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.
mini paired with Hauwei's new 4.5K 3:2 monitor = iMac killer?
- Thread starter tornado99
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This. The MateView runs at 50 Hz when using its HDMI 2.0 port. MiniDisplayPort and USB-C give you 60 Hz.
"Looks like 2560×1707". (Same PPI as the 27" iMac running at "looks like 2560×1440".)
Hey everyone, registered for this post and I am sorry if it's somewhere in here - I tried to read through the 24 pages!
So I have tried to connect to the screen in another way, then the side usb-x port, as having a cable hanging from the side is driving me crazy! But whether a dp adapter, or HDMI adapter, I cannot scale it to full screen and end up with bars on top and bottom...
my HDMI adapter does just say "4k", I am assuming it's therefore missing the few lines of res to max out this monitor? Would anyone know how to connect to this from my MacBook pro from the mini DP, or HDMI? (maybe I just need a better hub/port ?) worth pointing out that when connecting through usb-c, I have no issues whatsoever!
I have a MacBook Pro (2018) 17" i7 with the Radeon Pro 555x.
thanks for the help in advance
peace!
So I have tried to connect to the screen in another way, then the side usb-x port, as having a cable hanging from the side is driving me crazy! But whether a dp adapter, or HDMI adapter, I cannot scale it to full screen and end up with bars on top and bottom...
my HDMI adapter does just say "4k", I am assuming it's therefore missing the few lines of res to max out this monitor? Would anyone know how to connect to this from my MacBook pro from the mini DP, or HDMI? (maybe I just need a better hub/port ?) worth pointing out that when connecting through usb-c, I have no issues whatsoever!
I have a MacBook Pro (2018) 17" i7 with the Radeon Pro 555x.
thanks for the help in advance
peace!
Well as far as I know there is no way to do it manually. You just connect the monitor to wi-fi and it will automatically download and install firmware updates as they come out.
Hah yeah I still do and even without vpn!
I hope macrumors is above doing savage things like blocking someone just because his ip belongs to some country which is considered objectionable.Hey everyone, registered for this post and I am sorry if it's somewhere in here - I tried to read through the 24 pages!
So I have tried to connect to the screen in another way, then the side usb-x port, as having a cable hanging from the side is driving me crazy! But whether a dp adapter, or HDMI adapter, I cannot scale it to full screen and end up with bars on top and bottom...
my HDMI adapter does just say "4k", I am assuming it's therefore missing the few lines of res to max out this monitor? Would anyone know how to connect to this from my MacBook pro from the mini DP, or HDMI? (maybe I just need a better hub/port ?) worth pointing out that when connecting through usb-c, I have no issues whatsoever!
I have a MacBook Pro (2018) 17" i7 with the Radeon Pro 555x.
thanks for the help in advance
peace!
HDMI adapters are a bit of a minefield. You need one that is specifically marketed as 4K/60Hz e.g. StarTech make one. Possibly you have a 4K/30Hz one?
thanks for the suggestion - perhaps, not sure as it's an older one and nothing really written on it! I ordered a usb-c into a mini dp cable - hopefully that's going to work as I cannot have these cables hanging from the side like this... ;]
Using the MateView's HDMI 2.0 input only provides 50 Hz refresh so DisplayPort or USB-C input is the way to go.
Last edited:
Definitely not using non-retina display as developer after getting my studio display but the aspect ratio sure is nice, wish Apple would have at least 16:10 displays in the future.
Define non-retina. As has been mentioned many times now, displays don't suddenly become blurry below 220 ppi. The difference between the Hauwei's 165 dpi and 220dpi is far less than the difference between 110 dpi and 165 dpi. It's very sharp for most people.
I run this screen with my mac pro 5.1 via a radeon VII display port to USB-C cable run's at 60HZ and is Pin sharp. also connected to this screen is my Mac mini i7 6 core via an Egpu 6900XT display port to mini display port at 60HZ again Pin sharp. only the HDMI from Mac mini shows at 50hz which i dont use anyway.
For the money you wont find a better screen, its colours are amazing. as for its USB ports connect a mouse in there and update the screen directly via firmware all available from the screen's built in software.
Mac OSX from mojave up wards no longer supports sub pixel AL so unless you have at least a 4k screen the fonts look furry an Apple way of wanting you to purchase one of there screens. Yes the apple screens are nice but so is the price, this screen offers the best option to apple in my opinion.
great screen and some good deals around and it does look cool with it.
For the money you wont find a better screen, its colours are amazing. as for its USB ports connect a mouse in there and update the screen directly via firmware all available from the screen's built in software.
Mac OSX from mojave up wards no longer supports sub pixel AL so unless you have at least a 4k screen the fonts look furry an Apple way of wanting you to purchase one of there screens. Yes the apple screens are nice but so is the price, this screen offers the best option to apple in my opinion.
great screen and some good deals around and it does look cool with it.
Is This Retina? - DPI/PPI Display Calculator
Calculate aspect ratio, DPI/PPI, and minimum Retina viewing distance.
www.designcompaniesranked.com
"Retina" is an Apple marketing term, but the initial justification came from the rule-of-thumb that the typical human eye can resolve features separated by an angle of 1 arc minute or more (which also matches the definition of 20/20 vision). It's an angular measure so doubling the viewing distance doubles the visible separation, That corresponds to 1/300" at a viewing distance of 12" ( i.e. >300ppi, hence the claim that the iPhone 4 onwards, held as you would hold a book, were "retina") but for other devices you have to guess what the typical viewing distance will be. Hence, the "Retina" MacBooks are only 220ppi, on the (reasonable) assumption that you're going to view them from further away than you would an iPhone (it's "retina" at over 16"). The 5k iMac is nearly the same at 218 PPI so it's comfortably retina given that you'll probably sit more than 16" away, giving you the freedom to lean in a bit.
The Mateview, at 164ppi, becomes "retina" at over 21 inches - which is certainly less than my preferred viewing distance, OTOH it doesn't give you the leeway to lean in closer without (heaven forefend!) noticing pixels.
But note that although "retina" does have a rational, mathematical basis it's still a rational, mathematical rule-of-thumb based on a shedload of simplifying assumptions. Plus, it has the same basis as 20/20 vision which is only a "norm" - plenty of people have better or worse than 20/20 vision. It doesn't mean "nobody can see pixels" - but as you move beyond the "retina" limit fewer and fewer people will notice pixelisation effects.
As far as MacOS is concerned the Mateview is treated as a retina display because it offers the HiDPI and fractional scaling modes that only work on a high-DPI display, and defaults to a HiDPI mode with a 2x user interface scale (which some people find makes dialogs, menus, icons etc. bit "large" but it's still full, native 4k sharpness).
(Long diatribe on 4k screen resolution choices - mainlty regular 16:9, not Mateview here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/psa-4k-display-resolutions.2345906/?post=31127104#post-31127104)
What I'm finding with my Mateviews is that the default "2x" mode is perfect for me - helped considerably by the extra 400 pixel high band of real estate you get c.f. a 27" display. Dialogues etc. are a bit big, but I've never encountered one which doesn't fit (that would be bad design anyway) and what people seem to gloss over when complaining about this mode is that it doesn't affect the content in any application that has a zoom function or lets you set the font size in the editor.
E.g. with the default 2x mode, in VS code you can go full screen, set the font size to 8px and get 100 lines of code, perfectly sharp, with space for 3 side-by-side files. Going to the dreaded "looks like 2560x1440" mode (actually "looks like 2560x1707" on a 3:2 MateView) gives about 135 lines because the '8px' text is smaller, but well out of my comfort zone in terms of being comfortable to read - but that's my eyeballs - if I look closely the text is perfectly clear. By the time I've adjusted the font size to suit I've only gained a few lines over "default" mode.
Before reaching for the capitalist conspiracy theories:
Sub-pixel anti-aliasing has to take account of the actual arrangement of the individual red, green and blue sub-pixels on the screen to, effectively, increase the native resolution & relies on the Mac tweaking the individual R, G and B values of each pixel. One reason for dropping it as the default could be that there are an increasing number of different sub-pixel arrangements turning up on different display technologies, wide gamut, HDR etc. (see: https://geometrian.com/programming/reference/subpixelzoo/index.php) which Apple would have to recognise and support. Many displays now let you choose different colour gamuts or temperatures (unknown to the OS) which would surely mess up those carefully tweaked RGB values, as could any 'smart' picture improvement. Subpixel antialiasing could also be responsible for the mess that you get when a display ends up running in YCbCr mode instead of RGB.
So it may be that subpixel anti-aliasing was just getting too complicated to support on anything other than internal Mac displays where the subpixel layout was known and the display wasn't trying to be smart on its own (and Macs are now all "retina" and probably don't need SPAA).
Well its not sharp enough for me as I write and read 12h a day and the fact that its matte also makes it a non starter, the quality of the image on glossy screen is just so much better and the text is much sharper.
The problem is not everyone can afford Apple screens or 4k screen's, retina or not, if you buy a Mac mini your unlikely to purchase a 2k Mac screen, you might want to plug it into your existing screen you had for your PC at 1440P say. then the text on OSX looks rubbish. to a new Mac user they would see the difference straight away. might even put them off there new Mac mini saying text looks blurry.
Boot your Mac mini in bootcamp windows and your text is sharp and clear at 1440p in Mac OSX unless you run a 4K screen plus the text looks awful and furry. if windows can do it, why can't Mac OSX or is it plain marketing on Apple's behalf.
High Sierra looks fine, apple should have the sub-pixel-aliasing switchable for non retina screen's in all version's of Mac OSX.
I'm a bit confused what you're basing that on. Have you actually seen a Mateview in person?
You do realise that 220dpi 'Retina' is not based on a specific limit of the human eye, which is actually around 170-190dpi depending on the person. Apple just went with that number as it's double 110dpi so the OS X GUI would have the same scale.
It's more about the scaling (2x exactly at 5k gives 1440p screen size) for me and the fact that it's glossy, maybe i was confused about the term retina. I did not see MateView in person but I believe it shouldn't be too different from other 27 inch 4k displays?
Absolutely agree. I have a 24 inch 2560x1440 i.e. 122 dpi '2K' monitor connected to a Linux computer at work. Since the cleartype patents expired Linux now uses the same subpixel text antialiasing as windows. Text looks great on this screen, very sharp and comfortable to work with. Of couse a 4K screen with no subpixel AA does look sharper, but not massively. Color AA essentially gives you 3x the pixels to work with, although because you need to filter to avoid fringes, you get more like 1.25-1.5x the resolution of grayscale AA.
A lot of the problem is that Apple basically dumped subpixel AA so OS X only looks good on very high pixel density screens.
Last edited:
The Mateview isn't matte in the same way as the awful grainy IPS displays that were common a few years ago. It's more like a low haze semi-gloss finish. Although, yes, not as good as a fully laminated zero air gap panel would be.
This just in: £1600 5k Apple Studio Display may be sharper than £500 4k Huawei.
Matte vs. glossy is very much a love/hate thing depending on how you tolerate visible reflections vs. contrast/saturation reduced by scattered light. I've seen plenty of posts from people who regard a matte screen as a must-have. I'd actually preferred glossy to the matte Mateview, provided it had the same sort of anti-glare coating as the iMac (and, presumably, Studio Display) - and I don't mean the 'nanotexture' thing, the regular model, 2017 and on, added an optical coating that reduces reflectivity.
Maybe - but it's against Nanny Apple's religion to offer that level of configuration. Has been the case since the 1980s where they didn't even let you change the resolution of the display, because everybody would want 1 pixel to equal 1 point... I did suggest a list of reasons why sub-pixel anti-aliassing might cause problems, and SPAA-gone-wrong can look atrocious.
Personally, I've been using a 1920x1200 screen as a secondary display for ages and didn't notice a big change between Mojave and earlier. I'm not tying to dispute that there is a difference, but it certainly hasn't become unusable.
===========================
OK, so, as for the thread in general, I'm now using a pair of Mateviews connected to a Mac Studio (not a Mini - but it was this thread that got me interested in the Mateview) and overall, I'm really happy.
The Mateview is the same phsyical width as a typical 27", same pixel density as a 27" 4k, but is 2.45"/400 pixels taller - As I've said earlier, I personally find that the extra space compensates for the slightly large furniture/menus in default 2x UI HiDPI mode, which makes the arguments about fractional scaling moot. Of course, it only takes a few seconds to switch mode for a particular job.
But yes - coming from a 5k iMac, the image does have less "pop" although I'm not sure how that translates into objective facts when it comes to photo editing, colour accuracy etc. - but since you can't get a £1600 5k display bundled with a £1800 iMac any more and I paid a total of £900 for my two Mateviews, let's be reasonable.
As noted above, personally I'd have preferred a good glossy finish and like any matte display, bright, direct sunlight will completely wash out the image - whereas a glossy screen if you're lucky will reflect it to the side and still be usable. However, the real solution to that is to fix your work environment (maybe easier said than done, but it's still what's gotta be done). As matte coatings go, though, it's pretty good and isn't sparkly or grainy like some I've used.
List of other "cons" (remember to keep looking back at the price tag while you read these):
1. As noted elsewhere, the HDMI input only runs up to 50Hz, for whatever reason. Not a biggie on a Studio where you're probably going to run everything from USB-C, but AFAIK on a Mini with two displays, one of them has to be via HDMI (and you've only got 2 USB-C ports anyway) so be warned. 50Hz vs. 60Hz isn't exactly night & day, though - maybe a bit more cursor submarining or tearing when you drag windows - but it would be disappointing on a primary monitor.
2. After being powered off, the displays don't always auto-detect the input signal and have to be manually switched to USB-C mode (as far as I can tell, this is the display's fault, not the Mac) - my current working theory is that after powering on at the wall you have to let the displays run through their full start-up sequence and get to the colourful 'no signal' screen before switching on the Mac. I'll continue to experiment - this is annoying but, in perspective, at worst it's 10 seconds wasted at the start of the day. Seems a common issue with third party displays on Mac.
3. There are a few of the displays on-screen configuration options - particularly configuring WiFi - for which you really need to connect a wired or pair a bluetooth mouse to the monitor (yes, if your Mac is connected via USB-C it will then "see" bluetooth devices paired with the display, but I'm really not sure how that would play out with Magic keyboards/mice/trackpads). If you're thinking "Wait, what, the monitor has WiFi and Bluetooth?" and the idea of allowing your display to download and install firmware updates makes you throw up in your mouth a little bit this is probably a non-issue for you as the display will work just fine without being hooked up to your WiFi (which I think is the only step that really needs a mouse). If you connect to WiFi you can "project" video to the display from certain Android phones and Windows PCs. At worst you'll need the mouse very infrequently. If you use a wired keyboard and/or wired mouse/logitech dongle then odds are you'll connect them to the displays USB hubs anyway.
4. The "touch bar" (no, not that touch bar) takes a bit of getting used to but can be quite effective - esp. once you've discovered that the display ships with transparent tape around the bezel which covers up the touch sensor...
5. Yeah, the USB-C video input on the side of the stand is weird for a desktop config - it would make sense if you were using this as a display/charging dock for a laptop, though.
6. There's a USB-C to USB-C cable in the box suitable for connecting to a Mac. No HDMI cable. There is a Mini-to-full-size DisplayPort cable but the MiniDP is needed for the display end so you'll need a mini-to-mini cable for an old MiniDP/TB1/2 Mac.
7. The built in speaker is definitely a speaker. It is definitely built-in.It's a toss-up whether it is better or worse than the speaker built in to your Mac Mini or Studio. I believe that there's a mic as well. Least said, soonest mended.
...and full disclosure for those of us who have been throwing rotten tomatoes at the Studio Display:
The display has an external power brick (minus) with a USB-C connection to the rear of the display (plus) and the mains cable can be unplugged from the power brick (plus) which is a virtual copy of a MacBook power brick. I don't think a MacBook mains cable would work (best not to try) but like a MacBook power supply a regular figure-8 connector would.
The display has a really good range of height adjustment (double plus) and reasonable tilt. For swivel you turn the whole stand (neutral). It looks like it ought to pivot to portrait mode, but it doesn't.
Stand is not removable (all the sockets are in it), no VESA possibility. (minus).
You can get 3 for the price of a Studio Display and have enough change for a decent webcam. (plus)
Probably because of HDMI 2.0’s 600 MHz pixel clock limit (unless you do something to the colours IIRC). The MateView’s 60Hz mode is 631.75 MHz.
It's like a 27" 4k display with a couple of inches height of extra screen area tacked on the bottom.
No.
You can plug a wired mouse in or pair a bluetooth mouse with the monitor & you get an on-screen keyboard to set up the WiFi password (you can connect a keyboard as well if you like).
Thanks I did it and it display a message about a possible update but can't understand if it is downloading or what
After the message disappear I did not get any other info
I wouldn’t worry about firmware upgrades unless you actually have a problem. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
If you’re not going to use the facility to stream from Android or Windows I’d leave the WiFi disconnected. It’s certainly not what I bought it for.
