Scaling is a simple process. I suppose it's more work than not scaling. But the GPU should have enough parallelism to hide this.
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.
5K2K at 120Hz with Mac Mini M4
- Thread starter Newgoblin49
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Technically, say no scaling 1:1 consumes 0 extra performance to achieve.
Then next are integer scaling, namely the default retina 1:2.
Everything else that are non integer costs the most performance penalty.
Add to the fact that if the rendered frame is too large in pixel width, it hits the frame buffer limit for a given display engine. The M4 gen is still an unknown since it was only on an iPad Pro where we couldn't assess this. If anyone is truely concerned you need to wait for real world tests. But bottom line is that the display engine has been upgraded at least for the tandem OLED on the iPad Pro, then now the TB5 DP2.1 external capability also.
Then next are integer scaling, namely the default retina 1:2.
Everything else that are non integer costs the most performance penalty.
Add to the fact that if the rendered frame is too large in pixel width, it hits the frame buffer limit for a given display engine. The M4 gen is still an unknown since it was only on an iPad Pro where we couldn't assess this. If anyone is truely concerned you need to wait for real world tests. But bottom line is that the display engine has been upgraded at least for the tandem OLED on the iPad Pro, then now the TB5 DP2.1 external capability also.
Can the M4 Pro in the mini power 2x 4k monitors at 240hz each? Or would they run at 120hz each? I'm consfused.
This is exactly what I was thinking.
I’m upgrading from a MacBook Pro 2016. There’s a severe performance degradation when I try to use it at any scaling level on my 4K monitor other than “ looks like 1080P” which runs very smoothly .
I’m not sure if these M chips have gotten so good that with the base M4 that the power to drive a 5K2K 120 wouldn’t be noticeable
It has been improved massively. Even assuming the amount of extra processing needed has not changed, the abundance of GPU power in the newer SoC gives you enough headroom to not worry about it.
That said, I vaguely remember watching a YouTube video testing this on a M2 Max MacBook Pro. Changing the scaling settings or even unplugging an external display could give you different rendering times in Adobe Premiere. So the difference is there but not to the point of being noticeable while interfacing software, it is just in render and export, so background tasks.
That’s all good. What I’ve noticed with my MBP is that , the mere action of switching between different windows lags a bit. Or switching between desktops. I think with the base M4 chip having such troubles is out of the question right ?
I was thinking about your earlier comment , I think it’ll take months before we actually see tests on the display engine of the M4 and we come to a consensus of its capabilities.
I don’t really want to wait that long and I’d rather pick up an M4 on day one if I know that I won’t have trouble running it on a 5K2K 120Hz monitor which is going to be the highlight of Samsung and LG’s monitor line up at this CES come January
The GPU sucking has stopped immediately right when M1 was introduced. Even comparing between the 2019 16" Intel MBP and the base M1 Air it was already noticeable, plugging in one external display was enough to drive the dGPU on those MBP fans nuts. Doing the same on the M1 Air was like nothing happened.
In the case of the new minis, if I were you, with the premise of having no intention to wait for real world tests, then I would just spring for the M4 Pro. The base M1 M2 M3 and now M4 chips have always been, well, basic. Apple may have thrown in some gate keeping in there. The M4 Pro is more or less guaranteed to have better display engine capabilities.
Oh wow. That suggests the M4 Mac mini (which I just ordered) should be able to achieve both 5K and 6K (16:9) @ 120 Hz, correct? I didn't think it was worth it to spend an extra CA$600 to get Thunderbolt 5 plus DisplayPort 2.1 with M4 Pro.
I don't care about 4K 240 Hz or 8K 120 Hz.
P.S. I would love to get a 5K HDR 120 Hz 30" 16:10 monitor, but I don't think Apple will do this as the pixel density is closer to 200 ppi. It seems like they would stick with 218 ppi or higher.
Last edited:
You’ve got a good point, But I’m finding it hard to justify spending exactly double the amount to get the capability I want (5K2K 120Hz) which is supposedly already present in the base model.
It doesn’t make much sense financially , doesn’t it ?
In this case get the base M4 with the specs you want, test with the display yourself, and make use of the return period. I unfortunately live in a region with crappy consumer laws so I can't return a Mac, but I guess you like most others can.
The likely problem on the base M4 chip with regards to 5k2k is, again, the lack of scaled UI options. It may give you some but not all the ones you actually want to use. Then it may take installing SwitchResX / BetterDisplay to unlock them.
I just found an old thread on this very topic, but during the M2 era:
Even I myself was among the one discussing but I already forgot about it. The discussion is chaotic but we did get to the root of the problem, as per BetterDisplay release notes:
Even I myself was among the one discussing but I already forgot about it. The discussion is chaotic but we did get to the root of the problem, as per BetterDisplay release notes:
- Maximum flexible scaling resolutions depend on GPU capabilities and the display's resolution (horizontal width limit is 6144 pixels for entry level Apple Silicon Macs, 7680 pixels for the Pro/Max/Ultra versions).
Haha , I’m afraid it’s the same for me. We don’t have any return policy with Apple where I come from.
Yeah I get you mean with the scaled resolutions.
H
How would one go about finding this out once they have the base Mac Mini ?
Now an important point to note here is that I’ve done a lot of digging and I’ve found out that people have gotten the resolution and frame rate out of M2 pro/ Max , M3 Pro/Max.
When I’ve taken a look at the specs of M4 base in terms of display support, it seems to be equivalent if not slightly better than M3 Pro . Equating 1:1 I figured it should work fine ?
Thank you!
How would one go about finding this out once they have the base Mac Mini ?
Now an important point to note here is that I’ve done a lot of digging and I’ve found out that people have gotten the resolution and frame rate out of M2 pro/ Max , M3 Pro/Max.
When I’ve taken a look at the specs of M4 base in terms of display support, it seems to be equivalent if not slightly better than M3 Pro . Equating 1:1 I figured it should work fine ?
So you don't already have any 5k2k display to test? I know the original thread intent was to conjecture a 5k120 prospect display that doesn't exist yet, but in the context of frame buffer pixel width the frequency does not matter. (or does it? I am not 100% confident to be honest)
Again the problem is the buffer pixel width, it may be hard count so it cannot be mixed and relaxed into other data to loosen it. Or it may be just part of a combined math. You can see from the above linked thread, someone managed to loosen out a virtual screen to a 8192 px wide output by reducing from 10-bit to 8-bit.
Yes.
I was discussing DisplayPort limits and relating them to Apple advertised display limits.
5K120 is within the 4K240 bandwidth limit but the dimensions are different. We'll have to see if Apple allows this.
6K120 is outside the 4K240 bandwidth limit but still within the DisplayPort 1.4 limit. We'll have to see if Apple allows this.
8K120 is outside the DisplayPort 1.4 limit.
Some of the new Macs support DisplayPort 2.1 (with Thunderbolt 5) but their specs don't mention what link rates are supported. None of the supported display modes they list actually require DisplayPort 2.1. The higher link rates of DisplayPort 2.1 can lower the DSC compression required for a given display resolution & refresh rate but I've heard people say that the highest DSC compression of 8bpp is hardly noticeable anyway.
In that case, the benefit of Thunderbolt 5 will be mostly for external storage solutions.
I have just preordered the Base M4 16/256gb and I will test 3840x1620 at 120HZ and 5120x2160 at 120HZ. My MM M2 Pro 512/16GB works without any issues at both resolution with 120HZ refresh rate. I have tried with USB C - DisplayPort and with Thunderbolt 4 to Thunderbolt 4 cables, both works.
My monitor is Dell U4025QW with the latest firmware.
My monitor is Dell U4025QW with the latest firmware.
Attachments
SO where I come from , we don't have most of these on display. You'll have to order it and you'll get it in.
Now that the shipment window in my country has pushed to the 15th of November . I am thinking its best to wait and see what the test results say.
I really appreciate your help @Chancha. It means a lot !
This is literally the same monitor I am interested in!
When are you getting your Mac mini , Waiting eagerly for your results !
Thank you for confirming for us. Sad news but at least we now have a definitive answer.