Sidebar Sidebar
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

Chancha said:
Even an M1 Mac should be able to see 3008x1692 on that list, but your M4 does not. This is the issue that we are discussing now.
Click to expand...
Beau Slim said:
The numbers I gave are the horizontal resolutions. I would have expected you to see at least a 3008x1692 or 3072x1728 option in that list. That may simply be hidden, though, and unlockable via a utility. Probably not higher, though.

Not to rejoice in your misfortune, but if the bug is even worse on Apple's own monitors, that gives me hope that they'll fix it sooner.
Click to expand...
What makes it even weirder is that the M4 Mac mini got a big upgrade for resolution support as compared to previous models. In fact, that's one reason I felt comfortable ordering the M4 at launch (and not the M4 Pro).

M1
2 displays - 6K60 Thunderbolt + 4K60 HDMI

M2
2 displays - 6K60 Thunderbolt + 5K60 Thunderbolt, or 6K60 Thunderbolt + 4K60 HDMI

M4
3 displays - Two 6K60 Thunderbolt + 5K60 Thunderbolt, or Two 6K60 Thunderbolt + 4K60 HDMI
2 displays - 6K60 Thunderbolt + 8K60 HDMI, or 6K60 Thunderbolt + 4K240 HDMI

I was 100% sure the M4 would support 3008x1692 on a 5K monitor, but I was wrong. This is my friend's M4 with 27" 5K Studio Display:

M4_StudioDisplay-resolutions.jpeg

Anyhow, what I want is a 31.5" monitor, either 5K or 6K, at something like 2720x1530 or 2880x1620. I could consider running at 2560x1440 but that would not be ideal for me. From the sounds of it, I might be better off with a 5K monitor from a resolution support point of view, but it is likely the 5K 31.5" Acer gaming-oriented monitor will be lower quality than the new 6K 31.5" monitors coming out aimed at content creators. It's unfortunate that Apple will not support 2880x1620 on a 6K monitor (nor will BetterDisplay apparently), even though Apple supports 2880x1620 natively on a 5K monitor.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
yojow85 said:
Anyone know if the M2 or M3 (non-pro chips) support 3840x1620 HiDPI?
Click to expand...
Not out of the box, 3008x1692 is the max.

With BetterDisplay I think you have some leeway in using a virtual display larger than that but it comes with issues.
 
Chancha said:
Not out of the box, 3008x1692 is the max.

With BetterDisplay I think you have some leeway in using a virtual display larger than that but it comes with issues.
Click to expand...
So only M2Pro and M3Pro support it out of the box?
 
When connected to a regular 4K or 5K monitor, do both M4 and M4 Pro Mini list the same available resolutions for HiDPI? Any missing options compared with previous generations of Mac?
 
hajime said:
When connected to a regular 4K or 5K monitor, do both M4 and M4 Pro Mini list the same available resolutions for HiDPI? Any missing options compared with previous generations of Mac?
Click to expand...
M4 doesn't show 3840x1620 in HiDPI. I don't know about M4Pro.

M2 Pro does show 3840x1620 in HiDPI
 
hajime said:
Why Apple is doing this to us?
Click to expand...
Does anyone know if this an actual hardware (chip-level) limitation, or is it something Apple could fix with a software or firmware update? If the latter, maybe they'd do it if they get enough feature requests or bug reports about it? I just bought an M4 Pro Mini and I'm pissed off that I can no longer access the resolution options that best suited my eyes and my workflow (Logic Pro on an ultrawide monitor, using Better Display).
 
mzb said:
Does anyone know if this an actual hardware (chip-level) limitation, or is it something Apple could fix with a software or firmware update? If the latter, maybe they'd do it if they get enough feature requests or bug reports about it? I just bought an M4 Pro Mini and I'm pissed off that I can no longer access the resolution options that best suited my eyes and my workflow (Logic Pro on an ultrawide monitor, using Better Display).
Click to expand...
The Dell U4021QW does not work but the U4025QW does, therefore it should be a software problem - hopefully 😁
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riot Nrrrd

Attachments

  • IMG_4117.jpeg
    IMG_4117.jpeg
    658.4 KB · Views: 133
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
  • Wow
Reactions: Riot Nrrrd
jumpjim said:
My new M4 16Gb/512Gb mini is running my Samsung Odyssey G9 49” Ultrawide in 5120x1440 at 240Hz beautifully with a UGREEN USB-C to Displayport cable from Amazon. Very pleased overall.
Click to expand...
Is that like the equivalent of two 27" monitors lashed together? I don't have that much desktop real estate to get something similar, but more power to you if it works!

Now if only you had stable functioning rear Thunderbolt ports ... ;)
 
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
mzb said:
Does anyone know if this an actual hardware (chip-level) limitation, or is it something Apple could fix with a software or firmware update? If the latter, maybe they'd do it if they get enough feature requests or bug reports about it? I just bought an M4 Pro Mini and I'm pissed off that I can no longer access the resolution options that best suited my eyes and my workflow (Logic Pro on an ultrawide monitor, using Better Display).
Click to expand...
I think Apple could fix this with a software (or DCP firmware) update. With M4 there is a new set of horizontal and vertical framebuffer (video memory) size limits (beyond the usual 6K or 8K limit present in previous generations for non-pro and pro chips - previously only a horizontal limit and a max pixel count limit was present based on the hardware limits for a port). The system now dynamically allocates its capabilities when a new display is connected, trying to figure out the max sensible framebuffer size (sadly in a rather conservative/limiting manner) and keep the rest for further displays connected down the road. This allows the M4 generation to support more displays than the previous generations. The shared nature of capabilities is evident from the fact that the number of displays depends on the native resolution of the displays (for previous generations only the port usage was a differentiating factor). All this comes at a cost - those who want higher resolutions (typically Pro users who want large HiDPI desktops on their ultrawides) won't get what they want. Apple could tweak the way this works but it would probably require tweaking the supported mix of displays on the specs page retroactively (and make it convoluted, involving not only resolutions but physical display sizes, taking into account on what displays would it make sense to support higher HiDPI resolutions etc) which might not be something they want to do. But of course in the future they could sidestep the problem and just rethink how desktop composition works in future macOS versions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eva2000, gregre, Riot Nrrrd and 4 others
so on a base m4 mac mini, a scaled resolution of 3840x1080 won’t be possible on a 5120x1440 display?
 
Hello,

I plan to use a G9 57 in PBP mode: so one part of the screen would be at 5K2K resolution (and the other part is another PC completely), and refresh rate of this monitor is 120hz

Then, due to the limitations of mac os quoted in this thread, I shouldn't have HIDPI support natively: But I seen that with BetterDisplay it would allow me through the virtual screen feature to have HIDPI resolutions, which is fine for me

But looking at this feature, I seen that virtual displays can only do up to 60hz: https://github.com/waydabber/BetterDisplay/discussions/1675

So does that mean I cannot have both HIDPI for 5k2k and 120hz? Gotta pick one of the two?

Thanks
 
I am not sure if the 60Hz advertised is right because if I run my LG in Service mode it shows 72Hz. Maybe the virtual screen is only drawing at 60Hz? @waydabber would know best. I will say that I have a hard time noticing any difference with a virtual display since the mouse issue was fixed.
 
Last edited:
It’s going to be hilarious when you have to pay double the price to get a new 2025 Mac Studio (yes I know this thread is about M4-based Mac minis) that can do 3840x1620 scaled HiDPI. (And it still might have the randomly disconnecting rear ports issue with USB devices that the current M4-based Mac minis suffer from, who knows. We live in interesting times.)
 
Riot Nrrrd said:
It’s going to be hilarious when you have to pay double the price to get a new 2025 Mac Studio (yes I know this thread is about M4-based Mac minis) that can do 3840x1620 scaled HiDPI. (And it still might have the randomly disconnecting rear ports issue with USB devices that the current M4-based Mac minis suffer from, who knows. We live in interesting times.)
Click to expand...
Is it even confirmed that it'll work on mac studio? At least the M4 version of it might end up having the same issue
 
There is no reason to think the M3 Ultra wouldn't work, since it is just M3 Max stitched, and the M3 Max can do 1620 scaled? That's how I reason the logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riot Nrrrd
Not exactly on-topic, but I'm planning to pick up a new M4 MacBook Air next week and see if I'm able to get the same HiDPI + 120Hz on my Dell U4025QW as the base M4 Mac Mini. I don't see why the Air wouldn't work -- aside from the lack of active cooling, it is the same chip as the Mac Mini. Anyway, I'll post here for those who are curious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Akayfortyseven and Riot Nrrrd
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back