Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

toknormal

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Feb 21, 2011
7
1
Glasgow
Hi !

I'm Looking at this monitor but I have quite a dated MBP (2009 solidbody with Mini Display Port): LG 27UD68-W

https://www.amazon.co.uk/LG-27UD68-W-Ultra-White-display/dp/B01AN14SEO

I read on another blog that the monitor has a menu option (OSD Menu) to switch it into 2560x1440 which is what I'm using with my old Dell Ultra 1127 that's now packed in.

Does anyone know if this is a workable configuration ? Will it be blurry etc ?

GPU in the MacbookPro is NVIDIA GeForce 9400M 256 MB

Many thanks for any advice !
 

thesaint024

macrumors 65816
Nov 14, 2016
1,073
888
suspension waiting room
The 09 cannot drive the 4k at native resolution. I tried this. It downscales and looks like s**t. It will run your 2560x1440 resolution, but chances are good that it won't look as good as a monitor with that native resolution. I didn't try the Dell 4k, but I did try an ASUS. I did run the 09 on my current Dell 3440x1440 and it looks niiice. Not 4k nice, but everything is bigger so it's good for my uses.
 

toknormal

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Feb 21, 2011
7
1
Glasgow
Thanks for that @thesaint024

I thought it might not downscale too well but I was wondering if the 27UD68 might do ok since it had a specific OSD menu option for 2560x1440.

Doesn't have to last too long. I was in the market 6 months ago for a new MacbookPro but baulked at the prices so I'm still on the original. Will have to upgrade at some point.
 

thesaint024

macrumors 65816
Nov 14, 2016
1,073
888
suspension waiting room
Thanks for that @thesaint024

I thought it might not downscale too well but I was wondering if the 27UD68 might do ok since it had a specific OSD menu option for 2560x1440.

Doesn't have to last too long. I was in the market 6 months ago for a new MacbookPro but baulked at the prices so I'm still on the original. Will have to upgrade at some point.
I just can't see how downscaling will work well. Maybe I'm doing the math wrong, but every other pixel will have to be split somehow? But maybe the Dell is worth a try. Not sure about the return policy. If you only need to live with the resolution for a few months, maybe you can deal. It just wasn't good enough for me long term, but could be for you, temporarily. Hope it works out.
 

mastermind6192

macrumors member
Jan 8, 2010
92
28
USA
In a sense if the monitor works on a lower resolution that's great, but if your Mac can't support 4k why bother. You can get a non 4k monitor for a lot cheaper and have if function just the same. Unless you're planning on buying a new Mac soon there really isn't an advantage.
 

Grolubao

macrumors 68000
Dec 23, 2008
1,579
582
London, UK
I have a 2014 and it didn't run 4k smoothly since there was no dedicated graphic. In other words, forget about it
 

toknormal

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Feb 21, 2011
7
1
Glasgow
if your Mac can't support 4k why bother. You can get a non 4k monitor for a lot cheaper

Actually I'm finding the 4k monitors far better value than the Ultras (2560x1440). It's hard to find an ultra under £400/$500 and that also appears to be the price range of a load of great performance 4k mons. Right now I'm looking at these which are all in the $400/$500 region and are not 4k.

Acer H277HU kmipuz 27-Inch IPS WQHD (IPS Panel)
- Expensive for 60 Hz WQHD ?
- Has MacbookPro Reviews, good
- USB-C Passthrough (Charges the MacbookPro)

Acer XG270HU omidpx 27-inch (TN Panel)
Samsung 32” WQHD LED
ViewSonic VX2778-SMHD

Whereas check this amazing looking 4k LG monitor for only EU 482 (£411).

https://www.macnificos.com/lg-27ud68-w-monitor-27-4k-srgb-99-uhd?gclid=CJiO2867q9ECFQoo0wod56QI2w

However, I just discovered this alarming review so it looks like I'm definitely in the market for a dedicated 2560x1440 job:

https://www.amazon.com/LG-Electronics-27UD88-W-LED-Lit-Monitor/product-reviews/B01CDYB0QS

Let's say it plainly: for a Mac, the "correct" resolution for a 27"-32" monitor is 2560x1440, or 4x that for 'retina', which is a 5K display: 5120x2880.
The correct resolution for a 20-24" monitor is 1980x1080, or 4x that for 'retina'. That is a 4K display.

So for the best experience on a Mac, you should skip this monitor and get a 4K monitor in the 20-24" range, or visit your bank manager and then order a 5K monitor.

This is a serious usability problem for Mac users that not many people talk about (and the industry is trying to 'hush'). I suspect many of the users of this monitor set the 'wrong' 2560x1440 resolution and then are unimpressed with the display's quality. But the display is excellent when used at its native resolution! It's just a Mac unfriendly model. Do you think it is a coincidence that now that LG released two monitors in partnership with Apple, they went for a 21.5" 4K and a 27" 5K? Those are the same sizes and resolutions as the iMac. That is what works best on a Mac.
 
Last edited:
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.