From 5K to standar 2560x1440

austyn23

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 22, 2017
283
213
Hey!

Now that I have the 2019 MBP my iMac feels a little slow (2017 model)

I thought I can sell it and use the pro as my main machine with an external display like Dell U2515H (25 inch 2560x1440).

I used to have one of those a few years ago and it was a great monitor (even nicier than his 27 inch brother, 2560x1440 in 25 looks really good).

BUT then I bought the 5K iMac and been using it for the last 2 years as my main machine.

Anyone went from 5K to standard 2560?

Thanks!
 

whosthis

macrumors member
Aug 21, 2008
85
21
I didn‘t make the changes in that way, but I had retina and non-retina devices at the same time, and it was always pretty obvious "meh" to look at the pixelated ones.

You can try it somewhat yourself and set your display to a "low resolution" in the settings. But the usual option-click trick doesn't seem to work anymore on my MacBook, not sure if it works on the integrated display on the iMac.

I'd say get a nice 4k one, maybe the LG from the Apple Store, and be happy ever after.
 

austyn23

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 22, 2017
283
213
I'd say get a nice 4k one, maybe the LG from the Apple Store, and be happy ever after.
Thanks!

I don´t want an 4K display because it´s native resolution is not 2560x1440, so I have to use it in 4K (too small) or in HiDPI 1920x1080 (too big!)
 

whosthis

macrumors member
Aug 21, 2008
85
21
Thanks!

I don´t want an 4K display because it´s native resolution is not 2560x1440, so I have to use it in 4K (too small) or in HiDPI 1920x1080 (too big!)
Why would you not just set it to 2560x1440? On the retina-style displays you can chose from several different "lookalike resolutions", and they work out really well.
 

austyn23

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 22, 2017
283
213
Why would you not just set it to 2560x1440? On the retina-style displays you can chose from several different "lookalike resolutions", and they work out really well.
Because they don´t look as good as the resolution that is exactly 50% of the native:

5K / 2 = 2560x1440
4K / 2 = 1920x1080

4K in 2560x1440 is a non native resolution or 1:1 scale, it look fuzzy.

In fact the MBP comes in 1680x1050 as default and looks a little blurry, but when you set it in 1440x900 (the screen is 2880x1800) it look really better!.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlexJoda

whosthis

macrumors member
Aug 21, 2008
85
21
Well, I'd say your best bet is to walk into an Apple Store and check it out...

While non 1:2-scale may look a bit blurry, this is on the very subtle side, especially from normal viewing distance. All non-native (and 1:2 is non-native, too) resolutions are interpolated, that's the whole idea about it. The main advantage for 1:2 is on the hardware side: it makes it computationally easier. As a side note, on some mobile devices the ratio is not even, either.

I bet if you compare that with a standard display, you will be over the moon. Or go with the 27 LG 5k (if still available in your region).

Just for reference the DPI for the screens:
Dell 25 2560x1440: 117 DPI
LG 23,7 4k: 186 DPI
iMac 27 5k: 218 DPI

(I am very picky on my screens, too. :) )
 
  • Like
Reactions: austyn23

frou

macrumors 6502a
Mar 14, 2009
585
625
I would narrow the assessment down to say that it's specifically text that looks bad on non-Retina. If it's practical to increase the font size in the applications you use (resulting in each character getting a higher pixel budget) then non-Retina becomes not too bad.
 

remcoy

macrumors newbie
Jun 29, 2006
23
5
Thanks!

I don´t want an 4K display because it´s native resolution is not 2560x1440, so I have to use it in 4K (too small) or in HiDPI 1920x1080 (too big!)
It can also be scaled to 2304 x 1296
it’s non-native yes, but it looks fine and that’s 110 points per inch, almost same as the 5k.

I have a 5k iMac, and the new 24 UltraFine in front of me right now... :)
 

whosthis

macrumors member
Aug 21, 2008
85
21
I have a 5k iMac, and the new 24 UltraFine in front of me right now... :)
Do you use the 4k as a 2nd screen on the iMac? Any chance you could post a quick image of that setup? :)
My Eizo 32 4k - as much as I love its ergonomics - is not a perfect fit for me (and too big together with the iMac I am about to order).
 

CWallace

macrumors 604
Aug 17, 2007
6,566
2,460
Seattle, WA
Anyone went from 5K to standard 2560?
I have an ASUS PG279Q serving as a secondary monitor for my iMac 5K as well as the primary monitor for my Windows gaming PC. It's 2560x1440 with 350nits brightness and an IPS panel and it's a really nice display, but it's not as nice as my 5K display, IMO.
 

AlexJoda

macrumors 6502a
Apr 8, 2015
757
579
I have an ASUS PG279Q serving as a secondary monitor for my iMac 5K as well as the primary monitor for my Windows gaming PC. It's 2560x1440 with 350nits brightness and an IPS panel and it's a really nice display, but it's not as nice as my 5K display, IMO.
Have a similar setup but with a Lenovo P27h. The difference is display quality is less in my opinion than the difference between a Retina and non Retina MBP. I have no problems with standard web pages and use the 5K display mainly for photos and videos and and for really small text....