4K monitor at 1440p scaling performance

[MarceFX]

Hi there!

Very interested thread!! I'm working on a Benq PD3200U hooked to a Macbook Pro 16" 2019. (i7 2,6 Ghz, 32 GB RAM).

I get really pissed when sometimes my Mac goes laggy, specially when using Google Meet with the cam on. I think I have a powerful machine, but I was not able to understand the issue until I read all messages on this tread.

I'm using the 5120x2880 resolution scaled to 1400 (UI Looks like: 2560 x 1440). There's the problem.

I love current size and definition, but it's really hard on my computer performance.

From what I read, I guess getting a 5K monitor and scale down to 1440 would be better for my GPU, right? Any other solution without losing text/display quality?

Thanks!

 

[Amethyst1]

From what I read, I guess getting a 5K monitor and scale down to 1440 would be better for my GPU, right?

Yep. No scaling necessary in this case.

Any other solution without losing text/display quality

Run your 32" 4K monitor at "looks like 1920x1080" (ugh!) or hook it up to a powerful eGPU to take the load off the MBP.

 

[fjmartinezt]

Hi! Glad to have found this thread

I'm running a 2020 MBP 13" and jus recently updated my monitors. I did a lot of research two find what I thought were the best monitors, but never considered scaling and how it would affect performance.

I bought two DELL U2720Q monitors, which are 27" at 4k. They had great reviews and the USB C connectivity is really comfy to setup everything with less cable clutter. I just got them a few days ago and I run them both side by side with my MacBook in clamshell mode.

The first thing I noticed was the recommended resolution HiDpi scaling to 1080p made everything two big (though animations were very smooth).I found the best setting both size and quality wise was the second one from left to right (which I assume is 1440p). The performance hit is noticiable: animations are choppier. Not unusable in any case, but definitely worse.

I'm wondering if a upgrading my laptop would make a difference. I know the M1s have limited graphical capabilities and cannot run two 4k simultaneously. Maybe the rumored M1X or M2 will be capable enough? What you guys think?

Here's a pic of the setup: I totally recommend this monitors by the way!

 

[Amethyst1]

What you guys think?

My two cents:

Option #1 - upgrade to 5K monitors so you can run 2560x1440 pixel-perfectly without scaling.

Option #2 - get a powerful eGPU and hook up the monitors to that, so that scaling won't affect performance quite as much.

 

[kvic]

I'm running a 2020 MBP 13" and jus recently updated my monitors. I did a lot of research two find what I thought were the best monitors, but never considered scaling and how it would affect performance.

I know the M1s have limited graphical capabilities and cannot run two 4k simultaneously. Maybe the rumored M1X or M2 will be capable enough?

First of all, thanks for sharing your first-hand experience.

Personally I think the problem with common 27-inch 4K monitors is a dead-end. The way out is getting a 5K, 6K or whatever (e.g. non-HiDPI 1440p) natively supported by Apple.

A more powerful GPU to do the brute-force scaling faster is simply shifting the problem to somewhere else. The GPU still consumes more power to get the job done. Though motions may appear smoother. In the case of iGPU (regardless Intel's or Apple's own chips), not only it affects GPU performance but also cuts into power budget available for CPU boost. In case of eGPU, take the low-power Radeon RX 560 as an example, as long as there is non-trivial screen update, power consumption doubles in scaled resolution vs non-scaled. This bugs people who also prioritise power efficiency in their setups. You could say it's lesser evil.

Apple is unlikely to change MacOS in handling UI scaling. I believe equally unlikely that GPU in future Apple processors will do scaling efficiently until perhaps when 8K monitors are common place like today's 4K.

 

[Amethyst1]

Apple is unlikely to change MacOS in handling UI scaling.

The irony is that in Mac OS X 10.4 to 10.6, completely arbitrary UI scaling (between 50% and 300%) was possible. However, it was very unfinished and glitchy.

 

[fjmartinezt]

First of all, thanks for sharing your first-hand experience.

Personally I think the problem with common 27-inch 4K monitors is a dead-end. The way out is getting a 5K, 6K or whatever (e.g. non-HiDPI 1440p) natively supported by Apple.

A more powerful GPU to do the brute-force scaling faster is simply shifting the problem to somewhere else. The GPU still consumes more power to get the job done. Though motions may appear smoother. In the case of iGPU (regardless Intel's or Apple's own chips), not only it affects GPU performance but also cuts into power budget available for CPU boost. In case of eGPU, take the low-power Radeon RX 560 as an example, as long as there is non-trivial screen update, power consumption doubles in scaled resolution vs non-scaled. This bugs people who also prioritise power efficiency in their setups. You could say it's lesser evil.

Apple is unlikely to change MacOS in handling UI scaling. I believe equally unlikely that GPU in future Apple processors will do scaling efficiently until perhaps when 8K monitors are common place like today's 4K.

Hey everyone!

Now that M1 Pro has arrived, what do you guys think?

For example, would I notice an improvement driving two 4K monitors (but outputting 5k as previously established) with an M1 Pro, over the 2019 MBP with the intel Iris GPU?

And given the wide configuration options of M1 Pro and M1 Max, which would you recommend for this use case? Any first hand experience so far?

 

[kvic]

Now that M1 Pro has arrived, what do you guys think?

For example, would I notice an improvement driving two 4K monitors (but outputting 5k as previously established) with an M1 Pro, over the 2019 MBP with the intel Iris GPU?

My gut feeling was that scaling resolution and driving display are "old technologies". It means M1 Pro/Max iGPU won't be different from M1 iGPU that won't be different from Intel iGPU or AMD dGPU. Still go through the same amount of work if your external display doesn't align perfectly with MacOS "native" resolutions dictated by Apple.

Some anecdotal evidence shows up. For example, this one: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/unacceptable-thermals-fan-curve-watching-8k-on-yt.2320642/

"Even sitting at desktop doing nothing with monitors attached CPU sits at 60" which is about 5 to 10C higher than a M1 Pro/Max without external displays connected.

We could make an educated guest on the temperature. The delta should be coming from the resolution scaling and driving two external monitors.

--

As an aside, the same Macrumor'er in the above thread mentioned 8K playback using either SW decode or HW decode, the SoC reaches 100C in both cases.

Separately, another Macrumor'er in this thread reported 100C when running Cinebench R23, debunking a ludicrous tech youtuber's erroneous claim of only around 50C for the same benchmark.

So far, it seems to me once Apple silicon leaving the comfort zone of low-power devices/laptops, the temperature (and associated heat generated) isn't magically & extraordinarily superior to Intel macbook's.

The new MBP's do come with much improved air flow thanks to Jony Ive gone. Thinness and appearance no longer carries the same weight as before. Otherwise, I believe the temperature and heat will even less in favor of Apple's marketing these high-power Macbook's with Apple silicon.

 

[willie45]

Hi all. I stumbled across this thread because I'm looking for a 4k monitor to use with my 2018 mini i7 with 32Gb RAM and an eGPU using a Sapphire Radeon RX 580 Pulse 8192MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card. I want to use it for video and photo editing and will doubtless keep it if and when I ultimately move to the M1 chips. I was going to buy a 4k 32" monitor as I thought the 32" would mitigate eyestrain with menus and still allow me to use 4k to view edits clearly: it seems that there's debate about this though.

I've found the above discussion very interesting and I'd like to clarify these points please.

1. If I used any 4k monitor with my set up and ran it natively at full 4k, then I wouldn't notice any degradation of image or any performance hit. I might find menus and icons a bit too small though, even on a 32" screen.

2. If I scaled it to look like 1920 x 1080 there would be no performance hit and there would be no degradation of image but though text and icons would still be resolved finely as the monitor would still be in 4k, they would look a bit too large for comfort.

3. If I scaled it to look like QHD, icons and text would be a nice size but it would lead to a performance hit due to the scaling process Apple uses, but it would still look better than a native QHD panel for the reasons mentioned in 2 above.

Have I understood all this correctly?

If I have, and considering I'm not a gamer or anything, do you consider it likely that I'd notice the performance hit running Final Cut or Capture 1 on my set up?

Thanks

 

[MikeDr206]

Hi all. I stumbled across this thread because I'm looking for a 4k monitor to use with my 2018 mini i7 with 32Gb RAM and an eGPU using a Sapphire Radeon RX 580 Pulse 8192MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card. I want to use it for video and photo editing and will doubtless keep it if and when I ultimately move to the M1 chips. I was going to buy a 4k 32" monitor as I thought the 32" would mitigate eyestrain with menus and still allow me to use 4k to view edits clearly: it seems that there's debate about this though.

I've found the above discussion very interesting and I'd like to clarify these points please.

1. If I used any 4k monitor with my set up and ran it natively at full 4k, then I wouldn't notice any degradation of image or any performance hit. I might find menus and icons a bit too small though, even on a 32" screen.

2. If I scaled it to look like 1920 x 1080 there would be no performance hit and there would be no degradation of image but though text and icons would still be resolved finely as the monitor would still be in 4k, they would look a bit too large for comfort.

3. If I scaled it to look like QHD, icons and text would be a nice size but it would lead to a performance hit due to the scaling process Apple uses, but it would still look better than a native QHD panel for the reasons mentioned in 2 above.

Have I understood all this correctly?

If I have, and considering I'm not a gamer or anything, do you consider it likely that I'd notice the performance hit running Final Cut or Capture 1 on my set up?

Thanks

I believe you have accurately summarized everything. That said, insofar as you have an egpu, I’d be surprised if the performance hit was discernible.

 

[Amethyst1]

3. If I scaled it to look like QHD, icons and text would be a nice size but it would lead to a performance hit due to the scaling process Apple uses, but it would still look better than a native QHD panel for the reasons mentioned in 2 above.

Correct. I use a Radeon RX 460 as an eGPU which is considerably less powerful than a 580 and don’t notice any performance hit due to scaling.

 

[willie45]

Thank you both for clarifying this. I'm looking to buy an LG 32UN880 but wanted to be sure I was on the right track. I will run it at 4k for editing but otherwise scaled down to 1440.

 

[glindon]

If the 5K 27 LG ultrafine is the best route I would be willing to do that. I just see so much negative feedback on that monitor. Aware there have been a few versions of it. It also just looks ugly with its 90s styling.

I bought the launch day version and have never had any issues with it. Newer models shouldn’t have any issues. In person it really is not that bad looking. Just a blank black border with black square foot. In practice you don’t notice what the monitor looks like because it is so boring in its shape and color and you only see your screen contents. I know people complain about the top bezel not being symmetrical (because of webcam), but just like the notch on the MacBooks you see your content and your brain ignores it. Outside of the Pro XDR there isn’t another monitor sold that has “true” Mac retina. They discontinued the 21” ultra fine that used the same panel as the 21” iMacs so the new 24” isn’t a good replacement.

 

[alFR]

Thank you both for clarifying this. I'm looking to buy an LG 32UN880 but wanted to be sure I was on the right track. I will run it at 4k for editing but otherwise scaled down to 1440.

IIRC you shoudn't necessarily need to change it for editing: when using a scaled resolution macOS just scales the UI elements, it renders images / video at the full resolution available e.g. if you set the display preferences for a 4K display to "looks like 1920 x 1080" then played a 4k video fullscreen it would play in 4K, it wouldn't be downsampled to 1920 x 1080. If you were working in a 1920x1080 timeline on a 4K display you should be able to preview the video at full HD without going fullscreen. I'm sure someone will correct me if I've remembered that wrong. ?

 

[willie45]

IIRC you shoudn't necessarily need to change it for editing: when using a scaled resolution macOS just scales the UI elements, it renders images / video at the full resolution available e.g. if you set the display preferences for a 4K display to "looks like 1920 x 1080" then played a 4k video fullscreen it would play in 4K, it wouldn't be downsampled to 1920 x 1080. If you were working in a 1920x1080 timeline on a 4K display you should be able to preview the video at full HD without going fullscreen. I'm sure someone will correct me if I've remembered that wrong.

You might well be right. I am not really sure about all this stuff and I took my information from this guy here

Anyway, the relevant part for our purposes is the assertion he makes at 6min 10 sec. However, I believe he might be barking up the wrong tree but I'm not sure. Does he misunderstand what 100% means?

I'd be interested in hearing views about it

 

[jakeuten]

I'm guessing you didn't adjust/disable the font smoothing settings?

I regularly use a 1440p 27" with my Macbook Pro and it's great. I did have to tweak the font smoothing at first. Easier on pre-BigSur but still possible.

How to Adjust or Disable Font Smoothing in macOS Big Sur - MacRumors

I just wanted to boost this because this completely solved the irritation my 28" Samsung 4K monitor was causing my eyes when reading text. I don't know what the default value is, but setting it to 0 (or off) looks so much better. Thanks!

 

[SeenJeen]

I'm curious on how performance is with 1440p scaling now with 4K monitors on the new M1 Pro Macs?

A 5K display is 3-4X the cost of a 4K display. And the used market is a gamble with the LG UltraFine 5K coming up on 5 years old now.

 

[Christopher Kim]

I'm curious on how performance is with 1440p scaling now with 4K monitors on the new M1 Pro Macs?

A 5K display is 3-4X the cost of a 4K display. And the used market is a gamble with the LG UltraFine 5K coming up on 5 years old now.

My experience is still great. I have a 5yr old LG 27 UD68 4K monitor, which I run at "Looks like 1440p" HiDPI with my new 14" M1 Pro (10/16/32gb/1TB) at 60Hz. Everything runs very smooth, scrolling websites / text and moving windows around all very smooth animations.

For context though, my use case is very modest, and I was pretty much just fine doing the same thing with my prior 2016 13" MBP w/ Touch Bar (the first gen of that design). So I'm really not stressing the computer enough to make the non-integer scaling anywhere near strained.

 

[SeenJeen]

My experience is still great. I have a 5yr old LG 27 UD68 4K monitor, which I run at "Looks like 1440p" HiDPI with my new 14" M1 Pro (10/16/32gb/1TB) at 60Hz. Everything runs very smooth, scrolling websites / text and moving windows around all very smooth animations.

For context though, my use case is very modest, and I was pretty much just fine doing the same thing with my prior 2016 13" MBP w/ Touch Bar (the first gen of that design). So I'm really not stressing the computer enough to make the non-integer scaling anywhere near strained.

How's text look? Some complain about text 'looking weird' or pixelated.

 

[Christopher Kim]

How's text look? Some complain about text 'looking weird' or pixelated.

Nope, no issues here. Text still looks good at my normal viewing distance - even when I bring my eyes really close up to the screen, text still looks very crisp, unchanged since before I got my 14" M1 Pro and was using with my 2016 13" MBP.

 

[SeenJeen]

Nope, no issues here. Text still looks good at my normal viewing distance - even when I bring my eyes really close up to the screen, text still looks very crisp, unchanged since before I got my 14" M1 Pro and was using with my 2016 13" MBP.

Thanks so much for this!

I picked up a 27" 4K display today. Set to 1440p scaled on my M1 Pro Mac, I don't see the 'choppy animations' or performance issues that some are talking about... and I'm hyper-sensitive to lag.

WindowServer is taking a bit more memory ... but that's to be expected.

 

[jdb8167]

Thanks so much for this!

I picked up a 27" 4K display today. Set to 1440p scaled on my M1 Pro Mac, I don't see the 'choppy animations' or performance issues that some are talking about... and I'm hyper-sensitive to lag.

WindowServer is taking a bit more memory ... but that's to be expected.

You won't see anything like that on a M1 Pro MacBook. The M1 MacBook Air is also smooth.

 

[Lefty38]

Thanks so much for this!

I picked up a 27" 4K display today. Set to 1440p scaled on my M1 Pro Mac, I don't see the 'choppy animations' or performance issues that some are talking about... and I'm hyper-sensitive to lag.

WindowServer is taking a bit more memory ... but that's to be expected.

SeenJeen, Interesting thread, Which 27“ 4K monitor did you get?

 

[SeenJeen]

SeenJeen, Interesting thread, Which 27“ 4K monitor did you get?

Lenovo L28u-30

It's actually a 28-inch monitor, oops.

I ended up getting a refurbished one locally for $170. It's a good display but nothing special to write home about.

 

[decat]

Hi there!

Very interested thread!! I'm working on a Benq PD3200U hooked to a Macbook Pro 16" 2019. (i7 2,6 Ghz, 32 GB RAM).

I get really pissed when sometimes my Mac goes laggy, specially when using Google Meet with the cam on. I think I have a powerful machine, but I was not able to understand the issue until I read all messages on this tread.

I'm using the 5120x2880 resolution scaled to 1400 (UI Looks like: 2560 x 1440). There's the problem.

I love current size and definition, but it's really hard on my computer performance.

From what I read, I guess getting a 5K monitor and scale down to 1440 would be better for my GPU, right? Any other solution without losing text/display quality?

Thanks!

I was able to pick up this monitor for cheap not so long ago. Paid 400 EUR / 450 EUR.
Till some weeks ago it was mainly used in the home office, connected to my Windows work laptop.

A couple of weeks ago, when doing night shifts from home, I decided to take the Mini M1 with me to the 'home office'.
When connected to the Mini M1 it was, I don't know how to say it, an immense difference compared to the monitor the Mini M1 is connected to in our living room.

In the living room I'm using a Dell U2520D 2k monitor, and it seemed to run fine together till the Mini M1 got hooked to the PD3200U, it was a real eyeopener. The machine became way snappier, boots instantly. The laggyness you mention, I had it too, but it never came to my mind something wasn't working well. Did a quick Google search and bumped on this topic.

I never would have thought there would be such a difference in performance by just using another monitor.
In the meanwhile, the PD3200U moved to the living room and the Dell U2520D went upstairs to the office.

Loved the Mini M1 since it arrived, but now it's connected to the PD3200U I'm loving it even more.

When scaling it seems to get 5k signal.