Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
32" 4K LCD with a M4 Mac Mini?
- Thread starter lsquare
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's 138 ppi. That is considered "Retina" mathematically at greater than 25" seating distance. However, a LOT of people sit closer than that, which is why many Mac users might prefer something that is higher ppi, like at least 163 ppi.
I personally sit at around 22" to 25" away from the screen. 163 ppi or 4K 27" is considered Retina at greater than 21" seating distance, so that pixel density works pretty well for me. I'd personally prefer something in between my current monitor's 163 ppi and Apple's 218 ppi though.
I don't run a Mac mini, but use an M1 MBP for the same use case that you stated. I have not had any scaling issues but I don't run the display output at a "true" 4k resolution. 3008 x 1692 is the output resolution that gives me the best balance.
Did a lot of research because finding a decent monitor that can handle a high refresh as well as color accuracy is a bit tough to come across (unless you're willing to spend a decent amount of time color calibrating).
I went with a Dell gaming monitor that is extremely color accurate out of the box, has a 144hz refresh and 1ms response time. HDR 600 (not terrible considering LCD) and I use it with my XBOX. Has a decent amount of settings to tune to get it to somewhere that you want it to be. Have had it about 6 months now and haven't looked back.
Did a lot of research because finding a decent monitor that can handle a high refresh as well as color accuracy is a bit tough to come across (unless you're willing to spend a decent amount of time color calibrating).
I went with a Dell gaming monitor that is extremely color accurate out of the box, has a 144hz refresh and 1ms response time. HDR 600 (not terrible considering LCD) and I use it with my XBOX. Has a decent amount of settings to tune to get it to somewhere that you want it to be. Have had it about 6 months now and haven't looked back.
Dell 32 Inch 4K UHD Gaming Monitor (G3223Q) : Computer Monitors | Dell USA
Shop the Dell 32 inch 4K UHD Gaming monitor (G3223Q) with a smooth 144Hz refresh rate, 1ms GTG response time, or view all external computer monitors at Dell.com.
www.dell.com
I'm running a 32" 4K monitor with my 2018 Mac Mini. It works well with scaling at 3008x1672 and at 2560x1440 (I sometimes use this mode when my eyes are tired and don't need the larger workspace). The 32" at 3008x1672 has screen elements at the same size as the 27" running at 2560x1440 I was using previously, but somehow the 32" seems marginally clearer, despite the lower pixel density.
How did you figure out that 3008x1672 works well with scaling over the native 4K resolution?
I first used the 32" 4K monitor with my 27" iMac. 3008x1672 has things the same size as on the iMac screen. The iMac is clearer as it is perfectly pixel doubled due to the 5K screen, but the 4K screen is not too far off. So I used the same settings when connected to the Mac Mini.
I use a 32" 4k @ 160hz display with my MacBook Pros. It's fine. Except refresh rate maxes out at 120hz right now on Sequoia 15.1. Used to do 144.
I picked up a new MSI MAG401QR 40" 2K UWQHD (3440 x 1440) 155Hz .
I also picked up a new Mac Mini M4 10 core, 24gb, 512SSD.
I plan to set this up tomorrow morning. I am hoping that monitor is a good fit.
I also picked up a new Mac Mini M4 10 core, 24gb, 512SSD.
I plan to set this up tomorrow morning. I am hoping that monitor is a good fit.
I've just bought a Mac Mini M4 10 Core, 24GB, 512 SSD for my TV LG 83-inch screen. The screen resolution is 3840 x 2160 120Hz going to use it for YouTube mostly. We this be ok for viewing from the sofa? And typing.
And a server in the background for the other computers around the house to access a TB3 attached 4TB SSD.
Might try it on my 120-inch screen, Formovie theater Laser TV out of interest, says it has a 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) resolution. Doubt it will look good though.
Just ordered the Mac Mini from Costco UK, was £999.00 got it for £950.00. Will put a picture up, when set up next week.
And a server in the background for the other computers around the house to access a TB3 attached 4TB SSD.
Might try it on my 120-inch screen, Formovie theater Laser TV out of interest, says it has a 4K UHD (3840 x 2160) resolution. Doubt it will look good though.
Just ordered the Mac Mini from Costco UK, was £999.00 got it for £950.00. Will put a picture up, when set up next week.
I use a 32" 4k LG 32UL-500 with my M1 mini, about as cheap of a 4k monitor as there is these days. As others have mentioned, scaling is no problem. I'm usually between 20" and 27" away from the screen depending on whether I'm leaning back in my chair or not. Personally, I find 139 pixels per inch to be quite versatile. I normally work at full 3840x2160, and bump up the font size/zoom in text heavy apps. Menu items are still legible and usable. Reading content while leaned back can get tough when leaning back without bumping the font size a couple points.
If there were an option between 3840x2160 and 3008x1692, it would have probably been my default choice, but I tweaked things enough at 3840x1692 to satisfy myself. That said, 3008x1692 looks great, and as mentioned aligns with the default sizing of screen elements on Apple displays. 2560x1440 looks good as well. Personally, even though it is pixel doubled, I do not care for 1920x1080 on the 32" screen at all.
My wife has a 2017ish 5k 27" iMac. Sure, it's a beautiful screen, but I much prefer the screen real estate of a 32" display. As long as you know what the compromises are, I'm sure you will be quite happy.
If there were an option between 3840x2160 and 3008x1692, it would have probably been my default choice, but I tweaked things enough at 3840x1692 to satisfy myself. That said, 3008x1692 looks great, and as mentioned aligns with the default sizing of screen elements on Apple displays. 2560x1440 looks good as well. Personally, even though it is pixel doubled, I do not care for 1920x1080 on the 32" screen at all.
My wife has a 2017ish 5k 27" iMac. Sure, it's a beautiful screen, but I much prefer the screen real estate of a 32" display. As long as you know what the compromises are, I'm sure you will be quite happy.
Scaling issue is a myth, perpetuated by nerds who think numbers mean everything. Back in the real world, my scaled 32" 4k is certainly sharper scaled at 2560x1440 than my other native 1440p monitor and pretty much any other 1440p monitor I've used (I have one at work). I can't stand 1440p monitors especially if over 27".
I did run my 4k monitor at 3360x1890 for quite a while but tested at 3200x1800 and the size is quite a lot better so that's what I'm using now.
I did run my 4k monitor at 3360x1890 for quite a while but tested at 3200x1800 and the size is quite a lot better so that's what I'm using now.
Concur with this. Running a 32" MSI MAG something or other and 4k scaled to whatever is fine.