LG 31MU97 4k Display

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by Zorn, Oct 29, 2014.

  1. Zorn macrumors 6502a

    Zorn

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Location:
    Ohio
    #1
    Just started seeing yesterday LG's new 31MU97 display, a 4k 17:9 display that actually goes a little above to 4096x2160 and includes Thunderbolt. Seems to show a list price of $2,499 but it's available online from several retailers for about $1,399. Anyone seen one or used it? Thoughts?
     
  2. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #2
    If the thunderbolt support included a docking station that multiplexed ethernet and USB 3 ports onto the thunderbolt connection....in other words a 4K equiv. to an update Apple Thunderbolt Display.....I would be interested.
     
  3. MattZani macrumors 68030

    MattZani

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Looks like it has 3.5mm, HDMI x2, Thunderbolt, Display Port, USB3 in and USB3 x3.
     
  4. turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #5
    I have one arriving this morning.
    Very excited.

    Is it 5k? No
    Is it larger than 27" & 4k? Yes :)

    I've been rocking a 4k 28" and at my usage distance, it looks sensational (not sure I need 5k - very nice to have I'm sure...but not a "need" or anything)

    Apple should consider doing a 30"+ iMac 5k at some point
     
  5. Michaelgtrusa macrumors 604

    Michaelgtrusa

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Location:
    Everywhere And Nowhere
  6. MCAsan, Oct 29, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014

    MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #7

    FaceTime camera, mic, speakers, ethernet port, charger for MacBooks?

    I'll hold out a bit longer for a ATDII.
     
  7. megalaser macrumors 6502

    megalaser

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    #8
    any backlight bleed? how is the smoothness of video playback, any frame dropping?
     
  8. Basic75 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    #9
    This is great, true 4K (instead of UHD mislabelled as 4K), but I still don't know what to do with 4K on 31" on a Mac: With pixel-doubling it gives you 2048x1080 layout pixels, which is not enough, without pixel-doubling it gives you 4096x2160, which is a bit much for 31".

    If you want to buy this, or a comparable dpi, display, how will you use it on a Mac???
     
  9. Ryan0751 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2013
    #10
    As of 10.9.3, Apple introduced some scaling modes for OS X that give you some more options:

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/8023/apple-releases-osx-10-9-3-improved-4k-display

    I don't know if they work with any 4K resolution monitor, nor whether they are "good" in terms of sharpness or what not.

    At $1399, this is starting to get into the price range I'll consider one.

    Today I'm using two Apple TBD's, and they are fine, but I wouldn't mind a non-glossy screen in my very bright loft, and also could give up a built in iSight to use an external USB cam.

    I'd want some scaled resolution that would give me something comparable in screen real-estate for my non-media oriented coding work.
     
  10. vmacrob macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    #11
    On their Korean page for this monitor, it shows the maximum resolution on the Mac Pro and Macbook Pro Retina to be 3840x2160:

    http://www.lge.co.kr/lgekr/product/....laf?prdid=EPRD.282479&pcatid=2400&catid=2400

    I also don't see mention of Thunderbolt in the tech specs on the US page, or on any their Korean pages for this monitor.

    Hopefully these are just oversights or minor errors, but would love to see verification of both.
     
  11. Zorn thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Zorn

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Location:
    Ohio
    #12
    Any chance you could give us some photos & impressions please? I'm on the fence about ordering one.
     
  12. turbineseaplane, Oct 30, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2014

    turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #13
    Hi. Just super busy today otherwise I would do photos.
    If anyone's on the fence on this, I really wouldn't be.

    I played plenty with the Retina iMac at the store this last weekend.
    This screen is every bit as gorgeous to my eye - And I like having a bit more size than 27" (plus, obviously it's a standalone display we all want)

    Any specific questions I can answer?

    ----------

    I'd find that hard to believe, since it does full resolution for me on both Mini/Normal DisplayPort

    ----------

    I personally use an App called QuickRes to manage and save different custom resolutions.

    I will say that, as of right now, this monitor only works and looks "correct" in "best for retina" which is 2048x1080 @ 2x. The other modes aren't able to correctly deal with this 17:9 aspect ratio.

    That said - at 2x 2048/1080 it's GORGEOUS.

    Here are some pics of my standing desk area.
    (No knocks about my Apple Extended Keyboard II -- I LOVE IT! haha)

    Any grainy parts of the photos are 100% my iPhone 5s in low light here this morning.
    The screen in person is BUTTER smooth at this resolution.
     

    Attached Files:

  13. vmacrob macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    #14
    Excellent - is that at 60 Hz? I noticed on another site that some people (not on the Mac) couldn't get it past 50.

    So at 4096x2160 it doesn't look correct? This was the resolution I was intending - can you elaborate on that?

    Thank you!
     
  14. turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #15
    Yep - Absolutely 60z - For clarity sake, I am running a Hackintosh with a Titan Black though ;-)
    The GPU of any given Mac will be the issue on the 60hz thing

    FULL resolution with no software scaling absolutely works.
    That's what I'm actually running at, but OS X is software scaling down to 1/2 that (the standard Best for Retina setting in Sys Prefs)

    Note to Wall Mounters: Works great with most all the Monoprice mounts (enough clearance between the plastic and the recessed screw holes on the monitor)
     
  15. edanuff macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    #16
    One thing that's important to note for people who are saying it's too big. It's about the same vertical height as all the other 27"/28" monitors, like the Thunderbolt Display or the Samsung 28", it's just wider. My guess would be most people would typically run this in a 1.5x scaled 2730x1440 mode, since the 28" 4K monitors are currently best run (IMHO) in 1.5x scaled 2560x1440 mode. Think of it as a slightly wider version of the Thunderbolt Display but with better resolution.

    ----------

    Are you saying Yosemite won't handle the other scaling modes at all or that they're broken?
     
  16. Zorn thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Zorn

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Location:
    Ohio
    #17
    I'm also a bit confused by what you mean. I would be running this at native 4096x2160 @ 60Hz. Are you saying that doesn't work correctly, and you are forced to go to the 2x retina mode? Or does it run at native resolution on OS X just fine?
     
  17. turbineseaplane, Oct 30, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2014

    turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #18
    I'm not sure if it's Yosemite's fault - Graphics driver issue since it's so new (on my system that uses NVIDIA Web Drivers) or what...

    But right now the only 2 resolutions that work and look correct (in terms of aspect ratio) are:

    1x (no scaling) at full panel resolution of 4096x2160
    2x (perfect Retina mode) of 2048x1080

    ----------

    See my last post

    UPDATE: New web drivers just came out

    These are working (all at 60hz):

    4096 x 2160
    3008 x 1692
    2304 x 1296
    2048 x 1080 is absolutely the best (as expected - perfect 2x to native panel resolution)

    Also - The new drivers are allowing for correct resolution aspect ratios at all other scaled resolutions.
    If you choose one that's not 17:9, you'll get black bars on the side or stretching (your choice in Monitor hardware Menu)

    ----------

    The colors on this display are SUPERB.

    Also, I've had a ton of IPS monitors over the years and this is probably the least amount of IPS glow I've ever seen.

    I wouldn't bother waiting around for an Apple standalone 4k/5k display (which will probably be at 5k) as that's a ways off due to bandwidth issues (will need newer DisplayPort Standards to be in the wild -- and Mac's will need hardware upgrades to do all that)

    This is *the* monitor to get right now (in my opinion)
     
  18. edanuff macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    #19
    So you're using this with a pre-2013 Mac Pro and an Nvidia graphics card, it sounds like? Hopefully someone will try this on a 2103 nMP soon (might be me). The specs look great but I'm worried about the state of driver support. From the HardForum thread on this monitor, it looks like the EDID lists 3840x2160@60Hz as the preferred resolution, and I have no idea what Yosemite is going to do with this. For this price, I'd prefer not to risk something that required a lot of tweaks to get right.
     
  19. turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #20
    It's all about the GPU.
    Any of the new Mac Pros should drive it fine at full resolution 60hz.

    The HardForum threads had someone having issues, but I believe he was using a 670 series GPU perhaps?

    I'm on a 6 core Hackintosh with a Titan Black. (7 series technically)

    The only connection that won't work would be HDMI, as the display doesn't have HDMI 2.0 (nor do any available GPU's I don't think)

    Use DisplayPort (or mini DP) and all is well
     
  20. Acorn macrumors 68020

    Acorn

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    macrumors
    #21
    when I watched a video review of this monitor they stated it had 2 display ports not thunderbolt.
     
  21. turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #22
    Check LG site.
    Full info is up there now.

    I don't personally use TB so I didn't pay attention to that.
     
  22. Zorn thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Zorn

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Location:
    Ohio
    #23
    Where did you see one? I only was able to find 2 videos of this monitor, and they are both in German and just from a trade show.
     
  23. turbineseaplane macrumors 68020

    turbineseaplane

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2008
    #24
    It does look like No Thunderbolt.

    To me this is a non-issue.

    The color accuracy and size (and full 4k) is clearly targeted at Pro use (obviously also fine for anyone) and likely connected to a nMP (which most have on a desk with TB ports in reach).

    If you're using a MacBook Pro and looking for a TB display to be your "dock" of sorts (with ethernet/TB/etc) you'll want to keep waiting on something different.
     
  24. Basic75 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    #25
    It might look good, but it gives you much less screen real-estate than a 27" running the usual 2560x1440...

    ----------

    I really don't want to spend more than 1000 on a monitor and then have to use scaled modes, not for performance and not for sharpness. 100-110 ppi seem to work fine for desktop displays, so monitors should stick to that, or double to 200-220 ppi, I really don't know what to do with something around 150 ppi.
     

Share This Page