixels to feather the edges of letters whereas the subpixel technique can use 1/3 size strips to do the same thing.

In a sense it's a blessing to not notice this because then you have a much more numerous and less expensive range of possible monitors to choose from when buying.

 

[Tagbert]

I'm using the LG 27UK850 with an M1 Mac running at "looks like" 2560x1440. it gives the fine detail of 4K but the UI element size of 1440p. The text is reasonably sharp and there is no lag. I have heard that Macs don't do proper upscaling or font antialiasing with lower res monitors, now.

You might see some lag with your 2018, but consider if you want to get new monitor, you might consider one that will work well for future needs in case you upgrade your Mini.

 

[Basic75]

I'd say a 27" with native 2160p running at 1440p scaled looks "smoother" because the scaling simply blurs everything. Personally I prefer pixel-precise rendering over scaled and blurred which is why I'm using a 27" at its native 1440p.

 

[frou]

I'd say a 27" with native 2160p running at 1440p scaled looks "smoother" because the scaling simply blurs everything. Personally I prefer pixel-precise rendering over scaled and blurred which is why I'm using a 27" at its native 1440p.

Nope - you're missing that in a MacOS scenario, the image destined for that 4K is first rendered at 5K using the "Retina" detail assets/text.

The entities in play are (Framebuffer, DownsampledFramebuffer, Monitor), rather than the traditional (Framebuffer, MonitorThatInterpolates) or (Framebuffer, InterpolatedFramebuffer, Monitor) from a world without Retina assets/high-dpi-text-rendering.

 

[Basic75]

Nope - you're missing that in a MacOS scenario, the image destined for that 4K is first rendered at 5K using the "Retina" detail assets/text.

I didn't miss anything, I just prefer pixel-perfect rendering over a higher-resolution-but-blurred image (and to purchase displays that can be used at native resolution instead of letting the GPU do additional work.)

 

[GuilleA]

I used to have a 27" LED Cinema Display, with native 2560x1440. Later last year I switched to a 27" 4K LG monitor, and I'm running it at a scaled resolution to look like 2560x1440 to get more space. I say look like because internally, the Mac is running the display at 5K, and then scaling it back to get HiDPI.

Honestly it's the second best purchase of last year (first one being the M1 Air). The image quality is superb, and I love the matte screen. Running a scaled resolution might tax the GPU just a bit more but I believe its negligible, I can't really tell. It runs buttery smooth.

 

[Moonjumper]

I didn't miss anything, I just prefer pixel-perfect rendering over a higher-resolution-but-blurred image (and to purchase displays that can be used at native resolution instead of letting the GPU do additional work.)

Because of the macOS method described by frou, it does not appear blurred, it appears sharper. I have gone from 27" 1440p to 27" 4K as a second screen for my iMac and the 4K looks much better.

I have also used the 4K monitor with a 2018 Mac Mini and the performance was fine.

 

[Quu]

I have both kinds of monitor, 27" 4K and 1440p. Both are IPS and high quality panels.

It's very noticeable when using the 4K panel. I have it set to render at a HiDPI 5K resolution which gives a 1440p working space but with the higher pixel count for drawing everything on screen.

The most important thing is, it works perfectly and there is no drawback except for the increased GPU load, but the Mac Mini M1 can handle this without a problem, you won't even notice the performance hit unless you're playing games at native resolution.

At this point I wouldn't ever go back to using a 1440p native display with my Mac, the difference is just too great. I personally will look at getting a 5K display next just for the 1:1 scaling it would provide but that isn't to say using a 4K 27" looks bad in any way as it looks amazing.

 

[Basic75]

Because of the macOS method described by frou, it does not appear blurred, it appears sharper. I have gone from 27" 1440p to 27" 4K as a second screen for my iMac and the 4K looks much better.

I have also used the 4K monitor with a 2018 Mac Mini and the performance was fine.

Good for you, I prefer pixel-perfect rendering and consider it a pretty poor performance of macOS that it isn't properly resolution independent. If my chosen layout resolution for 27" is 2560x1440 then I'll always buy a monitor with that resolution, or a 5120x2880 and run it @2x.

 

[djc6]

Because of the macOS method described by frou, it does not appear blurred, it appears sharper. I have gone from 27" 1440p to 27" 4K as a second screen for my iMac and the 4K looks much better.

I have also used the 4K monitor with a 2018 Mac Mini and the performance was fine.

I think you - and others in this thread - are right. My wife has a 27" Thunderbolt display 2560 × 1440 - put it next to my remaining working LG 27" 4K running at 2560 × 1440 scaling, and text does look much sharper on the 4K with scaling. So I guess I'll replace my broken 4K with another 4K.

I've had my 2018 mac mini running with two scaled 4K monitors and really don't notice any performance issues - once I enabled "Reduce motion" and "Reduce transparency" in Accessibility it helped a lot.

 

[djc6]

Later last year I switched to a 27" 4K LG monitor, and I'm running it at a scaled resolution to look like 2560x1440 to get more space.

Which model 27" 4K are you using? Thanks!

 

[GuilleA]

Which model 27" 4K are you using? Thanks!

27UL500. It was on sale at the time so I took it, although I'd have liked a USB-C version.

 

[Moonjumper]

Which model 27" 4K are you using? Thanks!

You were asking someone else, but I thought I it might be useful let you know I have an HP Z27k G3 and I really like it. It has USB-C connectivity and some USB ports, plus ethernet for if you ever connect a laptop. It is also a colour that matches a Space Grey Mac Mini.

 

[Spectrum]

I have both types of monitors (run off a 2018 i7 mini like you), and the scaled 4K is much clearer - plus you get the option of running at lower and higher (apparent) resolutions should you want/need to.

 

[teohyc]

I've tested several 27-inch 4K displays.

All UI scaling options in MacOS will give you sharp text and UI elements.

However with some graphic design software, e.g. Photoshop, Affinity Photo, you will not get true 1:1 pixel representation at 100% zoom with certain UI scaling options.

Depending on your work, that may or may not matter. For graphic designers, I think it matters.

That's why I'm sticking with my 27-inch 1440P display. If I want to upgrade, I'll go with 32-inch 4K (used without UI scaling), not 27-inch 4K (used with UI scaling).

The other problematic display size and resolution combination is 16-inch and 1440P.

 

[mini5apple]

Ma

Maybe I'm blind but on my Dell U3011 and U2410 which only have around 100 PPI I can't see the font rendering issue. I'm about a foot away from both screens too.

maybe you should get your eyes checked

 

[Devvy]

I use a 27" 4K screen in combination with the base i3 mini from 2018. My observation is that the best performance is achieved with setting macOS to 2560x1440, and then use the "lower resolution" option. The picture quality will suffer a little, but the performance suffers a lot without the "lower resolution" option.
I notice the performance issue most when playing back 60fps clips using Quick view, it is generally choppy. Playing back in full screen or when opening the clip in Quicktime doesn't show that much of a difference.
I also notice a huge performance difference in DaVinci Resolve and playing back a timeline. Sometimes I feel like the 2018 mini is meant for just a single 1440p screen.

By the way, I noticed that MacOS will always use the screen itself in 4K mode; regardless of what you choose in the resolution settings. I guess that if you pick 2560x1440 in lower resolution, it will upscale the picture to 4K; and if you pick 2560x1440 it will downscale 5120x2880 to 4K. There are utilities however that will force the display itself to a particular resolution, but the picture quality will be even less than with the "lower resolution" option.