Monitor recommendation - 4k, 5k and what size?

[maflynn]

Long story short, the way macos handles scaling/resolution, is such that my 1440p monitor is not working optimally for me under macos. While I would love to get a Studio Display, its hard to justify the price. There's also a level of ignorance, where if I can get more info on how/why macos handles scaling - that would be beneficial.


Current setup: An LG ultra-wide 1440p monitor, in windows I have it set at 1440x1440 with 125% scaling. Texts, UI objects are dead on sharp, no fuzziness. In macOS, the native resolution is too small to use effectually, my only option is to knock it down to 2560x1080 and things are just too fuzzy. Not liking the experience.

I was leaning towards a 27" 5k monitor, because there was some info about macos and 5k monitors is the pixel density is such that 1/2 of 5k is 1440p so macos scales 1440p with crisp/sharp texts and UI elements. Something about how 2 physical pixels make up 1 logical pixel and the higher density of 5k makes ensures excellent rendering at 1440p

If I choose a 4k, what size monitor would work best then 27? 32? If 5k is going to look great at 1440p, does that mean 4k has to be run at 1080p to look nice?

Any links to explain how macos handles scaling?

Finally, what 5k and 4k monitors would you recommend? The LG 5k is nearly the same price of Apple's studio display so I don't see any reason to choose that, other then I've been really happy with my current LG monitor. I see Asus Proart 5k monitor is an option that is under a 1,000 and its generally positively reviewed. For 4k, I'm unsure what size, though I'll probably be looking at LG

 

[txmike418]

Long story short, the way macos handles scaling/resolution, is such that my 1440p monitor is not working optimally for me under macos. While I would love to get a Studio Display, its hard to justify the price. There's also a level of ignorance, where if I can get more info on how/why macos handles scaling - that would be beneficial.


Current setup: An LG ultra-wide 1440p monitor, in windows I have it set at 1440x1440 with 125% scaling. Texts, UI objects are dead on sharp, no fuzziness. In macOS, the native resolution is too small to use effectually, my only option is to knock it down to 2560x1080 and things are just too fuzzy. Not liking the experience.

I was leaning towards a 27" 5k monitor, because there was some info about macos and 5k monitors is the pixel density is such that 1/2 of 5k is 1440p so macos scales 1440p with crisp/sharp texts and UI elements. Something about how 2 physical pixels make up 1 logical pixel and the higher density of 5k makes ensures excellent rendering at 1440p

If I choose a 4k, what size monitor would work best then 27? 32? If 5k is going to look great at 1440p, does that mean 4k has to be run at 1080p to look nice?

Any links to explain how macos handles scaling?

Finally, what 5k and 4k monitors would you recommend? The LG 5k is nearly the same price of Apple's studio display so I don't see any reason to choose that, other then I've been really happy with my current LG monitor. I see Asus Proart 5k monitor is an option that is under a 1,000 and its generally positively reviewed. For 4k, I'm unsure what size, though I'll probably be looking at LG

The Dell S2725QC has great specs for a $320 4K 27” monitor, others here have reviewed it. It might be worth researching it.. I have the previous model and am pleased, but really wanting to get this one for the HDMI 2.1 120hz capability..

Dell 27 Plus 4K USB-C Monitor - S2725QC | Dell USA

Shop the Dell 27 inch 4K USB-C Monitor with AMD FreeSync Premium, 120Hz refresh rate, dual 5W speakers, and 4-star eye comfort.

www.dell.com

Good luck 👍🏻

 

[Fishrrman]

maflynn wrote:
"I was leaning towards a 27" 5k monitor, because there was some info about macos and 5k monitors is the pixel density is such that 1/2 of 5k is 1440p so macos scales 1440p with crisp/sharp texts and UI elements."

There aren't any.
At least... at the moment.

Acer is supposedly releasing one later this year:

New Monitors In 2025: What To Expect [Professional, Gaming]

Find out what LG, Samsung, and AU Optronics panel manufacturers have in store for us in 2025. There are some exciting models coming up!

www.displayninja.com

I'm watching and waiting with interest.
Perhaps there will be a few more to appear after this one, but that may take a while.

 

[enc0re]

Option 1: download BetterDisplay. The free version should be enough for your needs. Turn on the button for HiDPI and use the slider to set your logical resolution to 2560x1080. This will give you the HiDPI assets scaled to your preferred resolution and maybe you will be happy.

Option 2: get a HiDPI display. If you have the eyes for it, you may like this better than what you are currently experiencing in Windows at 125%. Which one to get depends on your budget:

4K: LG 24" UltraFine 4k. Exactly that one. Is discontinued but can be found cheap on eBay etc.
5K: I recommend hold until Apple updates the Studio Display. If you want to buy now, either the Studio Display, Asus ProArt 5K to save some money, or Kuycon 5K if you are willing to gamble getting great value for money but uncertain direct-from-China support. Buy from ClickClack.io not Kuycon.us. Kuycon.us is not an authorized retailer.

 

[maflynn]

Option 1: download BetterDisplay. The free version should be enough for your needs. Turn on the button for HiDPI and use the slider to set your logical resolution to 2560x1080. This will give you the HiDPI assets scaled to your preferred resolution and maybe you will be happy.

I tried that already, but maybe I'll revisit that once more.

if you are willing to gamble getting great value for money but uncertain direct-from-China support. Buy from ClickClack.io not Kuycon.us. Kuycon.us is not an authorized retailer.

That one looks interesting, so you're saying is, this could be a good deal, but given its a chinese import, don't hold your breath on support.

 

[maflynn]

Option 1: download BetterDisplay. The free version should be enough for your needs. Turn on the button for HiDPI and use the slider to set your logical resolution to 2560x1080. This will give you the HiDPI assets scaled to your preferred resolution and maybe you will be happy.

I've been retrying BetterDisplay, and I think this may be a good temporary solution. 2560x1080 is not HiDPI for my monitor but there are other resolutions that are. I'm running a resolution that is, and its producing a better output, which is helping - no more eyestrain or headaches.

I'm still going to hit my local Microcenter tomorrow and see what options I have. Also, I've been using the free version of BetterDisplay, I'll pay for the pro version, partly for the other features unlocked but also to reward the developer for this application.

Thanks for the suggestion

 

[Dark-Signature]

I was leaning towards a 27" 5k monitor, because there was some info about macos and 5k monitors is the pixel density is such that 1/2 of 5k is 1440p so macos scales 1440p with crisp/sharp texts and UI elements. Something about how 2 physical pixels make up 1 logical pixel and the higher density of 5k makes ensures excellent rendering at 1440p

It's not half the pixels, but a quarter of the pixels when you compare a 2560x1440 (2K - 2.5K) monitor to a 5120x2880 (true 5K) monitor on a 27" screen!

To answer your question briefly: You have to hit the right “grid” to really have a sharp display of text! The answer is: You can use any monitor that offers ~220PPI. The only thing that varies then is the available working area.

There are/were 24“ monitors with 218 PPI, a few more 27” monitors with 218 PPI, and now also 32" monitors with ~218 PPI. If you then select the scaling in macOS so that the font is not too tiny but is still displayed absolutely sharply (usually 1/4 of the physical screen resolution or 200% scaling in Windows), you have a perfect working environment!


Unfortunately, not all users understand this, because the point is that such monitors always cost a little more, and the average user tends to look at the price and then argue that, at a certain distance between the eye and the screen surface, the resolution of the screen is no longer that important. WRONG! Because with this argument, you could have stuck with Full HD, but reality shows that users definitely want to use resolutions higher than 1920x1080 and are very satisfied with them.

Some of us have already moved on with our own requirements and love working at 6144x3456 on a 32" screen, which is simply awesome (at 200% scaling), because then the screen looks as brilliant as on a smartphone, only you have much, much more space to work!

 

[maflynn]

Here's one video that helps explain macos scaling. I knew there was something about 2 pixels to 1. He explains it better. In macOS the default image of a 4k display is 1080p, and for 5k its 1440p and that helps explain why my 1440p monitor does a poor job when scaling down to 1080p because its not

 

[EugW]

4K at 32” (138 ppi) looks bad for text at usual desktop seating distances.

4K at 27” (164 ppi) looks reasonably decent even if you don’t use 2X scaling, at least if you sit at 21” or further away from the screen. Don’t knock it until you try it.

However, I would recommend a 5K 27” (218 ppi) if you can afford it. It will look good at any reasonable seating distance. It doesn’t need to be 2X scaled to look good. 2X scaled is slightly better if you look closely but most people won’t even notice the difference at usual desktop seating distances. Apple doesn’t even use 2X scaling on all its own laptops and nobody ever complains about it.

In my case though I am getting a 6K 31.5” (224 ppi). I find 27” monitors too narrow these days.

Actually I’d be OK with 5K 31.5” (186 ppi) and there is one coming from Acer with a 165 Hz refresh rate, but it is looking like it won’t come out until 2026 and I can’t be bothered to wait, esp. since it’s designed as a gaming monitor. I also don’t care much about the refresh rate as long as it’s at least 60 Hz.

 

[Fishrrman]

Eug wrote:
"However, I would recommend a 5K 27” (218 ppi) if you can afford it. It will look good at any reasonable seating distance."

No good for me.
This was the standard resolution of the 27" iMac (looks like 1440p).
Everything was TOO SMALL for my old eyes at normal view distance.

For years I used a 27" 2k display (Viewsonic) and was modestly happy with it, running at 1080p. I normally sit around 32" away from the display.

When it came time to replace it, I got the Dell Ultrasharp I'm using right now. I started off with the (Mac OS) default resolution "looks like 1080p" (HiDPI). It looks great, clean and sharp.

However, I experimented with BetterDisplay, and found that just one "notch" higher in resolution for me (2048x1152) looks just as good, with a little more "real estate". Still sharp and clear.

Folks with aging or weakened eyesight will often find that 27" 5k in "looks like 1440p" will yield text that is too small at normal sizes. I have a friend who got a 2017 5k iMac and from day one ran it in "lower resolution" (looks like 1080p) due to his eyesight. More recently, he got an m2pro Mini and a Dell 4k display, and uses that in 1080p and seems happy with it that way.

It's "an individual thing", and no one resolution is "frozen in stone" for all the users out there...

 

[EugW]

Eug wrote:
"However, I would recommend a 5K 27” (218 ppi) if you can afford it. It will look good at any reasonable seating distance."

No good for me.
This was the standard resolution of the 27" iMac (looks like 1440p).
Everything was TOO SMALL for my old eyes at normal view distance.

For years I used a 27" 2k display (Viewsonic) and was modestly happy with it, running at 1080p. I normally sit around 32" away from the display.

When it came time to replace it, I got the Dell Ultrasharp I'm using right now. I started off with the (Mac OS) default resolution "looks like 1080p" (HiDPI). It looks great, clean and sharp.

However, I experimented with BetterDisplay, and found that just one "notch" higher in resolution for me (2048x1152) looks just as good, with a little more "real estate". Still sharp and clear.

Folks with aging or weakened eyesight will often find that 27" 5k in "looks like 1440p" will yield text that is too small at normal sizes. I have a friend who got a 2017 5k iMac and from day one ran it in "lower resolution" (looks like 1080p) due to his eyesight. More recently, he got an m2pro Mini and a Dell 4k display, and uses that in 1080p and seems happy with it that way.

It's "an individual thing", and no one resolution is "frozen in stone" for all the users out there...

I never said you need to run at 2X scaling on that monitor. A 5K 27” running at any of those resolutions looks great. Text is crisp. Furthermore, multiple alternate resolutions are available natively in macOS, like 2048x1152 and 2304x1296. You don’t need Better Display for that.

I liked 2304x1296 in terms of text size on a 27” monitor, but it’s a little cramped horizontally. These days I just use 2560x1440 (or the equivalent 2560x1536 on my 3:2 4K monitor) but increase the font size in Safari to compensate.

In order to give myself more space horizontally, I just ordered an 6K 6144x3456 31.5” monitor, and will run at the default 2X scaled 3072x1728, but will similarly increase font sizing in Safari to compensate.

 

[Dark-Signature]

Eug wrote:
"However, I would recommend a 5K 27” (218 ppi) if you can afford it. It will look good at any reasonable seating distance."

No good for me.
This was the standard resolution of the 27" iMac (looks like 1440p).
Everything was TOO SMALL for my old eyes at normal view distance.

For years I used a 27" 2k display (Viewsonic) and was modestly happy with it, running at 1080p. I normally sit around 32" away from the display.

When it came time to replace it, I got the Dell Ultrasharp I'm using right now. I started off with the (Mac OS) default resolution "looks like 1080p" (HiDPI). It looks great, clean and sharp.

However, I experimented with BetterDisplay, and found that just one "notch" higher in resolution for me (2048x1152) looks just as good, with a little more "real estate". Still sharp and clear.

Folks with aging or weakened eyesight will often find that 27" 5k in "looks like 1440p" will yield text that is too small at normal sizes. I have a friend who got a 2017 5k iMac and from day one ran it in "lower resolution" (looks like 1080p) due to his eyesight. More recently, he got an m2pro Mini and a Dell 4k display, and uses that in 1080p and seems happy with it that way.

It's "an individual thing", and no one resolution is "frozen in stone" for all the users out there...

Do you or the friend you mentioned wear computer glasses? They easily restore your vision to 110% and allow you to enjoy the full brilliance of a high-DPI monitor.

 

[EugW]

Do you or the friend you mentioned wear computer glasses? They easily restore your vision to 110% and allow you to enjoy the full brilliance of a high-DPI monitor.

Yes and no. Often with presbyopia even with office glasses, one cannot sit too close, which means a seating distance of around 20-25 inches or so. The further away from the screen the more comfortable one may be (up to a point), but also the smaller the fonts may look. In this context having somewhat larger text helps. Having a high DPI screen with office glasses or some computer glasses doesn’t inherently solve the problem.

Regarding text sizing, I think Apple had it right with the 30” Cinema HD Display for my usage, at about 100 ppi. A modern Retinafied version of that would be 200 ppi, which would correspond to a 5K screen at just under 30”.

 

[Fishrrman]

dark wrote:
"Do you or the friend you mentioned wear computer glasses?"

The friend actually has no vision in one eye, and his other one that still sees is almost 80 years old.

There comes a point in life where "glasses" aren't a lot of help any more.
But simply by making text LARGER, it makes it easier to read for folks with problems...