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.
Intel Graphics and 5120x1440 testing in Big Sur
- Thread starter joevt
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A 5120x1440 display has less pixels than 4K, so you only need a DisplayPort 1.2 cable (HDMI 2.0 should also work but the Mac Pro 2013 only supports HDMI 1.4).
AMD GPUs should have no problem supporting resolutions with widths greater than 4096, except older AMD GPUs produce garbled pixels in that case. I don't know if Big Sur will fix those.
https://egpu.io/forums/bootcamp/mid-2015-15-inch-macbook-pro-egpu-master-thread/paged/10/#post-84794
Examples of older AMD GPUs that have a problem:
- MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015), AMD Radeon R9 M370X
- Mac Pro (Late 2013), AMD AMD FirePro D300, AMD FirePro D500, AMD FirePro D700
Right now I'm trying to figure out why I can't get the latest Big Sur beta to boot with Lilu + WhateverGreen on my Mac mini 2018 to test a patch to support 5K timing (not scaled) on smaller displays (like my 4K display).
iMactouch
macrumors member
Hi everyone, I'm new to the forum but wanted to question something about my situation. I have the samsung CRG9 (5120x1440) and a macbook pro 13 (2019, 2 thunderbolt ports)
I also have a regular 2560x1440 monitor above, and I was looking into getting a dual display thunderbolt dock like the CalDigit thunderbolt one. Now that its known that 5120x1440 is supported in Big Sur, would you guess that a thunderbolt dock like this would be able to drive both screens at their native resolutions? (both at 60Hz of course)
Thanks!
I also have a regular 2560x1440 monitor above, and I was looking into getting a dual display thunderbolt dock like the CalDigit thunderbolt one. Now that its known that 5120x1440 is supported in Big Sur, would you guess that a thunderbolt dock like this would be able to drive both screens at their native resolutions? (both at 60Hz of course)
Thanks!
bdelaney
macrumors newbie
Exact same setup. Note to anyone who finds this thread with a Philips 499P9H that is finding they can't select any refresh rate higher than 30Hz @ 5120x1440, I found only after changing the USB mode to USB 2.0 that the option for 60Hz or 70Hz appeared in the MacOS display settings.
Sorry for waking up this old discussion, where does this issue stand?
I have a Macbook Pro 13 2018, Iris Plus 655 (OSX 11.5.2 Big Sur) and want to purchase Dell u4919dw but after spending hours over the web to verify whether it's possible to achieve 5120x1440 I see lots of conflicting answers.
Dell official page states that it is impossible to achieve this resolution using USB C but doesn't specify whether it is possible using USB C to DP cable (which would work for me).
This video shows it's possible to achieve this resolution but with Macbook Pro 2019 Iris 645 and a different monitor, when using the proper USBC to DP cable (so not just any cable, a high end one).
And various comments over the web state that this it's impossible due to all kinds of limitations on any Macbook Pro 13 up to 2019.
So what's the latest on this topic for my exact specs?
I have a Macbook Pro 13 2018, Iris Plus 655 (OSX 11.5.2 Big Sur) and want to purchase Dell u4919dw but after spending hours over the web to verify whether it's possible to achieve 5120x1440 I see lots of conflicting answers.
Dell official page states that it is impossible to achieve this resolution using USB C but doesn't specify whether it is possible using USB C to DP cable (which would work for me).
This video shows it's possible to achieve this resolution but with Macbook Pro 2019 Iris 645 and a different monitor, when using the proper USBC to DP cable (so not just any cable, a high end one).
And various comments over the web state that this it's impossible due to all kinds of limitations on any Macbook Pro 13 up to 2019.
So what's the latest on this topic for my exact specs?
Last edited:
iMactouch
macrumors member
The problem ist that some Macs can use the resolution and some Macs like the Mac Pro 2013 can not use the resolution although both of them are using the same Big Sur version!
Found two more comments stating Macbook Pro 13 2018 over USBC works with Dell u4919dw
Concorde63
- https://discussions.apple.com/thread/8641919?answerId=254520748022#254520748022
jkastan
- https://discussions.apple.com/thread/8641919?answerId=253864539022#253864539022
While others claim it doesn't work, is it on a computer by computer basis? So no other way to tell other then trying?
Concorde63
- https://discussions.apple.com/thread/8641919?answerId=254520748022#254520748022
jkastan
- https://discussions.apple.com/thread/8641919?answerId=253864539022#253864539022
While others claim it doesn't work, is it on a computer by computer basis? So no other way to tell other then trying?
Are those others not using macOS Big Sur on the same Macbook Pro 13 2018 or a Mac with one of the specified Intel GPUs that now has support for > 4096 width in Big Sur?
Most people don't provide full specifications of their system, here is one example that seem to be a case where system should have allowed high resolution but it didn't work out:
Dell U4919DW / MacBook pro 5k issue - Apple Community
Also, Dell's official page on this states the following, which contradicts what the successful people wrote (on using usb-c)
Quite some time passed in most of these discussions, so maybe official status has changed.
On the list at the beginning of this discussion a configuration similar to mine is mentioned (different monitors though - LG and not Dell). But it relies on a message from @matroi and two replies later @SpoddyCoder explained that what the computer alone states might not be right and it could be the computer will present high resolution while actually the monitor is lower resolution.
Was that configuration validated to work?
Right. The limit was 4096 until it wasn't. But this is only for Kaby Lake or Coffee Lake CPUs. Apple did not fix the driver for Sky Lake or earlier CPUs.
Can you provide a link to the mention? @SpoddyCoder is correct. You need to see the timing info using SwitchResX because macOS only shows the framebuffer info. The framebuffer can be scaled by the GPU to a different output resolution (known as scaled modes).
So I ran
$ sysctl -n machdep.cpu.brand_string
received i5-8259U
Which I found on Intel's site that it's Coffee Lake. Does that mean I can be certain that Dell u4919DW will work at 5120x1440 and using USB-C/Thunderbolt (so no need for a high end DP cable)?
This is the link to the "evidence" : https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...1440-testing-in-big-sur.2244174/post-28770543
And this is the link to the reply challenging the evidence: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...-big-sur.2244174/?post=28774356#post-28774356
I couldn't find any reply to the latter response.
You can also execute the following command which should show what graphics driver is being used:
kextstat | grep Intel | egrep "Graphics|Framebuffer" Oh, I thought you meant the discussion in the Apple discussions thread. There's only one 13 inch model in 2018 and it uses Coffee Lake so it should work. I just haven't seen a screenshot of the timing info or the other info I asked for.
This is what I get when running the command above:
Executing: /usr/bin/kmutil showloaded
No variant specified, falling back to release
123 0 0xffffff7f99dcc000 0xc1000 0xc1000 com.apple.driver.AppleIntelCFLGraphicsFramebuffer (16.0.5) 8ACDE7D9-1900-32FF-88AF-81FCB2D5CCFE <122 121 118 42 14 13 8 7 6 5 3 1>
169 0 0xffffff7f9a6a9000 0xb8000 0xb8000 com.apple.driver.AppleIntelKBLGraphics (16.0.5) 8B11EE30-3D67-3FB9-9F2E-46A1B159E059 <122 118 93 14 8 7 6 5 3 1>
What can I learn from that?
CFL = Coffee Lake so the Intel graphics should be able to support timings (not just scaled modes or dual tile modes) that have width > 4096.
Coffee Lake uses all but two drivers from Kaby Lake (see table in first post).
Mac mini 2018 should have no problem with HiDPI since it's not Apple Silicon. What display resolution timing and HiDPI mode combination would you like me to test? And what macOS version?
I assume you want to know about HiDPI on a 5120x1440 display. 5120x1440 displays are not retina displays so most people wouldn't want to use a HiDPI mode with that display.
So let me tell you the whole story..
I'm currently working on base macbook air m1 with 8Gb and it's complete disaster for me to work it as a desktop computer with my setup. I'm mostly use it with multiple browser windows and some parallel applications.
I'm using Samsung G9 (ether 5140x1440 or 2560x1440 as half) + 3x 1080monitors around (via DisplayLink). On m1 nether of those resolutions is treated as HiDPI so the font quality is really bad. I started to use BetterDummy to work around this, but this has more caveats then it's usable.
I don't want to be running external GPU because I'm not doing gaming, I just want it to act as a "client" and "terminal" for many browser application, text editors etc..
How is font smooting working on the 5k1k and 1080p resolutions ? Is 630 performing in that resolutions or that is too big of a set back to move back to 2018 CPU ?
Also I know that 5140x1440 is not Retina, hece I have to use BetterDummy for it. I was hoping that Intel with mac mini 2018 does not have this limitation and can do font smoting, which was disabled on M1 processors.
You didn't say what HiDPI resolution you want to use. What setting are you using in BetterDummy?
I want to use full resolution with a crispy text...
On betterdummy I use 2560x1440 HiDPI (when I use monitor in PinP mode) or 5120x2880 (when I use full scaling).
But I understand that is not need in case none M1 chips as intel support scaling of all resolutions.
Basically I want to achieve crips text in both cases, when I use half or full screen on Samsung G9 or my other 3 1080 monitors.
From my Mac mini 2018 iGPU, I can output 5120x1440@60Hz to my 4K display which accepts timings up to 8K30. A normal 4K display would only accept 4K timings. Since I'm using a 4K display, I need to use my WhateverGreen patch (
igfxmaxwidth=16384) to make the iGPU accept timings with width > 4096.The maximum default scaled mode in Ventura is 6720x1890 (3360x945 HiDPI).
The Scaler can scale up to 8191x8191 pixels, so a scaled mode of 10240x2880 is rejected by CoreDisplay.framework and you can't get a 5120x1440 HiDPI mode.
A scaled mode of 6784x1908 or 8128x2286 is rejected by the driver.
I can tell the driver to not reject those (using another patch) and they both work including their corresponding HiDPI modes (3392x954 HiDPI and 4064x2286 HiDPI) - scaling to the 5120x1440@60Hz timing. I can't tell you how well it looks since the display will scale that to it's native 3840x2160 resolution.
32:9 aspect ratio on my 16:9 display reminds me of 80 column mode on Apple //e except with a lot more columns. Or maybe Instant Pascal's text editor (double hi-res graphics, monochrome mode for clarity)
I made a new patch (
igfxmaxscale=16383) so the scaler max is now 16383x16383. I now have 10240x2880 and 5120x1440 HiDPI scaled modes from my Mac mini 2018 iGPU and the modes can be applied to a 5120x1440@60Hz display.