Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hands On With Eve's Spectrum 4K Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The last sentence isn't really true, particularly on macOS. I'm currently running my 2016 13" MBP in closed clamshell mode into an older 4K 27" LG monitor (UD68). I run it at "Looks like 2560 x 1440".
macOS HiDPI scaling basically doubles the effective resolution from 2560 x 1440 to 5120 x 2880, and then downscales it to fit the 3840 x 2160 4K resolution of the monitor. It doesn't look blurry at all - in fact, it looks almost as good as it would running on a true 5K monitor. And still better than it would just running 2560 x 1440 resolution on a standard QHD 2560 x 1440 monitor (with no pixel doubling). The only downside to doing it this way is the non-integer scaling reduces GPU performance.
There are very few 5K monitors out there at the 27" size, and so from a budget standpoint, 4K @ 27" can be nice bang-for-buck.
Earlier this year, I needed the exact same requirements for work and my PS5. The technology screens taking advantage of 4k @120hz is still relatively new and the market was quite niche before COVID accelerated WFH movement. I decided to hold station with a LG 32UN500 and a Caldigit TS3 Plus. Its a pretty decent screen for the money and suits my deep office desk.
Hopefully next year, we'll see some economies of scale and some more 4k120hz screens out in the wild.
Hopefully next year, we'll see some economies of scale and some more 4k120hz screens out in the wild.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I received mine about a week ago and so far so good. Its looks great and i'm not having any issues with my Xbox Series X or Playstation 5. I use it for PC gaming as well but run it at 1080p 120hz and the built in scaler keeps it looking good there. I also have a MacBook Pro hooked up via USB C. Its a one stop shop for all my devices at my desk.
It may not look blurry to you but it does to me and I know that I am not alone. With pixel doubling, one pixel is rendered as four pixels. If you are displaying an image at any other resolution, that can no longer be the case. To my eyes, there is a noticeable difference between pixel doubling and everything else.
There is nothing on the specs page. But it also lists pulsing/strobing backlights as a 'feature'.
This monitor is primarily aimed at high screen refresh gaming. The motivation for the DCI-P3 Gamut coverage is probably primarily driven to help get the HDR400 and HDR600 tags. ( its 8bit+A-FRC implementation of '10-bit' ).
The marketing around this monitors states that gamers and designers had input into the design, but I doubt the voting pool was even. Also that it was broad in the scope of design. ( e.g., gaming character designers versus traditional print. )
P.S. Factory calibration and not much mention of calibration after that.
For work, I use a 4k 28" monitor and I'm thrilled with it. It is scaled to essentially 1080p, but it gets me lovely fully formed, smoothly edged fonts, compared to an actual 1080p monitor. Great for programming.
Fair enough - I don't doubt that you (and others) notice it enough that it's a negative. I think especially if you have had a good experience w/ true pixel-doubled HiDPI (eg. on a 27" 5K iMac), I could see how once you become used to it, you notice it a lot more if trying to "downgrade" to the 1440p on a 27" 4K experience on macOS.
But just as validly, for ppl without that history (like me) with higher-end monitor setups, I've been super impressed with how macOS HiDPI scaling works, as I've been more than happy with running "Looks like 2560x1440" on my 27" 4K screen. I've actually swapped back and forth to "Looks like 1920x1080" on my monitor, which as an aside looks too big for my tastes (but @CarlJ, I hear you that it's great for you), and I didn't notice a big enough difference on how text or fonts looked. But I know that could be more a case of me / my specific setup.
Except there's more to how Macs handle "scaled mode" - as the previous poster pointed out, in "looks like 1440p" mode, effectively, everything is rendered at 5k (using pixel doubling where needed) and then downsampled (...using a decent quality, not some simple algorithm built into the monitor as you'd get with old school standard def models). The ultimate result is still non-integer scaling, but using oversampling like this rather than just "scaling up" gives a much better result.
I've got a 28" 4k Dell Cheapo next to my 5k iMac and, yeah, in "looks like 1440p" mode the text is slightly "soft" c.f. the 5k - but it's pretty good and still far better than a "standard def" 1440p display (...and even that was never rubbish) while images/graphics are only distinguishable on things like ultra-fine hatching (in terms of sharpness - the $400 Dell's colour rendition doesn't come close to the iMac panel that costs > $1000 in standalone form, of course...) - I really don't see it as a problem in general use that doesn't involve displaying test targets and doing A-B tests with a jewller's loupe... I guess that, if you let it bug you, you can't un-see it, though...
NB: not strictly relevant, but it's almost 10 years since "retina" displays and HIDPI mode came out, and these days actual pixel doubling is only used by old/neglected software that doesn't understand HIDPI mode or include 2x bitmap assets. "Scaled" mode still uses oversampling because MacOS only seems to recognise two PPI settings (standard and HiDPI) - unlike Windows where properly written programs (big if!) have supported variable PPI since forever.
That’s the problem for me as I had a 5K iMac for a few months to use. I’m still surprised to find there’s practically nothing out in the market that comes close to that in resolution and PPI.
With the new 24” iMac’s stellar 4.5K display, I’m excited for what’s to come with the larger (30” 5.5K?) iMac.
I find 24” to be too small especially when it’s 16:9. My old (and current) 24” is a 16:10 and is quite a bit larger in terms of usable space.
27" 4K is for users who are sensitive to jagged pixels. If you want soft borders especially for text on screen, pixel pitch is important.
Is there something I'm missing? Neither the specs or price seem particularly unique or exceptional to warrant a crowd sourced display.
YES! Finally someone who gets it!!!
You know what is THE WORST tho... 1pt LINES... that flicker between being displayed as a 1px or a 2px line...
And if you zoom in and out... it ALWAYS looks funky... in a bad way.
They did the same with EVE V and ended investigated by Revenue Canada and RCMP.
.
Plus their repair service/warranty is non-existent.
LG released what you're asking for today: https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/13/lg-oled-ultrafine-monitor-now-available/
But at $4K, can you afford it? Also, only 60hz.
I’ve waited for years for a good 27”/5K monitor and finally gave up and got a 27” 4K that I run at 1440p. I’d love something better but the LG 5K is not good enough and at $1500 is priced too dear. Apple isn’t stepping up and no one else actually ships one, so we make due.