Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple specifically states the Mac mini M2 Pro's HDMI port supports up to 8K at 60 Hz or 4K at 240 Hz. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that to achieve this, it would require >40 Gbps with DSC.

EDIT:

I believe a 48Gbps HDMI 2.1 port sends data at 12Gbps over each of four lanes. When watching videos testing the bandwidth of HDMI 2.1 ports on 4K televisions using a signal generator, a "full bandwidth" 48Gbps HDMI 2.1 port will return a value of "12G@4L" whereas one that is sending, say, 40Gbps will return "10G@4L".

So these are 48Gbps "full bandwidth" HDMI 2.1 ports on the M2 Apple Silicon Macs.
For the M2, Apple states it only supports up to 4K 60 Hz over HDMI. The higher resolution support requires M2 Pro or above.
 
Last edited:
Even 1GbE will be limited by USB 2.0 speed. Can you test 1 GbE by connecting another Mac or PC? I get 117 MB/s using AmourphousDiskMark.app using file sharing over GbE to another Mac. USB 2.0 would be limited to 60 MB/s.

Did you check if any USB 3.x device works at USB 3.x speed?
Testing USB devices ended up being more interesting than I was expecting! I just connected a USB 3.x external SSD to the monitor to test the USB speeds and got:
  • 40 MB/s transfers from the SSD when I connected the U3224KB to the M2 Pro Mini with HDMI and the USB upstream cable. Clearly this is USB 2.0 speeds and I got this dismal performance with the SSD connected to either the USB-C front ports or the USB-A backside ports.
  • 366 MB/s transfers from the SSD when I instead connected the U3224KB via Thunderbolt 4 (and without USB upstream cable connected). I got these USB 3.x speeds with both the front and back USB ports. Moreover, when I looked in System Report, I now saw that both the SSD drive and the 2.5GbE LAN adapter were connected off of USB 3.1 Bus -> 4-port USB 3.0 Hub, which I wasn't seeing before.
  • However, I then went immediately back to only using the HDMI and USB upstream cable and retested, and surprisingly, I still got the fast ~366 MB/s transfers with my external SSD. How bizarre!
I haven't tested the LAN port (still haven't found my 1GbE ethernet USB adapter), but I don't think it's necessary. It's clear that something really screwy is going on with the USB hub and peripherals built into my monitor. Perhaps this inconsistent behavior is also related to the big problem that I'm having where all the built-ins just disappear occasionally.

By the way, I did try swapping out the USB upstream cable for another one, but this didn't make a difference. Perhaps more interesting is that when I was doing the first test above (getting only 40 MB/s transfers when using the USB upstream cable), the faint coil whine (see this post) that I've briefly heard once before actually returned. But the whine only lasted when I was doing that test, where the monitor and macOS incorrectly had the USB devices connected via USB 2.0. I've tried once to replicate that whine but it hasn't reoccurred.

At the moment, I'm inclined to think I just got unlucky with faulty hardware in my U3224KB, and if Dell replaces it, all my issues will be sorted out. But it's hard to really know and so it'd be great if anyone else could confirm whether or not they too have encountered these same problems.
 
My Asus ProArt PA329CV monitor had different USB-C settings that would support either USB 2 or USB 3 speeds via the hub. It was set to USB 2.0 by default.

d6d5c3c4-a1d0-4eba-a1bb-dd80076276cc.png


BTW, I really didn't like this monitor. While the colour balance seemed fine out of the box, it had significant edge light bleed, and at 137 ppi, the pixel density is too low for macOS. I returned it immediately.
 
I've had my U3224KB since July 3rd but the Seattle/Tacoma weather has been so good I can't bring myself to sit inside and spend time figuring it out. It doesn't help it's staying light and warm until 10:00

I have my monitor connected to a MacBook Pro M2 Max via HDMI 2.1 and am using the USB- C upstream and connecting a keyboard, mouse and the network and all have worked without issue. I haven't bothered to check speeds but I haven' experienced slow response. I can't hear any noise from the Dell but I have a PC and its fans running.

I updated the Dell firmware and installed DDPM and it is working fine.

At 6144 x 3456 the windows and fonts, tool bars, applications, everything, are tiny and if I prioritize Dell settings, so is the MacBook Pro screen.. What is this scaling I read referred to in previous posts? I've never used an external monitor on a Mac before. I have a main editing Windows workstation I build myself a new PC every 4 or 5 years, I'm due for a new one, and running the Dell on that with limited graphics resolution support is not a problem.

Where do I find the scaling where I can run at 6K but actually read the screen? Mac states default is 3072 x 1728 but that defeats the purpose of a 6K monitor. I apologize in advance for my ignorance that may be second nature for those more experienced.

Thank you.
 
At 6144 x 3456 the windows and fonts, tool bars, applications, everything, are tiny and if I prioritize Dell settings, so is the MacBook Pro screen.. What is this scaling I read referred to in previous posts? I've never used an external monitor on a Mac before. I have a main editing Windows workstation I build myself a new PC every 4 or 5 years, I'm due for a new one, and running the Dell on that with limited graphics resolution support is not a problem.

Where do I find the scaling where I can run at 6K but actually read the screen? Mac states default is 3072 x 1728 but that defeats the purpose of a 6K monitor. I apologize in advance for my ignorance that may be second nature for those more experienced.
That doesn't defeat the purpose of a 6K monitor. In fact, that is the whole point of a 6K monitor on macOS. Ideally with macOS you should be running at 2X scaled (if the pixel density of the monitor is high enough to support that well), so that a 6144x3456 monitor is running at what "looks like" 3072x1728. As you've discovered, trying to run at 1X on a 6144x3456 screen means everything is way too small to read. However, if it's run at 3072x1728, you get 2x2=4 times as many pixels per unit area of screen real estate, meaning everything looks that much smoother and crisper. In other words, for a screen size of 32", running 6K screen 2X scaled to 3K looks much, much better than running a native 3K screen of the same size non-scaled at 1X.

You should realize that the current 14" MBP has a native screen resolution of 3024x1964, but by default runs 2X scaled at what "looks like" 1512x982. Similarly the 16" MBP has a native screen resolution of 3456x2234, but by default runs 2X scaled at what "looks like" 1728x1117. In order to see what resolutions are available, go to the Displays Preferences, right-click on the display options, and select "Show List".

I have provided screenshots below to guide you. My particular 28.2" monitor doesn't have a high enough pixel density to function well at the recommended 2X scaling, so I use fractional scaling. My screen is 3840x2560, but I use 2304x1536, which works out to 1.67X scaling. That won't be quite as crisp as 2X scaling.

Screenshot 2023-07-16 at 5.02.08 PM.png


Screenshot 2023-07-16 at 5.02.33 PM.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GrandCiel
That doesn't defeat the purpose of a 6K monitor. In fact, that is the whole point of a 6K monitor on macOS. Ideally with macOS you should be running at 2X scaled (if the pixel density of the monitor is high enough to support that well), so that a 6144x3456 monitor is running at what "looks like" 3072x1728. As you've discovered, trying to run at 1X on a 6144x3456 screen means everything is way too small to read. However, if it's run at 3072x1728, you get 2x2=4 times as many pixels per unit area of screen real estate, meaning everything looks that much smoother and crisper. In other words, for a screen size of 32", running 6K screen 2X scaled to 3K looks much, much better than running a native 3K screen of the same size non-scaled at 1X.

You should realize that the current 14" MBP has a native screen resolution of 3024x1964, but by default runs 2X scaled at what "looks like" 1512x982. Similarly the 16" MBP has a native screen resolution of 3456x2234, but by default runs 2X scaled at what "looks like" 1728x1117. In order to see what resolutions are available, go to the Displays Preferences, right-click on the display options, and select "Show List".

I have provided screenshots below to guide you. My particular 28.2" monitor doesn't have a high enough pixel density to function well at the recommended 2X scaling, so I use fractional scaling. My screen is 3840x2560, but I use 2304x1536, which works out to 1.67X scaling. That won't be quite as crisp as 2X scaling.
Thanks. Now I know what people were meaning by scaling. I have been in all the areas you included screen shots for and played around with them. I just thought scaling was more involved, referring to some type of view that made tool bars, apps, font, etc. larger and readable while at full resolution, not simply selecting different smaller resolutions.

My highest priority is selecting the optimum resolution for high quality 4K video editing. Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
I've had my U3224KB for a few days, and so far, it is dead quiet. (But I've had other issues, which I'll write about in another post.) However, when I was first connecting cables and had the monitor raised up and rotated so I could see the ports, I did hear the faintest high-pitched whine when my ear was almost touching the bottom edge of the monitor. But if that whine was any quieter, I probably wouldn't have been able to hear it. And I don't hear it now, even if I put my ear back up to the monitor. Hope that's helpful.

EDIT: Per this more recent post, I've actually now re-encountered this faint coil whine sound. But it was indeed truly faint and didn't last long. I'm not sure what to make of it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was related to the USB connection and speed issues that I've been having. Are you using the USB upstream cable and do you have any other peripherals connected to the monitor?
Thanks for that update. For me I actually think the coil whine is coming from the speakers, almost like those beige Harmon/Kardon ones from the 90’s used to do. It is present when plugged into several different machines, but I can get it to go away for a short time if I play some audio. It also seems to be worse when it isn’t connected to anything. I spoke to Dell and they said they will send out a brand new monitor so im not too concerned with getting this resolved.
 
I am already doing the same with BetterDisplay, which also gives HiDPI and LowDPI resolutions in separate lists. But the scaling isn't the issue here. If I select to use 6016x3384 pixels, in either native resolution (tiny text!) or HiDPI (looks like 3006x1692), and I do NOT fake the native panel resolution using BetterDisplay, the video signal somehow gets rescaled to 6144x3456, which is what the monitor reports as the input. However, if I take a screenshot, I still get an 6016x3384 image. I think this rescaling is happening somewhere in macOS or the Mini's hardware, but I really can't tell. I'm really surprised by this behavior, but it indeed appears to be operating this way, for whatever reason! Or macOS is faking me out with a differently scaled screenshot!

In my earlier detailed post, I just added an "UPDATE" paragraph to hopefully make this much clearer. I also added a couple of other edits and fixed some typos for better clarity.
SwitchResX will show what the scale is (active pixels) when you double click a resolution in the Current Resolutions list. The 6016x3384 is a scaled mode that scales up to 6144x3456. If the EDID includes a 6016x3384 timing (as it does in the EDID that I've seen) then I think SwitchResX might have two different 6016x3384 modes - one that is scaled and one that is not. At least that's what happens on Intel Macs. Basically, macOS adds various scaled modes that all scale to the native resolution of the display (6144x3456). For example, my 4K display has 4 different 1280x720 modes: scaled lores (4K), timing lores (720p), scaled HiDPI (4K), timing HiDPI (1440p). SwitchResX can show the non-scaled (timing) modes in bold. The 1440p has VRR because it can do 144Hz. The 4K modes don't have VRR because 144Hz is not possible at 4K on my display (using single cable input). Apple does not allow VRR modes for modes that have max refresh rate less than the max refresh rate of the display.

I guess you are referring to the "connectivity" block on page 16? I've gotten HDR @ 60 Hz to work with Thunderbolt 4, but only up to 6016x3384 pixels, not all the pixels in the display. Curious. I'm speculating, but maybe this isn't oversight in the manual but rather an implicit acknowledgement that HDR is not supported at the native resolution of the panel when using Thunderbolt??? I hope not, but if so, that would seem to indicate that this is an actual hardware limitation of the Thunderbolt 4 interface, at least for the chip inside the monitor.
I doubt Thunderbolt has such a limitation. It should be able to do anything DisplayPort can do since it uses DisplayPort. I guess it would be interesting to compare with a DisplayPort (not Thunderbolt) connection.

If it's labeled HDMI v2.1, isn't it supposed to support up to 48 Gbps? Of course, I realize you are asking whether anyone has tested the actual transfer limit of the HDMI v2.1 port on M2 Pro Mini. I don't know.
All the HDMI 2.1 options are optional so even HDMI 2.0 can be called HDMI 2.1.

Really? Why would the OSD show 12 Gbps (non DSC) to mean 48 Gbps? Is that a standard thing to do for HDMI connections?
12 Gbps per lane. 4 lanes for Fixed Rate Link (FRL) which is a HDMI 2.1 feature (6, 8, 10, 12 Gbps per lane). HDMI 2.0 has 3 lanes of TMDS (1.65, 3.4, 6 Gbps per line).
DisplayPort is 1.62, 2.7, 5.4, 8.1 Gbps per lane. DisplayPort 2.0 adds 10, 13.5, 20 Gbps per lane.

Apple specifically states the Mac mini M2 Pro's HDMI port supports up to 8K at 60 Hz or 4K at 240 Hz. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that to achieve this, it would require >40 Gbps with DSC.
8K60 and 4K240 use 2376MHz pixel clock (HDMI timing). This is possible with DSC@12bpp starting at HDMI 2.1 40 Gbps (10G@4L). 8G@4L would require DSC@11bpp. 6G@4L would require DSC@8bpp. HDMI 2.0 (6G@3L?) would require a 6bpp mode which doesn't exist? (unless you can get a 6bpc luminance only mode which is basically grayscale).

Testing USB devices ended up being more interesting than I was expecting! I just connected a USB 3.x external SSD to the monitor to test the USB speeds and got:
  • 40 MB/s transfers from the SSD when I connected the U3224KB to the M2 Pro Mini with HDMI and the USB upstream cable. Clearly this is USB 2.0 speeds and I got this dismal performance with the SSD connected to either the USB-C front ports or the USB-A backside ports.
  • 366 MB/s transfers from the SSD when I instead connected the U3224KB via Thunderbolt 4 (and without USB upstream cable connected). I got these USB 3.x speeds with both the front and back USB ports. Moreover, when I looked in System Report, I now saw that both the SSD drive and the 2.5GbE LAN adapter were connected off of USB 3.1 Bus -> 4-port USB 3.0 Hub, which I wasn't seeing before.
  • However, I then went immediately back to only using the HDMI and USB upstream cable and retested, and surprisingly, I still got the fast ~366 MB/s transfers with my external SSD. How bizarre!
I haven't tested the LAN port (still haven't found my 1GbE ethernet USB adapter), but I don't think it's necessary. It's clear that something really screwy is going on with the USB hub and peripherals built into my monitor. Perhaps this inconsistent behavior is also related to the big problem that I'm having where all the built-ins just disappear occasionally.

By the way, I did try swapping out the USB upstream cable for another one, but this didn't make a difference. Perhaps more interesting is that when I was doing the first test above (getting only 40 MB/s transfers when using the USB upstream cable), the faint coil whine (see this post) that I've briefly heard once before actually returned. But the whine only lasted when I was doing that test, where the monitor and macOS incorrectly had the USB devices connected via USB 2.0. I've tried once to replicate that whine but it hasn't reoccurred.

At the moment, I'm inclined to think I just got unlucky with faulty hardware in my U3224KB, and if Dell replaces it, all my issues will be sorted out. But it's hard to really know and so it'd be great if anyone else could confirm whether or not they too have encountered these same problems.
Sounds like the USB 3.x lines are flaky in the Dell USB upstream port so using Thunderbolt is the best way around that problem.
Check the USB bus controller. With Thunderbolt 4, it may use USB tunnelling, so that the Thunderbolt controller is the USB controller of the Apple Silicon Mac. But that would be the same USB controller when using a USB connection instead of a Thunderbolt connection.
Intel Macs don't have Thunderbolt 4 so they won't use USB tunnelling when connected with Thunderbolt - they'll use the USB controller of the Thunderbolt controller of the display.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
Thanks for that update. For me I actually think the coil whine is coming from the speakers, almost like those beige Harmon/Kardon ones from the 90’s used to do. It is present when plugged into several different machines, but I can get it to go away for a short time if I play some audio. It also seems to be worse when it isn’t connected to anything. I spoke to Dell and they said they will send out a brand new monitor so im not too concerned with getting this resolved.
Ah, okay, it sounds like the whine on your monitor is totally different than the faint one I've heard on mine. Glad to hear that Dell is sending you a replacement.
 
I have my monitor connected to a MacBook Pro M2 Max via HDMI 2.1 and am using the USB- C upstream and connecting a keyboard, mouse and the network and all have worked without issue. I haven't bothered to check speeds but I haven' experienced slow response.
Thanks for the reporting on this and glad to hear that at least one person isn't experiencing any of the weird USB issues that I am. It seems to suggest that Dell may indeed need to exchange my monitor.

Thanks. Now I know what people were meaning by scaling. I have been in all the areas you included screen shots for and played around with them. I just thought scaling was more involved, referring to some type of view that made tool bars, apps, font, etc. larger and readable while at full resolution, not simply selecting different smaller resolutions.

My highest priority is selecting the optimum resolution for high quality 4K video editing. Thanks again.
If you are running at, per EugW's instructions above, 6144x3456 but "looks like" 3072x1728, then video editors like FCP should display 4K video in a window with 1:1 pixel mapping (so no rescaling of the video) while also leaving you plenty of screen space for various UI elements of your video editor.
 
My Asus ProArt PA329CV monitor had different USB-C settings that would support either USB 2 or USB 3 speeds via the hub. It was set to USB 2.0 by default.

View attachment 2233344
As far as I can tell, the Dell does not give the user any way to explicitly choose USB 2.0 or USB 3.x. Using Thunderbolt 4 or the USB upstream cable should result in USB 3.x speeds, but my monitor, I sometimes get USB 2.0 speeds or no connection of the built-in peripherals at all.
 
SwitchResX will show what the scale is (active pixels) when you double click a resolution in the Current Resolutions list. The 6016x3384 is a scaled mode that scales up to 6144x3456. If the EDID includes a 6016x3384 timing (as it does in the EDID that I've seen) then I think SwitchResX might have two different 6016x3384 modes - one that is scaled and one that is not. At least that's what happens on Intel Macs. Basically, macOS adds various scaled modes that all scale to the native resolution of the display (6144x3456). For example, my 4K display has 4 different 1280x720 modes: scaled lores (4K), timing lores (720p), scaled HiDPI (4K), timing HiDPI (1440p). SwitchResX can show the non-scaled (timing) modes in bold. The 1440p has VRR because it can do 144Hz. The 4K modes don't have VRR because 144Hz is not possible at 4K on my display (using single cable input). Apple does not allow VRR modes for modes that have max refresh rate less than the max refresh rate of the display.
Thanks for the all info! I certainly was surprised that 6016x3384 output, by default, ends up actually resulting in 6144x3456 being output to the monitor, particularly since 6016x3384 is a supported input mode on the U3224KB. Thankfully we can get the native 6016x3384 signal via the faking features in BetterDisplay. I've looked at SwitchResX and it lists five options for "3008x1692", where the HiDPI modes really mean "6016x3384 but looks like 3008x1692":
SwitchResX_res_options.png

Here is the detailed info for the second mode (the selected one), which is actually sent to the monitor as a 6144x3456 signal:
Selected_res_details.png

So far, I've not been able to coax SwitchResX to push an actual 3008x1692 HiDPI signal to the monitor, i.e., a 6016x3384 input signal. The options in SwitchResX all still result in a 6144x3456 video signal being pushed out instead, whether or not BetterDisplay is used to fake the native panel resolution as 6016x3384. Also, I tried to enabled the third mode, by enabling it, making it visible, and then trying to activate it, but SwitchResX wouldn't activate it.

I doubt Thunderbolt has such a limitation. It should be able to do anything DisplayPort can do since it uses DisplayPort.
But when the Dell is connected via Thunderbolt, the built-in peripherals are also connected using Thunderbolt. That must take away a chunk of the available bandwidth that would otherwise be available for video, right? Perhaps this is why the video capabilities over Thunderbolt are slightly more restrictive than over HDMI 2.1.

I guess it would be interesting to compare with a DisplayPort (not Thunderbolt) connection.
For sure and I was hoping to do this but I don't have the hardware. I don't have any PCs, and unless I'm mistaken, it doesn't look like USB-C to (mini) DisplayPort 2.x cables/adapters actually exist yet. In fact, when I was waiting for the monitor to be delivered, I looked pretty hard and all I could find online were cables/adapters for up to DisplayPort 1.4. I think the hardware in the M2 Pro Mac Mini should theoretically support DisplayPort 2.x over the USB-C connectors, but I don't think there is anyway to actually test this until DisplayPort 2.x adapters hit the market.

All the HDMI 2.1 options are optional so even HDMI 2.0 can be called HDMI 2.1.
Between that and the similar acting USB standards, it really is unnecessarily super confusing!

Sounds like the USB 3.x lines are flaky in the Dell USB upstream port so using Thunderbolt is the best way around that problem.
Check the USB bus controller. With Thunderbolt 4, it may use USB tunnelling, so that the Thunderbolt controller is the USB controller of the Apple Silicon Mac. But that would be the same USB controller when using a USB connection instead of a Thunderbolt connection.
Intel Macs don't have Thunderbolt 4 so they won't use USB tunnelling when connected with Thunderbolt - they'll use the USB controller of the Thunderbolt controller of the display.
I don't think that the USB upstream port is the specific problem because on my U3224KB, the built-in USB peripherals also sometimes disappear when I'm only using the Thunderbolt 4 connector. So the speed and connections problems that I've experienced on my U3224KB seem to be the result of something that would affect both Thunderbolt and USB upstream connections. Since at least one other person here doesn't seem to have any issues with the USB peripherals, I really am starting to think my monitor is damaged/defective somehow, possibly due to the apparently rough shipping it incurred.
 

Attachments

  • SwitchResX_res_options.png
    SwitchResX_res_options.png
    136.1 KB · Views: 51
So far, I've not been able to coax SwitchResX to push an actual 3008x1692 HiDPI signal to the monitor, i.e., a 6016x3384 input signal. The options in SwitchResX all still result in a 6144x3456 video signal being pushed out instead, whether or not BetterDisplay is used to fake the native panel resolution as 6016x3384. Also, I tried to enabled the third mode, by enabling it, making it visible, and then trying to activate it, but SwitchResX wouldn't activate it.
The third option appears to be a mode that would output 6016x3384. Did you double click it to verify the timing info? Strange that SwitchResX won't let you use it. You can try disconnecting the display for a few seconds then reconnect it to make SwitchResX rebuild the list. You can try selecting the option in the SwitchResX menu instead of the SwitchResX app.

But when the Dell is connected via Thunderbolt, the built-in peripherals are also connected using Thunderbolt. That must take away a chunk of the available bandwidth that would otherwise be available for video, right? Perhaps this is why the video capabilities over Thunderbolt are slightly more restrictive than over HDMI 2.1.
Thunderbolt is 40 Gbps. 6144x3456 60Hz is 1378.8 MHz. With DSC@12bpp, that's only 16.5456 Gbps - only slightly more than 4K60 10bpc without DSC. PCIe/USB data maxes out at ≈25 Gbps but is usually more like 22 Gbps. USB maxes out at 10 Gbps.

For sure and I was hoping to do this but I don't have the hardware. I don't have any PCs, and unless I'm mistaken, it doesn't look like USB-C to (mini) DisplayPort 2.x cables/adapters actually exist yet. In fact, when I was waiting for the monitor to be delivered, I looked pretty hard and all I could find online were cables/adapters for up to DisplayPort 1.4. I think the hardware in the M2 Pro Mac Mini should theoretically support DisplayPort 2.x over the USB-C connectors, but I don't think there is anyway to actually test this until DisplayPort 2.x adapters hit the market.
8.1 Gbps is HBR3 link rate (DisplayPort 1.4) so you shouldn't need a DisplayPort 2.0 cable. Also, Macs don't support DisplayPort 2.0 yet. I think there are some PC GPUs with DisplayPort 2.0 outputs but only up to UHBR10 which is 40 Gbps? I suppose a DisplayPort 1.4 cable should be able to do UHBR10 since a USB-C cable usually can do 10 Gbps per line.

I don't think that the USB upstream port is the specific problem because on my U3224KB, the built-in USB peripherals also sometimes disappear when I'm only using the Thunderbolt 4 connector. So the speed and connections problems that I've experienced on my U3224KB seem to be the result of something that would affect both Thunderbolt and USB upstream connections. Since at least one other person here doesn't seem to have any issues with the USB peripherals, I really am starting to think my monitor is damaged/defective somehow, possibly due to the apparently rough shipping it incurred.
The problem could be the USB hub in the display. A USB hub includes a USB 3.x part and a USB 2.0 part - they use separate wires for each part.
 
Thanks for everyone's help. I ended up returning the display as I could not get comfortable with it for various reasons.

Funny anecdote, I asked a coworker who uses a Pro Display XDR, how he uses it comfortably -- some of my problems were text being too small, and having to look up & down too much -- he has it on an arm and constantly moves it around during the day (up & down and closer & farther from his eyes).

Anyway, for me, 4K on a 27-inch display is just right, I don't want things any smaller. This will be different for everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
I just received my Calibrite Display Plus HL sensor today, installed Calibrite PROFILER on my MacBook Pro M2 Max and did a quick basic photo calibration on the Dell 6K U3224KB and photos now look very close to my PC connected NEC MultiSync PA272W calibrated with SpectraView and an older i1 Display Pro. I use the Dell on the PC and still need to do that calibration. I haven't set up KVM yet but the Thunderbolt Doc, high speed USC-C downstream and 2.5GB network switch are still working well.

The Dell brightness was way too high and I learned Calibrite Profiler won't launch while in mirror monitor mode.

I want to try a video profile next and learn more about how to correctly calibrate. I have been spoiled with the automation of SpectraView. Calibite PROFILER seems good enough for my purposes but there may be other, better options.
 
Thanks for everyone's help. I ended up returning the display as I could not get comfortable with it for various reasons.

Funny anecdote, I asked a coworker who uses a Pro Display XDR, how he uses it comfortably -- some of my problems were text being too small, and having to look up & down too much -- he has it on an arm and constantly moves it around during the day (up & down and closer & farther from his eyes).
My U3224KB is mounted on arm but mostly for various conveniences: easy and precise placement, more free space on my desk, which is rather narrow, and being able to move the monitor completely out of the way if I need even more space for some project. While it generally takes me some experimentation to find the ideal placement for any new monitor, once I've honed in on that, I generally don't move it around after that. But I've also been using large screens for a while now, and I do recall needing to get used to them when I first went from <= 24" screens to a 42" 4K screen many moons ago. I used that 42" one with a notably larger viewing distance than I do with the U3224KB.

Anyway, for me, 4K on a 27-inch display is just right, I don't want things any smaller. This will be different for everyone.
Glad to hear you're narrowing in on what works well for you! That's the only thing that matters. I think for many of us here interested in the U3224KB, we've tried and really liked 27" @ 5K via an iMac or Studio Display and just wanted that same experience but with even more space diagonally, more than one video input (!), etc.
 
The third option appears to be a mode that would output 6016x3384. Did you double click it to verify the timing info? Strange that SwitchResX won't let you use it.
All agreed, but I'm not sure why SwitchResX won't let me activate it. It's possibly the timing info is incorrect or too off, as the Dell manual says the pixel clock should be 1323.25 MHz for 6016x3384, but SwitchResX says the pixel clock for that third mode is 1337.17 MHz. Here is a screenshot of the detailed info for that third mode from SwitchResX:
6K_timings_for_broken_mode.png


You can try disconnecting the display for a few seconds then reconnect it to make SwitchResX rebuild the list. You can try selecting the option in the SwitchResX menu instead of the SwitchResX app.
Yes, I tried all of that previously, but none of it worked. I suppose I could try making a custom mode so that the pixel clock exactly matches what's reported in the manual to see what happens, but to be honest, it doesn't really matter to me at this point. Now that I understand the differences between how the HDMI and Thunderbolt video options behave when using the U3224KB with an M2 Pro Mac Mini and how to get the most out of both video paths (e.g., the 6016x3384 workaround by faking the native resolution via BetterDisplay), I'm pretty satisfied with the video performance on the U3224KB over either connection.

Thunderbolt is 40 Gbps. 6144x3456 60Hz is 1378.8 MHz. With DSC@12bpp, that's only 16.5456 Gbps - only slightly more than 4K60 10bpc without DSC. PCIe/USB data maxes out at ≈25 Gbps but is usually more like 22 Gbps. USB maxes out at 10 Gbps.
Of course DSC reduces the requirements tremendously, but I was really thinking about the highest bandwidth signal that we can use, not what we can fit when DSC is used. Also, HDMI 2.1 (if fully implemented) already offers more bandwidth (up to 48 Gbps, 42 G Gbps usable) than Thunderbolt 4 does, and HDMI doesn't have the burden of carrying any USB traffic whatsoever.

For example, we discussed earlier that it seems that native 6144x3456 @ 60 Hz and 30-bit color should fit in (full-spec) HDMI 2.1 without needing DSC, and yet currently, we see that on HDMI, 6144x3456 results in 12Gps DSC while slightly stepping down to 6016x3384 results in 12Gps without DSC. But maybe the HDMI 2.1 path between the M2 Pro and the U3224KB really isn't quite enough bandwidth for the former without DSC? Meanwhile, with Thunderbolt 4, 6144x3456 @ 60 Hz is currently stuck at 24-bit color and uses 8.1 Gps, while stepping down to 6016x3384 enables 30-bit color and uses 8.1 Gps DSC. These differences must be due to the max available bandwidths on the Thunderbolt 4 and HDMI v2.1 paths between the M2 Pro plus U3224KB, with Thunderbolt having less available bandwidth. It'd be nice if firmware or macOS updates could unlock more modes and more bandwidth for either HDMI or Thunderbolt, but it might be that we are already at the limitations of the hardware in the M2 Pro or display or both. But it seems like you might be far better informed on that front than I am!

8.1 Gbps is HBR3 link rate (DisplayPort 1.4) so you shouldn't need a DisplayPort 2.0 cable. Also, Macs don't support DisplayPort 2.0 yet. I think there are some PC GPUs with DisplayPort 2.0 outputs but only up to UHBR10 which is 40 Gbps? I suppose a DisplayPort 1.4 cable should be able to do UHBR10 since a USB-C cable usually can do 10 Gbps per line.
Per my comments above, I am actually interested in the max bandwidth signal that we can currently attain and whether or not we should be able to get higher bandwidth modes, not what DSC allows us to do with (far) less bandwidth. By the way, is it truly confirmed that Macs don't support DisplayPort 2.0 yet? I haven't seen anything that says that definitively (if you have, please send me a link), and of course, Apple's tech specs are frustratingly ambiguous, just saying "DisplayPort" without any version number.

The problem could be the USB hub in the display. A USB hub includes a USB 3.x part and a USB 2.0 part - they use separate wires for each part.
Could be faulty hardware, firmware / driver issues, or a macOS quirk. It's really hard to know! I spoke to Dell on Monday, and they sent me a replacement monitor, which just arrived. I'll need time to test out the new monitor to see if I still have the problem with the built-in USB hub and peripherals being flaky. I'll report back on that here after I've had some days with the new monitor.
 
Last edited:
So I received my U3224KB yesterday and here are my first impressions:

Connecting to my M1 Max Mac Studio, with the included 1.5m TB4 cable - 6144x3456 @ 60Hz 24bit colour depth, no HDR. Pretty straightforward and works well enough.

Needed BetterDisplay to enable custom 6016x3384 Native panel pixel resolution, and 3008x1692 default resolution. You lose ~7mm of wasted potential pixel space on each side and ~4mm top and bottom. (must set the aspect ratio 1:1 in the monitor settings or it will stretch out to the corners)

With the custom resolution set, you can enable HDR (first in the monitor) and then in MacOS displays.

The monitor came with firmware M2T102, and I updated to M2T103 already. I didn't notice much difference to be honest. (but I haven't used the camera at all yet)

I haven't tried PIP/PBP or the KVM yet.

Speakers are average, probably as good as to be expected for ones built into the monitor. Better than the built in speaker underneath the Mac Studio, but no where near as good as my Audioengine 2+ pair.

I think the M1 Max Mac Studio natively only has HDMI 2.0, so an HDMI cable in itself won't enable 6144x3456 60fps.

Does anyone know if those Cablematters USBC/HDMI dongles or adapters will work to enable full 6144x3456 60fps HDR?

Thanks
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7858.jpeg
    IMG_7858.jpeg
    326.7 KB · Views: 240
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
This monitor is absolutely no go.

I have my old MacBook Pro 2018. When connected directly is shows strange resulutions which does not look like scaled (e.g. 3300x2k something). Ok, that was expected (the macbook does not properly support these resolutions)

When connected through Blackmagic eGPU, resolutions list becomes normal, but it can only do 6144x3456 or scaled 3072x1728 at 30Hz. Ok, this was also expected.

When connected to Dell Windows laptop it produces the full resolution at 60Hz.

Now, the image quality. I compare it to iMac 27 late 2015 retina display... and iMac is sharper and brighter. Any change in settings does not help. It is simply as it is.

HDR is nightmare. For YouTube HDR videos it is okay (iMac screen without HDR still looks better). For my own HDR videos filmed on iPhone they become overexposed (no contrast, too bright). None of HDR settings help to fix it.

Other minor things: USB ports are not charging when the monitor is off (except the main 140W input). There is only one Thinderbolt input with video capacity, so if I have two laptops or a Mac laptop and Mac Studio, I have to use HDMI which loses all attached peripherals. If I mute mic or switch off camera from the front panel, it always shows it is muted in red, there is no way to switch off all the lights. The edges of the screen are illuminated (visible when it is black).

And, finally, it has died after a day of use. It switches on, a computer says there is a monitor attached but nothing is displayed. Just blank screen. When fully disconnected (only power cord) no on-screen menu or no signal popup visible. Really helped me with the decision to return:)

A courier is picking up it on Friday. At least return are good for it (I hope I get my money back soon).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
For ppl who have been following: i updated the the monitor firmware and mac os to 15.6 but the thunderbolt issue still exists.
 
Last edited:
This monitor is absolutely no go.
From what you written, it sounds like some of the unexpected problems you experienced were due to both getting a lemon and missing some key setup items (more specifics on both of these inline below).

Just FYI, I also initially got a lemon, as did Macdude2010. When I first got my Dell, I noticed that the shipping box was pretty beat up, and I had various problems with the builtin USB peripherals being flaky. I spoke to Dell support, and within two days, I had a replacement monitor, and so far, the replacement seems to be working normally (although to be sure, I am still testing, which is why I haven't yet written any update here). I've been pretty pleased with Dell's support.

I have my old MacBook Pro 2018. When connected directly is shows strange resulutions which does not look like scaled (e.g. 3300x2k something). Ok, that was expected (the macbook does not properly support these resolutions)

When connected through Blackmagic eGPU, resolutions list becomes normal, but it can only do 6144x3456 or scaled 3072x1728 at 30Hz. Ok, this was also expected.
Indeed, this is all expected, as your MacBook is five years old and presumably the Blackmagic eGPU is about that old too. Older hardware simply isn't going to have the newer video connectivity options that are needed to properly drive a 6K monitor at native resolution and 60Hz. One really needs to have a computer with Thunderbolt 4, DP 2.0, or HDMI v2.1 to take full advantage of this Dell 6K monitor.

When connected to Dell Windows laptop it produces the full resolution at 60Hz.
Presumably this is a fairly recent Dell laptop with Thunderbolt 4, DP 2.0, or HDMI v2.1, yes?

Now, the image quality. I compare it to iMac 27 late 2015 retina display... and iMac is sharper and brighter. Any change in settings does not help. It is simply as it is.
Regarding the sharpness issue, did you double check that either macOS or the monitor wasn't rescaling the video? That would definitely lessen the sharpness. There are some pitfalls here; see this post of mine (as well as others in this thread) on how to properly configure things for the best output.

I had an iMac Pro until recently and I'd describe the glossy iMac screen as more vivid, but I don't find the Dell a downgrade in terms of actual brightness and sharpness. It seems just as sharp to me, and at max brightness, I find the Dell too bright for normal work, unlike my iMac Pro, which I could use at max brightness. Overall, I've been pretty pleased with the matte finish on the Dell. It's not as matte as the LG 38" UltraWide that I've also used. But glossy versus matte is a very personal thing.

HDR is nightmare. For YouTube HDR videos it is okay (iMac screen without HDR still looks better). For my own HDR videos filmed on iPhone they become overexposed (no contrast, too bright). None of HDR settings help to fix it.
Interesting. Thanks for the report. I haven't tested HDR, as it's not something I need with this monitor.

Other minor things: USB ports are not charging when the monitor is off (except the main 140W input).
This can be enabled via OSD -> Personalize -> Other USB Charging -> On in Standby Mode. When setting up the monitor, the OSD says that this is disabled by default due to energy saving reasons.

There is only one Thinderbolt input with video capacity, so if I have two laptops or a Mac laptop and Mac Studio, I have to use HDMI which loses all attached peripherals.
When using HDMI or DisplayPort, there is an included USB upstream cable that also needs to be connected so that the monitor's builtin peripherals and USB ports will work. This is what I do. My Mac Mini is connected using HDMI and the USB upstream cable, and I leave the Thunderbolt cable available for when I want to connect or charge my MacBook Pro. The Dell OSD even has settings to pick whether or not the peripherals should be switched from Thunderbolt to/from the USB upstream cable when switching video inputs; see OSD -> USB -> mDP assign to and OSD -> USB -> HDMI assign to. I think this all works really nicely and is more customizable than I was expecting. I think Dell did this right.

If I mute mic or switch off camera from the front panel, it always shows it is muted in red, there is no way to switch off all the lights.
This really annoyed me at first too. Presumably Dell did it this way so that it's always clear when the user has muted the mic or closed the camera privacy shutter using the monitor controls. But since they are red LEDs and not screamingly bright like blue LEDs, I've found I can tolerate them (even in a dark room), unlike blue LEDs, which I abhor and often cover with tape. Still, I'd too greatly prefer if there was a way to set the monitor so that the red LEDs would be either significantly dimmed or fully turned off when the proximity sensor doesn't detect that one's hand is near the monitor control panel on the left side of the bottom bezel. Maybe Dell will release a firmware update to allow this. It would be a big improvement.

The edges of the screen are illuminated (visible when it is black).
I think this is one sign that you got a lemon. I don't have this problem at all with my Dell (the first one I got or the replacement). The only other thing I can think of is that you were actually running the Dell at 1:1 resolution with an output that was less than the full 6144x3456 resolution of the display, and so you were seeing some of the actual screen being unused but backlit.

And, finally, it has died after a day of use. It switches on, a computer says there is a monitor attached but nothing is displayed. Just blank screen. When fully disconnected (only power cord) no on-screen menu or no signal popup visible. Really helped me with the decision to return:)

A courier is picking up it on Friday. At least return are good for it (I hope I get my money back soon).
Sorry to hear that yours completely died on you! It really does sounds like you got a lemon. Good luck with the return and I hope the info above is helpful for any potential further troubleshooting.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MikeDr206
It’s selling for $1999.99 on Amazon now. Apparently demand is in the dumpster.
 
Apparently demand is in the dumpster.
How are you drawing that conclusion? Dell stuff is always on sale.

The bigger picture is that if this fails it could dampen investment in higher resolution screens. That is *not* a good thing for Mac users.

Sadly, it’s still full-priced in Australia, though our MSRP translates to $2400usd.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.