Late 2013 - 15" rMBP - External 27" 4K monitor

[WestbankSurfer]

Hi everyone,

I'm thinking about getting a 4K display, as in my current MBP home setup I'm not close enough to the screen, as I use a regular Mac keyboard instead of the internal one. Working with huge scores in Sibelius becomes quite straining on the eyes to be honest (and on my back, as I'm constantly leaning forward).

Now, I'm quite aware the internal graphics processor is quite meager, so I'm wondering if I'll be able to run a 4K screen smoothly. I'm not gaming or anything, but I might do simple video editing as well as photo manipulation.

The reason I do want to get 4K is that I want to invest in videography from next year onwards, I will be buying a new desktop computer for this which will easily support 4K in a lot of scenario's. But I just don't like getting a cheap alternative now for the time being, if I know that I'll be upgrading later anyway.

Also I've read that some people find the letters and symbols quite small on a 27" 4K display. I'm used to having my 15" rMPB scaled to fit as much as possible on the screen. Will this be comparable?

I hope someone might have some answers. In any case, I appreciate every feedback I could get on this.

Many thanks,
WestbankSurfer

----

Specs:
2 Ghz Intel Core i7
8 GB Ram
Intel Iris Pro 1536 MB

 

[Samuelsan2001]

The graphics and thunderbolt 2 bandwidth support it with a display port cable so why not.

 

[WestbankSurfer]

I'm perhaps a little concerned that day-to-day tasks might become more sluggish, if using the 4K monitor results in a heavier strain on the integrated graphics card. Or does this only influence things like rendering 3D graphics and video in that resolution?

Would scaling down the image to say 2560x1440 improve performance?

 

[Samuelsan2001]

I'm perhaps a little concerned that day-to-day tasks might become more sluggish, if using the 4K monitor results in a heavier strain on the integrated graphics card. Or does this only influence things like rendering 3D graphics and video in that resolution?

Would scaling down the image to say 2560x1440 improve performance?

You will have to run it scaled at 1440p anyway or have Everything very small, scaling uses more graphics power not less although scaling to exactly half in each direction usually works fine and has less impact. The iris Pro can run a 4K screen at 60hz I would do it in clamshell mode so it’s the only screen being used, lag and stuttering may be an issue with more intense applications, it should be fine with day to day tasks though.

 

[WestbankSurfer]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Samuelsan2001!

Perhaps a 2560x1440 27" display might be the better option in that case, if that takes a bit of the load off as it won't need scaling.

I'll find someone near me with a 4K monitor to test on my setup, to see how various applications run. Clamshell mode is a valuable tip as well.

 

[mickeydean]

The graphics and thunderbolt 2 bandwidth support it with a display port cable so why not.

sorry to hijack but same laptop except with a Sony 4K 55” from 2014 (with only HDMI inputs I believe)?

Sony XBR55X850B so it has HDMI2.0

 

[mj_]

Scaling will make it even worse, see here: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ling-lag-on-4k-monitor.2031459/#post-25665038

Your bigger problem will be that the 15" MBP Late 2013 doesn't yet support 4K@60Hz SST, you'll need at least a Mid 2014 for that. This means two things: a) you need to get an MST display, which are rare and expensive, or b) you'll only be able to use your external 4K display at 30 Hz --> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206587

That said the GPU should be able to handle the graphics load mostly. I've had a 2016 13" MBP hooked up to a 4K display and it only stuttered occasionally. The Iris Pro in your MBP is only slightly slower than the Iris 540 so it should work ok mostly.

 

[WestbankSurfer]

Your bigger problem will be that the 15" MBP Late 2013 doesn't yet support 4K@60Hz SST, you'll need at least a Mid 2014 for that. This means two things: a) you need to get an MST display, which are rare and expensive, or b) you'll only be able to use your external 4K display at 30 Hz --> https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206587

I've read somewhere that using mini display-port you'll be able to squeeze out 60Hz out of the Late '13 rMBP, however I can see this is not backed up by Apple officially. It starts to become clear that I should just opt for a 2560x1440 display instead. I'd be better off with a little lower resolution but better performance than vice versa. I've also heard that 27" is on the smallish side for 4K anyway.

Thanks so much for all your input!

 

[mj_]

My 4K is 27" and yes, for native 4K (3840x2160) it is definitely way too small. On the other side, it is also way too big for optimal scaling (200% aka 1920x1080). Thus, mine is set to "looks like 3008x1692". Next in line would be 2560x1440 which again I find too big, but that's a personal preference. I also have my 15" MBP set to the rightmost "More Space" scaling, aka 1920x1080.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Samuelsan2001!

Perhaps a 2560x1440 27" display might be the better option in that case, if that takes a bit of the load off as it won't need scaling.

I'll find someone near me with a 4K monitor to test on my setup, to see how various applications run. Clamshell mode is a valuable tip as well.

Yeah that is exactly as the old apple cinema and thunderbolt displays, along with the original 27 inch imac your MacBook will run it superbly and while it won't be as sharp its pretty nice if you don't sit on top of it.
[doublepost=1514994134][/doublepost]

sorry to hijack but same laptop except with a Sony 4K 55” from 2014 (with only HDMI inputs I believe)?

Sony XBR55X850B so it has HDMI2.0

You'll want a mini Display port to hdmi 2 adapter and an HDMI 2 cable.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_s...dmi+4k&rh=i:aps,k:mini+displayport+to+hdmi+4k

 

[Fishrrman]

OP wrote:
"It starts to become clear that I should just opt for a 2560x1440 display instead. I'd be better off with a little lower resolution but better performance than vice versa. I've also heard that 27" is on the smallish side for 4K anyway."

For 1440p, you might consider a 32" display instead of 27".
Here's something I saw a while ago and archived:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/96378...lips-monitor-with-99-adobe-rgb-only-costs-500