Fellow MINI-Owning iMac Refugees: Help Me Downgrade to 4K!

[jordii]

Question on upgrading from 2020 27" iMac to Mini, and I know a lot of you have done likewise. Which is why I'm posting here.

I'm bemoaning my beloved 5K monitor and can't afford Studio Display. I've seen loads of advice re: 4K monitors, but I have a specific angle: anyone in my shoes now using Mini + 4K monitor and not profoundly disappointed by the latter? If so, please offer recos! I mostly care about sharpness (my eyesight ain't great), and good speakers would be nice. I'm willing to spend for satisfaction...just not $1600!

Mini-specific:
I have 32G ram in this iMac, but I've heard Apple silicon is much much more efficient with memory, so I'm planning on ordering 16G. I neither compile nor render; just lots of apps (and browser tabs) open. Could I sneak by with 8G?

And will upgrade from 2020 Intel 3.3 GHz 6-Core to M2 Mini feel substantial in everyday use?

 

[ducknalddon]

I'm using an LG 27" 5K screen with my Mac mini, I love it. It's basically the same panel as the 27" iMac. They also have a 4K 24" model although I haven't seen that in action.

What I'd be wary of are the bigger 4K monitors, particularly 32" as you lose the benefits of a Retina display.

 

[jordii]

I'm using an LG 27" 5K screen with my Mac mini, I love it. It's basically the same panel as the 27" iMac. They also have a 4K 24" model although I haven't seen that in action.

What I'd be wary of are the bigger 4K monitors, particularly 32" as you lose the benefits of a Retina display.

Thanks, but here in Europe, the LG 27" 5K costs more than the Apple Studio Display. So I need a 4k.

 

[EdwardC]

Dell S2721QS, very very sharp and only around $250.00 (Amazon is $230.00

https://www.amazon.com/Dell-S2721QS-Ultra-Thin-DisplayPort-Certified/dp/B08DQWG3JG/ref=sr_1_3?crid=2HP1O13C3BJ51&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.x69tfpS_qsf9etU9jc32UQsm_Rh1xuGGsODP00f3y6UW96gKRWEnq_hoNg0AZKRtmnQ6JhO02NnKfefVXiNzAVkDR_zJK4uOwv8plXe8kYIpLwqUBrIAFh3XkUBD2rrasZFPWeSjYnWEdeEac4nmA5sdO36Xshfe4TkqsOjNy7VkFmH0pvZAmD7JkBfyxY43YhjSD-HFfKD4VuW8Jg8yRDArEUI7J6S-9QyLe06_KxU.ZWjFPiKwo49iPbe6weFlM2k561EgXRzRjQLV1HGikYw&dib_tag=se&keywords=S2721QS&qid=1710960840&sprefix=s2721qs%2Caps%2C93&sr=8-3&th=1

 

[F1100mrz]

I just bought the M2 Mac Mini hoping I can save some money and hook it up to my 2009 iMac. Apple says it can’t be done, others say they’ve done it! Advice? Thx

 

[sparkhill]

I use a Dell 27” at work to dock my laptop and it is solid monitor, but the speakers are not great. I think you will be OK with a 27” 4K as long as you do not compare it side by side to your 5K iMac.

At home, I moved from a similar from a 5K iMac to the Mac mini and the performance upgrade is significant. I would stick with 16 GB RAM.

 

[Fishrrman]

27" 4k display.
There are many of them, at all price points.
You'll get used to it.

 

[mr_jomo]

I'm on a mini m1 with the LG 32UN880-B - thought I would hate going from the 5K 27" display, but so far I'm a happy camper . And yes - I'm using multiple, multifocal glasses so clarity is key for me also

Edit: 16 GB for sure, as the minimum, if you're multitasking

 

[meson]

I use a 32” 4k display. Sitting 24”-27” away, I find that I can use the screen at full 3840x2160 resolution. The screen real estate is amazing! Although I do bump up the text size a bit in text-heavy app.

It would be tough to get used to the difference if you have only been using an Apple Retina display for a long period of time. Stepping out of the Apple ecosystem for screens means compromise. You will lose the sharpness gained from higher pixel density of Apple’s screens. The replacement will likely be matte, so colors won’t pop in the same way. The screen likely won’t be as bright at full brightness.

Before the mini and 32” display I was using a few different external screens at 110 ppi and lower alongside my MBP. By comparison the 32” 4k display was a major upgrade compared to the other externals. When making my choice, I weighed the options, made an effort to understand the compromises and decided I was fine with them. I’m quite satisfied, but the choice can be very personal.

I will say that at 140 ppi that the 32” 4k is the first non-retina display I’ve used that I find looks decent in a scaled resolution mode.

 

[frou]

It is possible to get legit 27" 5120x2880 monitors without paying top dollar. Even my Trashcan Mac Pro setup has one (Dell UP2715K) which I found for less than £300.

More standard single-cable Displayport models to look out for are the Planar and Iiyama (I have multiple of the latter hooked up to a 2018 Mac Mini with an eGPU).

List of monitors with 5K resolution:

5K resolution - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[PaulD-UK]

Here's the MacRumors list of 5K displays:
The *COMPLETE* list of 27" 5K Displays?

The cheapest route is DIY from an old iMac:
DIY 5k Monitor - success
Not for everyone, but as the saying might go 'Good: Easy: Cheap: pick any two of three...'
G + E = ASD
E + C = 4K
G + C = DIY

 

[Thirio2]

I have a mini with a 28” 4k display with a matte finish. Resolution is ok but the glossy studio display and the glossy 24” iMac display just look better to me. Since I don’t have prob with reflections I sort of lust for one of the Apple displays but just don’t want to spend the money since I only use it a few minutes a day.

 

[picpicmac]

Here's the MacRumors list of 5K displays:
The *COMPLETE* list of 27" 5K Displays?

We should always be reminded that there are errors in that list.

 

[Flowstates]

LG 24" UltraFine 4K UHD IPS Monitor with macOS Compatibility 24MD4KL-B - Open Box | BuyDig.com

Buy the LG 24" UltraFine 4K UHD IPS Monitor with macOS Compatibility 24MD4KL-B - Open Box at buydig.com, and receive fast, free shipping and a flexible return policy.

www.buydig.com

One of the only tech purchases I never came close to regretting.

 

[picpicmac]

mostly care about sharpness (my eyesight ain't great)

I've been shopping (gathering information) for several months now including going through a great many display-related MacRumors threads... and I can only conclude that what one person thinks is a great display another person will not.

IN PERSON I have been mostly disappointed by the current trend of matte 4k large displays.

For some reason the industry decided that matte plastic covers in front of IPS panels is what the world wants/needs.

Apple of course decided it did not like that and sells glass covered LCD displays. The Apple glass appears to have optical coatings to reduce glare, and this looks much different than the plastic diffusion covers on most displays.

The IPS panels are a problem themselves regardless of covers.

Recommend you look at the entries on RTINGS website for displays. They do a great job standardizing their testing and the images they take of the displays can be revealing.

As for "sharpness" : your eyesight and distance from the display are the dominant factors in determining how well you can resolve detail on a the screen. The next important quality is contrast and here many applications and web pages really let down users because the user interface is often designed for the 18 year old eye, not the 65 year old eye.

For my own purchase: if I don't go with an Apple display then I'll likely get the Dell U2723QE, as it has the enhanced contrast ("IPS Black") LG panel, and buying direct from Dell gives one some customer perks that one will not get buying through Amazon.

 

[jordii]

After reading everything posted here, and much of what's posted on the Internet, I've concluded that Mac Mini plus Mac Studio Display is far and away the best option. Everything else involves compromises I'd rather not make.

Frustratingly, even Studio Display is a compromise. No MiniLED, no Pro Motion, lousy cam, perma power cable, and super low-set unless you pay $400 for height adjust (1.2" lower than the 27" iMac display, which is already low). The latter is a big problem, but this or this make viable workarounds (and I can stash computer + keyboard underneath).

I'm normally happy to hustle my way out of being cornered by Apple like this, but this one time I'll pay up - for M2 Mini 16GB/512GB + Apple Studio Display + Magic Keyboard Touch ID at Euro price of €3173 (US price would be $3016 with tax, ≈2790€). By far the most I've ever spent on a Mac set-up (since 1991), but by far the best Mac set-up I've ever had.

One relief: I can order English language Magic Keyboard from apple.pt.

 

[picpicmac]

and super low-set unless you pay $400 for height adjust

Or you could order the ASD with the VESA option without paying the extra $400. Get yourself a decent arm and you will be able to set the display to the perfect location for yourself.

 

[macuros]

After reading everything posted here, and much of what's posted on the Internet, I've concluded that Mac Mini plus Mac Studio Display is far and away the best option. Everything else involves compromises I'd rather not make.

Frustratingly, even Studio Display is a compromise. No MiniLED, no Pro Motion, lousy cam, perma power cable, and super low-set unless you pay $400 for height adjust (1.2" lower than the 27" iMac display, which is already low). The latter is a big problem, but this or this make viable workarounds (and I can stash computer + keyboard underneath).

I'm normally happy to hustle my way out of being cornered by Apple like this, but this one time I'll pay up - for M2 Mini 16GB/512GB + Apple Studio Display + Magic Keyboard Touch ID at Euro price of €3173 (US price would be $3016 with tax, ≈2790€). By far I've ever spent on a Mac set-up (since 1991), but by far the best Mac set-up I've ever had.

One relief: I can order English language Magic Keyboard from apple.pt.

I have similar setup, just the 8/512 Mac Mini. Studio Display is just the best. Never regretted the purchase.

 

[sebastian...]

As for "sharpness" : your eyesight and distance from the display are the dominant factors in determining how well you can resolve detail on a the screen.

Maybe a bit off topic, but I'm always puzzled when I read threads like these.
I don't wear/need glasses and I can read very small labels. But I'm using an ips 24" 1920 x 1200 and sometimes I'm even using a smaller non native resolution, this monitor has a very sharp interpolation.
I feel like Davinci Resolve and especially 3d software perform better with a lower res. I'm building 3d worlds with tons of objects, also doing color grading, sometimes book covers, movies posters and so on. And here I am, doing professional graphic work with a blasphemous non native resolution, while most say they are bothered by under 4k displays and they are probably not even doing graphics work.

Many also said once you go retina you can't go back, but I have an ipad pro 11" which I'm using from time to time. I can see the difference very well, but for some reason I'm not bothered at all by my 24" display.
The same with the ProMotion higher refresh rate, another thing which people claim you can't go back from. I can see the difference very well, but since I feel this ipad is quite battery hungry, I'm keeping it most of the time on power save which disables its ProMotion.

It's not like I'm indifferent about displays, I care a lot about color accuracy, I have color calibration devices and I would not tolerate a single dead pixel anywhere.
I also don't think I would find miniLED displays acceptable since many times I'm doing and adjusting fine amount of glow/bloom, and these displays are adding their own artificial glow.

I don't understand how are my eyes so different.
I would also think a person who is not wearing glasses should be even more sensitive to sharpness.
Sometimes I wonder if I'm not in danger of getting a bad habit - working 4k and even higher videos on under 2k resolution displays and maybe not being able to evaluate my video work well, the sharpness, focus and so on. Even though no one complained so far.

 

[jordii]

Maybe a bit off topic, but I'm always puzzled when I read threads like these.
I don't wear/need glasses and I can read very small labels. But I'm using an ips 24" 1920 x 1200 and sometimes I'm even using a smaller non native resolution, this monitor has a very sharp interpolation.
I feel like Davinci Resolve and especially 3d software perform better with a lower res. I'm building 3d worlds with tons of objects, also doing color grading, sometimes book covers, movies posters and so on. And here I am, doing professional graphic work with a blasphemous non native resolution, while most say they are bothered by under 4k displays and they are probably not even doing graphics work.

Many also said once you go retina you can't go back, but I have an ipad pro 11" which I'm using from time to time. I can see the difference very well, but for some reason I'm not bothered at all by my 24" display.
The same with the ProMotion higher refresh rate, another thing which people claim you can't go back from. I can see the difference very well, but since I feel this ipad is quite battery hungry, I'm keeping it most of the time on power save which disables its ProMotion.

It's not like I'm indifferent about displays, I care a lot about color accuracy, I have color calibration devices and I would not tolerate a single dead pixel anywhere.
I also don't think I would find miniLED displays acceptable since many times I'm doing and adjusting fine amount of glow/bloom, and these displays are adding their own artificial glow.

I don't understand how are my eyes so different.
I would also think a person who is not wearing glasses should be even more sensitive to sharpness.
Sometimes I wonder if I'm not in danger of getting a bad habit - working 4k and even higher videos on under 2k resolution displays and maybe not being able to evaluate my video work well, the sharpness, focus and so on. Even though no one complained so far.

I’m a writer.

 

[picpicmac]

I don't understand how are my eyes so different.

It's not your eyes that are "different", it's your expectations.

I come across posts all the time from what I now label as 5k-or-Bust folk, who declare that anything other than 5k (for a 27" screen) is trash.

On the other hand, many people also post that they love their 4k (27") screens.

That different people can look at the same object and come to different conclusions is why designs are intended for particular audiences, and why so many designs (fashions) exist.

 

[sebastian...]

I’m a writer.

I think I understand. Letters look (quantifiably) better on a higher res. And on top of that, displaying words on the screen uses very small amount of CPU and GPU, so in that case why not take advantage of the current technology.
I'm not criticizing, but I'm mostly puzzled and trying to understand.
Even if the perceived benefit or increase in quality is maybe a small percent, if one has the budget why not buy the best quality you can have. I'm guessing this is what's all about.

 

[jordii]

I think I understand. Letters look (quantifiably) better on a higher res. And on top of that, displaying words on the screen uses very small amount of CPU and GPU, so in that case why not take advantage of the current technology.
I'm not criticizing, but I'm mostly puzzled and trying to understand.
Even if the perceived benefit or increase in quality is maybe a small percent, if one has the budget why not buy the best quality you can have. I'm guessing this is what's all about.

Writers write for many hours.

 

[dizzbuster]

I have used a Dell 32" 4k (U3223QE )and the 40" Curved (U4021QW 5120 x 2160 (Ultra-wide 5K). Both are awesome. I am currently using the 40" for personal and work use. For work I have a Windows 11 Dell laptop and it can not hang with the 40". The 40" is awesome with my Mini. I also have 32GB of Ram - I run a few VMs with different OS's. Built built in speakers are just that built in speakers. I am not an audiophile but like good sound so I use Klipsch Heritage 2.1 which I like.

The Dell's are not Retina's but they do look quite nice in my book (I have old tired eyes as well) and for my use cases.

 

[FreakinEurekan]

I don't understand how are my eyes so different.
I would also think a person who is not wearing glasses should be even more sensitive to sharpness.
Sometimes I wonder if I'm not in danger of getting a bad habit - working 4k and even higher videos on under 2k resolution displays and maybe not being able to evaluate my video work well, the sharpness, focus and so on. Even though no one complained so far.

It's all about what you need. I sit in front of my computer literally 10 hours a day, with text on both screens. One is a LG 5K and the other is a 21.5" 1080p. Sure, I can TELL the difference between them - but it doesn't bother me to look at either one of them. Both are sharp enough to read, and that's all that matters to me.