Mac Studio Display vs iMac 24

[seb2195]

After the announcement of the Mac Studio display, I was underwhelmed. The display is gorgeous, but spending £1,500 on the display alone with an iMac sitting a couple hundred cheaper is making me question the value I will get from this display vs the price.

Another display is out the question, I want that ~220ppi and would want a new unit (not a refurb 27inch LG UltraFine 5k). I guess I am spoilt with my MacBook Retina display.

The iMac seems like a relatively good buy. I currently have a 16 M1Pro MBP (base spec, bought for the screen, I do not *think* I need the M1 Pro power). I'm just looking for advice here really as to whether I go ahead with an iMac 24 or pick up the display in May (current shipping estimate). I would also benefit having another computer as this would allow the rest of the family to use the machine I am nt. The three specific questions are:
- How seamless is working across multiple Macs? I understand the Desktop and Documents are synced across. Universal Control looks like another step. Has anyone any advice on using multiple Macs. All my documents are synced through iCloud or through web apps.
- Am I leaving performance on the table if I am not using the capabilities of the regular M1? Is the M1 Pro considerably faster for light tasks or negligible? My current workload is multiple spreadsheets and chrome. Apple Music playing in the background and sometimes some light Lightroom/FCP work.
- Is there a huge difference in screen real estate between the 24 and 27 inch? Is it really worth spending more than the cost of the iMac to get a larger screen? Again, anyone with experiences of both screen sizes, any advice would be really helpful.

Thanks for bearing with me, just hoping for some input and guidance here.

 

[chscag]

- Is there a huge difference in screen real estate between the 24 and 27 inch? Is it really worth spending more than the cost of the iMac to get a larger screen? Again, anyone with experiences of both screen sizes, any advice would be really helpful.

I can't give you my experience between the 24" and 27" but I can tell you when I replaced my 21.5" iMac with a 27" model, the difference was amazing. Several other users here in the forums have stated that there is a huge difference between the 24" and 27" screens.

Also you need to take in account all the other differences between the two models... sound, ports, and the ability of the Studio Display to provide power to a MacBook Pro.

 

[rustyosaurus]

After the announcement of the Mac Studio display, I was underwhelmed. The display is gorgeous, but spending £1,500 on the display alone with an iMac sitting a couple hundred cheaper is making me question the value I will get from this display vs the price.

Another display is out the question, I want that ~220ppi and would want a new unit (not a refurb 27inch LG UltraFine 5k). I guess I am spoilt with my MacBook Retina display.

The iMac seems like a relatively good buy. I currently have a 16 M1Pro MBP (base spec, bought for the screen, I do not *think* I need the M1 Pro power). I'm just looking for advice here really as to whether I go ahead with an iMac 24 or pick up the display in May (current shipping estimate). I would also benefit having another computer as this would allow the rest of the family to use the machine I am nt. The three specific questions are:
- How seamless is working across multiple Macs? I understand the Desktop and Documents are synced across. Universal Control looks like another step. Has anyone any advice on using multiple Macs. All my documents are synced through iCloud or through web apps.
- Am I leaving performance on the table if I am not using the capabilities of the regular M1? Is the M1 Pro considerably faster for light tasks or negligible? My current workload is multiple spreadsheets and chrome. Apple Music playing in the background and sometimes some light Lightroom/FCP work.
- Is there a huge difference in screen real estate between the 24 and 27 inch? Is it really worth spending more than the cost of the iMac to get a larger screen? Again, anyone with experiences of both screen sizes, any advice would be really helpful.

Thanks for bearing with me, just hoping for some input and guidance here.

For syncing files, I have never used Documents/iCloud. Most of my work clients use Dropbox so that is what I use. I have a MacBook Air and a 27 iMac, both of which I use mainly for work. I store all files on my iMac but all of my working files are in Dropbox. I only use files in Dropbox on my MacBook Air so I never need to worry about syncing or versioning. At some point when I no longer need to have access to files on my Air, I archive them on the iMac (move out of Dropbox), but I haven't done that in awhile. I have some files on there for years and years.

This set up works great for me and I have never had a problem but maybe there is an even better way through iCloud.

I think monitor size is like TV size. Always buy the biggest one you can afford. You won't regret it. If you spend a lot of time at the iMac, you will notice the difference between the 24 and 27. I got two Studio Displays and am excited.

 

[4sallypat]

My 24" M1 iMac is awesome but currently using a second display: 27" Thunderbolt.

Ordered 2 Studio displays - will replace the TB with Studio display.
Second Studio display will replace M1 Mini 27" Thunderbolt.

 

[seb2195]

For syncing files, I have never used Documents/iCloud. Most of my work clients use Dropbox so that is what I use. I have a MacBook Air and a 27 iMac, both of which I use mainly for work. I store all files on my iMac but all of my working files are in Dropbox. I only use files in Dropbox on my MacBook Air so I never need to worry about syncing or versioning. At some point when I no longer need to have access to files on my Air, I archive them on the iMac (move out of Dropbox), but I haven't done that in awhile. I have some files on there for years and years.

This set up works great for me and I have never had a problem but maybe there is an even better way through iCloud.

I think monitor size is like TV size. Always buy the biggest one you can afford. You won't regret it. If you spend a lot of time at the iMac, you will notice the difference between the 24 and 27. I got two Studio Displays and am excited.

Interesting point with Dropbox. I have noticed that the desktop and documents on iCloud sync across to my iPhone and Google seems to suggest they will sync automatically to the desktop and documents folder of any other iMac with the same iCloud account.

I guess with the iMac 24 aspect ratio being slightly taller, I wonder how much more usable space the 27inch has?

 

[seb2195]

My 24" M1 iMac is awesome but currently using a second display: 27" Thunderbolt.

Ordered 2 Studio displays - will replace the TB with Studio display.
Second Studio display will replace M1 Mini 27" Thunderbolt.

How does the iMac screen size compare with the 27inch for productivity? (I'm assuming the 27inch is a 16:9 aspect ratio? Does the iMac 24 feel a lot smaller in day to day usage?

Sounds like a great setup you have coming!

 

[rustyosaurus]

Interesting point with Dropbox. I have noticed that the desktop and documents on iCloud sync across to my iPhone and Google seems to suggest they will sync automatically to the desktop and documents folder of any other iMac with the same iCloud account.

I guess with the iMac 24 aspect ratio being slightly taller, I wonder how much more usable space the 27inch has?

I suggest going to an Apple store and comparing the two so you can see the difference.

 

[seb2195]

I can't give you my experience between the 24" and 27" but I can tell you when I replaced my 21.5" iMac with a 27" model, the difference was amazing. Several other users here in the forums have stated that there is a huge difference between the 24" and 27" screens.

Also you need to take in account all the other differences between the two models... sound, ports, and the ability of the Studio Display to provide power to a MacBook Pro.

Sound, ports and power passthrough are all impressive feats of engineering. Undoubtedly they drive the price of the display up higher. None of the additional value adds here add much more additional value to me

 

[Amethyst1]

I guess with the iMac 24 aspect ratio being slightly taller, I wonder how much more usable space the 27inch has?

Both the 23.5" iMac M1 and the 27" Studio Display have the same 16:9 aspect ratio and a pixel density of approximately 218 pixels per inch (PPI).

At their respective default "pixel-perfect" setting which provides the sharpest picture, the iMac provides 2240×1260 real estate whereas the Studio Display provides 2560×1440. That's 14.3% more vertical screen estate or 30.6% more screen estate in general, i.e. when taking both horizontal and vertical screen estate into account.

Having upgraded from a 23.8" "4K" monitor running at "looks like 2304×1296" (i.e. it provided slightly more screen estate than the iMac at its default setting) to a 27" 5K monitor running at "looks like 2560×1440" myself, the difference in screen estate is noticeable and welcome but not worth the price of the Studio Display to me. I was able to get my 5K monitor for like $500, which made the upgrade well worth it, especially considering I sold the "4K" monitor for $200 after upgrading.

 

[4sallypat]

How does the iMac screen size compare with the 27inch for productivity? (I'm assuming the 27inch is a 16:9 aspect ratio? Does the iMac 24 feel a lot smaller in day to day usage?

Sounds like a great setup you have coming!

The 27" Thunderbolt actually shows less than the iMac because it's not as Retina dense as the 24" iMac.

For text editing, command line, web html programming - the 27" can't be beat as the fonts are sharp & clear.
24" iMac gets more streaming content due to the higher density pixels....

I love the combination of the dual displays but thinking now about how the Studio display will look compared to the 27" Thunderbolt which I have become accustomed to over 11 years.

 

[Amethyst1]

The 27" Thunderbolt actually shows less than the iMac because it's not as Retina dense as the 24" iMac.

It shows less pixels, but gives you more real estate than the iMac. The iMac only provides 2240×1260 real estate at the default setting while the Thunderbolt Display provides 2560×1440. Please don't confuse pixel density and real estate.

[...] thinking now about how the Studio display will look compared to the 27" Thunderbolt which I have become accustomed to over 11 years.

It will look literally a million times better. I speak from experience.

 

[seb2195]

Both the 23.5" iMac M1 and the 27" Studio Display have the same 16:9 aspect ratio and a pixel density of approximately 218 pixels per inch (PPI).

At their respective default "pixel-perfect" setting which provides the sharpest picture, the iMac provides 2240×1260 real estate whereas the Studio Display provides 2560×1440. That's 14.3% more vertical screen estate or 30.6% more screen estate in general, i.e. when taking both horizontal and vertical screen estate into account.

Having upgraded from a 23.8" "4K" monitor running at "looks like 2304×1296" (i.e. it provided slightly more screen estate than the iMac at its default setting) to a 27" 5K monitor running at "looks like 2560×1440" myself, the difference in screen estate is noticeable and welcome but not worth the price of the Studio Display to me. I was able to get my 5K monitor for like $500, which made the upgrade well worth it, especially considering I sold the "4K" monitor for $200 after upgrading.

Thanks for clearing that up. I had assumed that the iMac had a 16:10 display as similar to the MacBooks.

I didnt consider the usable space within the two displays but this makes sense now. Quickly mocking up 2 boxes (using the 'looks like' dimensions mentioned above), I can see the real difference between the two screens.

I guess the question now is whether the increased price of the display is worth the premium over the iMac and the exclusion of a separate computer.

Been reading about Apple's Target Display mode and understand this was canned due to bandwidth limitations, but can't help but feel like this would have been the perfect solution!

 

[seb2195]

Taking this a step further, this is the two side by side and scaled using the dimensions @Amethyst1 provided. Bottom stand have been aligned for height.

The lack of chin on the Studio Display makes this feel very similar in size.

 

[Amethyst1]

I had assumed that the iMac had a 16:10 display as similar to the MacBooks.

It (unfortunately) does not.

I didnt consider the usable space within the two displays but this makes sense now. Quickly mocking up 2 boxes (using the 'looks like' dimensions mentioned above), I can see the real difference between the two screens.

Well, you can scale the iMac's display to provide the same 2560×1440 real estate as the Studio Display. However, this will introduce blurriness due to the way macOS handles non-integer scaling (on the iMac, only "looks like 2240×1260" uses pin-sharp integer scaling; on the Studio Display, only "looks like 2560×1440" uses pin-sharp integer scaling). In the same vein, you can scale the Studio Display to provide up to 3200×1800 real estate though. The big questions are, then, if you can notice the blurriness (I easily can) and if so, if it bothers you (it doesn't bother me).

Been reading about Apple's Target Display mode and understand this was canned due to bandwidth limitations, but can't help but feel like this would have been the perfect solution!

You mean using the 23.5" iMac as an external display? That would be no problem via DisplayPort 1.4 (USB-C Alternate Mode) or Thunderbolt 3.

 

[Lioness~]

It's probably a matter how much you want to spend / invest into it. That's all about it.
Decide what you want to put your money on. The Studio Display will last probably beyond 1 Mac.
But how can we really know what happens 5-7 years?

I just ordered one of those Studio Display with a Mac Studio. I was thinking about to buy like 2 LG's instead of the Studio Display. Probably for the same price. But nah, I wan't the Apple quality.
I would never go to a 24" after had 27" iMac's for quite some time. Though the real estate of the iMac display's have't been as much as the 27" Studio Display. So I am looking forward to when it comes....long wait...2 months, see how that will change ?

 

[Neverless]

If your focus is to get the best value for your money, you can try huawei mateview, a similar specced monitor with even more slimmer bezels, height-adjustable, but only at a 25% of the cost.

 

[Warped9]

An iMac is an elegant all-in-one solution. A studio display needs a a computer, a keyboard and a mouse. In the end the Studio is going to cost you a lot more.

I have a 21.5. A 24in. is going to feel like a significant step up because I’ve never had a 27.

How badly do you want a 27in. display?


Using an automotive analogy. I have been thinking of upgrading my car’s wheels from current 17in. to 18in. In all honesty it’s about looks because in real world terms the 18s will not offer me any truly tangible performance advantage over the 17s. Furthermore upgrading to larger wheels means I must also buy new tires to fit those 18in. wheels, effectively doubling the cost. OR I can upgrade to slightly wider 17in. wheels with a lower offset that makes the wheels poke outward a half inch more, thus giving my car a different and slightly more aggressive stance. And the further beauty of this option is being able to keep my existing tires (which I’m very satisfied with) that have very low mileage on them.

After a lot of wavering back and forth I’ve opted for the latter choice, sticking with 17s.

 

[macpro2000]

Thanks for clearing that up. I had assumed that the iMac had a 16:10 display as similar to the MacBooks.

I didnt consider the usable space within the two displays but this makes sense now. Quickly mocking up 2 boxes (using the 'looks like' dimensions mentioned above), I can see the real difference between the two screens.

I guess the question now is whether the increased price of the display is worth the premium over the iMac and the exclusion of a separate computer.

Been reading about Apple's Target Display mode and understand this was canned due to bandwidth limitations, but can't help but feel like this would have been the perfect solution!
View attachment 1974631

Can you add the 32 XDR to this??? Thanks!

 

[GSWForever8]

Go for the iMac. It provides plenty enough power for your needs. You might want to upgrade some specs though.

 

[glenthompson]

I went from a MBA + Thunderbolt Display to a 24” iMac while keeping the Air for my occasional travel. I find the 24” screen to be more comfortable for me. I don’t tend to have a lot of apps open at the same time. iCloud sync works well for me. Both computers have 1tb drives so I don’t have to depend on a fast internet connection when traveling.

My wife liked the size of my iMac so much she got one to replace her 5k iMac.

 

[Amethyst1]

Using an automotive analogy. [...]

...can be a bad thing when it comes to computers

 

[seb2195]

Thanks for all the input and the help. Seems that there are conflicting recommendations here and after all the reviews of the Studio Display have dropped, I am still on the fence. I think I will be going to the Apple Store over the weekend to see them both in person and decide which way to go.

 

[seb2195]

Can you add the 32 XDR to this??? Thanks!

Sure thing.

Here are the panels with the 2x scaling and dimensions:

Here is the mockup with the XDR to scale. It seems to sit a lot higher so I am assuming this is at the top of the height adjustment:

Finally, here they are with the same wallpaper:

 

[macpro2000]

Thank you Thank you! I think I’ll get an XDR for the middle and two studios with height for the sides. Then they can all be aligned nicely vertically.

 

[seb2195]

Thank you Thank you! I think I’ll get an XDR for the middle and two studios with height for the sides. Then they can all be aligned nicely vertically.

That is one amazing setup, please post some pics when you have them - would love to see this!