Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
good to hear that sharpness is similar to a 24" 4K.
Which is to say, there's definitely a difference between the MateView scaled to 2560×1707 and the 5120×2880 monitor running at pixel-perfect 2560×1440 which is sitting next to it ;) I've already fallen in love with its aspect ratio though (I hate 16:9!) so this is a small price to pay for finally having a monitor that does it right!

How about 10-bit colour modes? The Mateview can do 10bit 60Hz at 3600x2400, and of course you'd want a scaled resolution that works well with that.
I'm running 3840×2560 8 bit per colour and don't see the 3600×2400 mode in the Displays preference pane (not by Alt-clicking "Scaled" and not by enabling low resolution modes either). macOS automatically uses the highest resolution as base for the scaling I think and you need to fumble around with the EDID (i.e. play with SwitchResX) to override that.

Sadly, System Information doesn't show any reliable information regarding 8 or 10 bit per colour. It says „30-bit“ for all my displays even though two of them are 8 bit per colour.
 
Last edited:
Which is to say, there's definitely a difference between the MateView scaled to 2560×1707 and the 5120×2880 monitor running at pixel-perfect 2560×1440 which is sitting next to it ;) I've already fallen in love with its aspect ratio though (I hate 16:9!) so this is a small price to pay for finally having a monitor that does it right!


I'm running 3840×2560 8 bit per colour and don't see the 3600×2400 mode in the Displays preference pane (not by Alt-clicking "Scaled" and not by enabling low resolution modes either). macOS automatically uses the highest resolution as base for the scaling I think and you need to fumble around with the EDID (i.e. play with SwitchResX) to override that.

Sadly, System Information doesn't show any reliable information regarding 8 or 10 bit per colour. It says „30-bit“ for all my displays even though two of them are 8 bit per colour.
I share your hatred for 16x9. It is disgusting.
 
While I love the pairing, the 24" iMac is probably not the greatest comparison in this case since it's targeted toward consumers rather than prosumers.

If you had the current 27" iMac, then I would agree it could be a better deal.

The new Mac mini smokes my i7 model, even with the added eGPU and 32GB of RAM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave

Another 3:2 beast…

Edit: seems the site is wrong. That’s a 16:9 monitor.
 
Last edited:

Another 3:2 beast…

I am LOVING seeing these 3:2 options!!!

When/where will that Iiyama be for sale?

The ability to remove the stand and VESA mount this one is a game changer for me and fully has my attention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
It is on the Hauwei Germany website already. I imagine it will make its way to the UK in the next week or so. They sold their MateBook laptops on Amazon UK so imagine they will do the same.


No clue on panel manufacturer, could be an exclusive for Hauwei like the iMac panels are for Apple. At a guess BOE.



Because working on code/documents vertical real estate is extremely useful to avoid scrolling too much. The iMac 4.5K may be exquisitely sharp, but it's still a 16:9 display. Load up an article on the New York Times, and you'll make almost the same number of scroll movements as a $100 1080p display.

Yes, because only coders and readers are the only people using computers.
The physical beauty and clean desk area, combined with the 16:6 is beautiful for multiple windows and of better use, IMO, for creatives. Especially at desk-working distance. The other monitor seems much too tall.
 
I am LOVING seeing these 3:2 options!!!

When/where will that Iiyama be for sale?

The ability to remove the stand and VESA mount this one is a game changer for me and fully has my attention.

Looks like Iiyama cheaped out on the backlight. I don't think 300 cd/m^2 is really enough for such a large screen.
 
Got this display yesterday

- corners and sides are dimmer and unfortunately this is visible with eye. Is that huge problem? I don't know, I'm not a graphics designer / display expert and this does not look very bad to me IMHO
- if you scale display to values other than 1x/2x than you can see blurred fonts if you look closely. With 2x scaling UI is a bit too big IMO, 5k display would be awesome for that scaling. I'm trying to get used to 2x scaling.
- I'm getting full resolution with USB-C cable (4k+/60Hz without HDR, but it was mentioned here before). For some reason I can't get 4k+/50Hz or 4k (not plus)/60Hz with HDMI, I will investigate it later
- generally display is really beautiful and matches MacBook / other Apple accessories very well
- back of the display is plastic, not aluminium (stand and frame of display is aluminium). Quality is not highest here. But that's reasonable as this display is 10x cheaper than XDR
- stand is getting hot when I use USB-C (I haven't tried checking it after using HDMI/DP)
- quality of screen is a bit worse than MacBook one
- sound quality is way worse than MacBook one, but I guess it was expected :)
- touchbar on bottom of the display is very creative idea, it works well, I like it
- 3:2 ratio is awesome for coding / browsing websites

I got this display for around 500$ (with taxes) with pre-order promotion on Huawei Store. But I think this promotion is not available in US.

IMG_1611.jpg
 
- if you scale display to values other than 1x/2x than you can see blurred fonts if you look closely. With 2x scaling UI is a bit too big IMO, 5k display would be awesome for that scaling. I'm trying to get used to 2x scaling.

Part of the blame for this is the way in which OS X handles fractional scaling. Each app is told to render all GUI elements to a framebuffer which is double the resolution you want (supersampling). Then OS X instructs the GPU to scale this down *as a single image* to fit the physical pixels of the display. Linux Gnome does the same thing. This can lead to all sorts of scaling artifacts if you don't divide by 2 in the second step.

Linux KDE handles all elements separately. So text is rendered directly to the physical pixels of your display, thus avoiding fractional scaling artifacts.

Hopefully when I get my hands on this monitor I can compare Linux fonts vs OS X.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
Part of the blame for this is the way in which OS X handles fractional scaling. Each app is told to render all elements to a framebuffer which is double the resolution you want (supersampling). Then OS X instructs the GPU to scale this down *as a single image* to fit the physical pixels of the display. Linux Gnome does the same thing. This can lead to all sorts of scaling artifacts if you don't divide by 2 in the second step.

Linux KDE handles all elements separately. So text is rendered directly to the physical pixels of your display, thus avoiding fractional scaling artifacts.

Hopefully when I get my hands on this monitor I can compare Linux fonts vs OS X.
I think the same goes to Gnome on Wayland when you have Wayland-native apps. I haven't used it for a year and year ago there were not many applications build on Wayland :/
 
Last edited:
- if you scale display to values other than 1x/2x than you can see blurred fonts if you look closely. With 2x scaling UI is a bit too big IMO, 5k display would be awesome for that scaling. I'm trying to get used to 2x scaling.
I'm using scaled "looks like" resolution of 3360x2240 (it is next to the original one) and I can't see any noticeable blurring and difference in comparison with MBP's screen. Everything looks just perfect, though as I've already mentioned I'm not a designer.
Matter of fact most (if not all) modern Mac displays out of the box don't follow the rule of 2х retina scaling. E.g. MBP 15" which has an original resolution of 2880x1800 comes with a "looks like' scaled resolution of 1680x1050 set by default.
 
BTW here's a new review! This guy bought 2 of them at once for coding and at 23:16 he shows a working HDR setting. I've contacted him, he sad he is using Hackintosh with Radeon RX 580 and running Catalina :)

 
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
For some reason I can't get 4k+/50Hz or 4k (not plus)/60Hz with HDMI, I will investigate it later
Does your USB-C to HDMI adapter or dock support HDMI 2.0 or higher? If it doesn't, that explains it.

- touchbar on bottom of the display is very creative idea, it works well, I like it
It's cool yep, but I wish that just swiping over it would adjust the screen's brightness, not the volume of the speakers I don't use anyway.

Matter of fact most (if not all) modern Mac displays out of the box don't follow the rule of 2х retina scaling. E.g. MBP 15" which has an original resolution of 2880x1800 comes with a "looks like' scaled resolution of 1680x1050 set by default.
This only applies to MacBooks, not to iMacs (those are set pixel-perfect). And the scaling problems aren't as apparent on e.g. the MBP because its screen has a higher PPI (227) compared to the MateView's 164. I can definitely see a difference between pixel-perfect and scaled on the MateView.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jakmac
Does your USB-C to HDMI adapter or dock support HDMI 2.0 or higher? If it doesn't, that explains it.
Good point, it turned out that it does not support HDMI 2.0 :)

It's cool yep, but I wish that just swiping over it would adjust the screen's brightness, not the volume of the speakers I don't use anyway.
That's true. I had to change it like three times during a day. I miss auto-brightness that my MacBook have
 
Does anyone know what DDC/CI support the Mateview has? You would be able to change the brightness that way without even touching the monitor. [DDC/CI is basically sending the monitor commands over DP or HDMI]

If you install apps like these the Mateview should just show up if supported:


 
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
This only applies to MacBooks, not to iMacs (those are set pixel-perfect). And the scaling problems aren't as apparent on e.g. the MBP because its screen has a higher PPI (227) compared to the MateView's 164. I can definitely see a difference between pixel-perfect and scaled on the MateView.
Yeah, I forgot that iMacs differ from MacBooks in this matter! Anyways as for me I had no complaints even about the EW3280U's 32" 4K uhd screen with PPI of just 138 - this still looks good and this is definitely a huge step from 27" qhd (2560x1440) Samsung I've been using during last 6 years. No need to say that in this terms MateView is just 100% awesome and its resolution is more than enough for almost anyone, especially for those who are not so deeply immersed in graphics design.
Does anyone know what DDC/CI support the Mateview has? You would be able to change the brightness that way without even touching the monitor. [DDC/CI is basically sending the monitor commands over DP or HDMI]

If you install apps like these the Mateview should just show up if supported:


It's cool yep, but I wish that just swiping over it would adjust the screen's brightness, not the volume of the speakers I don't use anyway.
Yep, it works just perfect, forgot to mention this thing!
I've been using Monitor Control for several years now and there is no problem using it with MateView (both brightness and sound can be adjusted). Btw recently this app also gained m1 support. IMHO anyone using an external monitor should definitely use it.

I miss auto-brightness that my MacBook have
However True Tone feature works with any external monitor including MateView :)
 
Last edited:

Another 3:2 beast…
And this one can actually be used with a VESA mount. :D
 
Apparently you can configure the Mateview from your phone with this app:


Not sure if it does anything that you can't do from the OSD, but perhaps you could turn the brightness up/down from your sofa/bed!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Moonjumper
I've also had a look at the display's EDID when connected via HDMI. Compared to DisplayPort, there are no 2560×1440 60Hz or 3840×2560 30Hz modes. 3600×2400 30Hz is new.

ResolutionRefresh RatePixel Clock
3840 × 256049.981 Hz544.96 MHz
3600 × 240059.999 Hz557.00 MHz
3600 × 240029.994 Hz274.50 MHz
3000 × 200059.999 Hz390.00 MHz
2160 × 144059.955 Hz206.00 MHz
 
Can the display only be powered by Thunderbolt? If so, how would that work alongside a computer without Thunderbolt ? (let’s say cMP 5,1).
 
Can the display only be powered by Thunderbolt? If so, how would that work alongside a computer without Thunderbolt ? (let’s say cMP 5,1).
This is not a Thunderbolt display. It’s plain old DisplayPort 1.2/1.4 or HDMI 2.0.
 
By ‘powered by thunderbolt’ I mean current/electricity/juice.. power to turn the display on.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.