New Mac Mini - Hard Time Deciding on Monitor

[Friscochris]

Just purchased a M1 16gb Mini, which is my first mac desktop. I also added Final Cut Pro so that I can finally edit all the videos I’ve been saving and wanting to do something with. Hoping the pros here can help me with monitor selection based on my needs.

The mini will be a standard use desktop: Kids school work, browsing of the internet, watching a movie/tv from time to time, listening to music, but is mostly for editing video, which will be in 4k now that I have a 4k gopro. I am a beginner w/ FCP, so I doubly I’ll be doing much “power using” for a while.

I’d love the latest, greatest, and baddest TB3 4k monitor, but I’m on a <$300 budget. Problem is 4k monitors are right at the edge of that budget and are very basic it seems like. It got me wondering if I even need a 4k monitor for what I’ll be doing? My guess is no less than 24”, and of course the bigger the better.

Suggestions on whether or not I should go 4k or find a very good IPS (2k/1080P) monitor for half my budget? What monitors would you all recommend in 4k that meets my budget, and the same in IPS? I feel like with IPS I could get a lot more bang for buck.

I’m a n00b with monitor selection and the research is starting to become tiresome. I appreciate any help I can get.

 

[njvm]

There are a heap of threads on this forum on this topic - probably best to look at them. For instance:

Any problem-free monitor suggestions for the Mac Mini M1?

Hi. Any problem-free monitor suggestions for the Mac Mini M1? (low budget if possible) The YPBPR problem scares me. model I want: Dell U2520D I am open to suggestions.

forums.macrumors.com

 

[Friscochris]

There are a heap of threads on this forum on this topic - probably best to look at them. For instance:

Any problem-free monitor suggestions for the Mac Mini M1?

Hi. Any problem-free monitor suggestions for the Mac Mini M1? (low budget if possible) The YPBPR problem scares me. model I want: Dell U2520D I am open to suggestions.

forums.macrumors.com

I’ve read through quite a few of them, and even did research on the net, but I’m still having a hard time deciding. I get it “not another monitor thread.” I was hoping someone could very simply point me in the right direction. At minimum answer the 4k or IPS question (or even plain 1080P) that I had based on my use so I stop spinning my wheels between the choices.

 

[ricopacino75]

Macs and monitors are difficult. A lot op people don't understand how the scaling works in macOS, which is important to know. I ordered the Dell U2720Q 4K screen and found out that 4K basically sucks on a Mac.
The native resolution is far too small, if you want no performance loss on your GPU, you have the choice to run native 4k, or 1080p, which is way too big. The ultimate retina mode would be QHD, but then you would need a 5K monitor (and I think the pro display is out of your budget ). My advise is to go for a QHD monitor, you wont have a retina resolution, but the screen estate is the same as running macOS on a 5k pro display monitor, but a lot cheaper. just my 2 cents.

 

[GaelenSky]

In the last month I purchased an LG 27UL550, which is a 27” 4K monitor with HDR support. Like you, I was on a tight budget but found solstice in this purchase - it’s really good! It’s HDMI/DP connection only, so no thunderbolt or USB directly into it as you’ll be paying more for it. I narrowed down to this particular screen because of it’s 400 nits brightness as well. I purchased in the UK for £339, so just a little over your quoted budget but if you can stretch to it you seriously wouldn’t be disappointed.

 

[ignatius345]

My guess is no less than 24”, and of course the bigger the better.

If you buy (say) a 32" 4K monitor, it's going to look less sharp than a 24" monitor of the same resolution -- since it's the same number of pixels spread out on a bigger area. And since you're probably a lot closer to the screen than you would be with a television, it's going to be a lot more visible.

 

[Friscochris]

Macs and monitors are difficult. A lot op people don't understand how the scaling works in macOS, which is important to know. I ordered the Dell U2720Q 4K screen and found out that 4K basically sucks on a Mac.
The native resolution is far too small, if you want no performance loss on your GPU, you have the choice to run native 4k, or 1080p, which is way too big. The ultimate retina mode would be QHD, but then you would need a 5K monitor (and I think the pro display is out of your budget ). My advise is to go for a QHD monitor, you wont have a retina resolution, but the screen estate is the same as running macOS on a 5k pro display monitor, but a lot cheaper. just my 2 cents.

In the last month I purchased an LG 27UL550, which is a 27” 4K monitor with HDR support. Like you, I was on a tight budget but found solstice in this purchase - it’s really good! It’s HDMI/DP connection only, so no thunderbolt or USB directly into it as you’ll be paying more for it. I narrowed down to this particular screen because of it’s 400 nits brightness as well. I purchased in the UK for £339, so just a little over your quoted budget but if you can stretch to it you seriously wouldn’t be disappointed.

These two posts helped a bunch. Thank you.

 

[GaelenSky]

Just to add to the scaling debacle - it’s not so much of an issue in 2x” sizes, however people running 32” and above are certainly right to moan. I use “looks like 1080p” with my 4K and it looks ‘normal’ to me - text is clear, sharp and graphical elements are well detailed. Personally if it were me I’d be trying to aim for more DPI, but the suggestion for a QHD monitor isn’t terrible either.

The real pain with monitors is that you can’t get a good idea without seeing how the look first, I was nervous about mine from a contrast standpoint (how much backlight bleed would there be?) but during lockdown is been trying things from Amazon and returning them after realising they weren’t up to scratch and plumping for something else once I was more in-the-know. Always worth a suggestion.

 

[Fishrrman]

You might also consider a 32" 1440p (native resolution) display.

This is NOT 4k, of course.
But... for FCP it will offer a lot of "screen real estate", and the native pixel size of .2767mm isn't bad.

Good for photo editing, too.

 

[Friscochris]

Well... I really went above the price I was trying to stay within, but I think I’ll be happy. Only thing I am questioning is the CalDigit TS3+. Once everything arrives I’ll get it all setup and see if the TS3+ is necessary. May return it for something far cheaper.

As far as monitor goes.. I looked at QHD’s and found a few, but I kept going back to the LG27UL550 that was recommended for some reason. For <$40 more I opted for the 27UN850. So much for trying to save money.

 

[Nihilvor]

Macs and monitors are difficult. A lot op people don't understand how the scaling works in macOS, which is important to know. I ordered the Dell U2720Q 4K screen and found out that 4K basically sucks on a Mac.
The native resolution is far too small, if you want no performance loss on your GPU, you have the choice to run native 4k, or 1080p, which is way too big. The ultimate retina mode would be QHD, but then you would need a 5K monitor (and I think

That's damn confusing. I've read thread after thread on here of people writing that you have to go with 27inch 4k monitors to run 1440p (or anything above 1080), and that 2k monitors aren't worth it because of the DPI font smoothing issue. People haven't been complaining about performance that I've seen.

I've been researching reasonably-priced 27inch 4k monitors for the last month. So, is there a significant performance loss with all 4k monitors that allow you to run in 1440p? I know for certain that I don't like the looks of 1080p on 27inch monitors, but you seem to be suggesting that any other resolution would be inefficient in this case. 5K isn't an option for me, so now I'm looking at my notes and wonder if I should be prioritizing a good 2k monitor instead.

If it helps to get a sense of my use of the machine, my primary use of the computer is for Microsoft Office products, music creation, some amateur video editing for teaching purposes (use Adobe, but not intensely), and gaming (basically non-AAA).
Thanks!

 

[GaelenSky]

That's damn confusing. I've read thread after thread on here of people writing that you have to go with 27inch 4k monitors to run 1440p (or anything above 1080), and that 2k monitors aren't worth it because of the DPI font smoothing issue. People haven't been complaining about performance that I've seen.

I've been researching reasonably-priced 27inch 4k monitors for the last month. So, is there a significant performance loss with all 4k monitors that allow you to run in 1440p? I know for certain that I don't like the looks of 1080p on 27inch monitors, but you seem to be suggesting that any other resolution would be inefficient in this case. 5K isn't an option for me, so now I'm looking at my notes and wonder if I should be prioritizing a good 2k monitor instead.

If it helps to get a sense of my use of the machine, my primary use of the computer is for Microsoft Office products, music creation, some amateur video editing for teaching purposes (use Adobe, but not intensely), and gaming (basically non-AAA).
Thanks!

What Mac do you have?

 

[ricopacino75]

Yes it is confusing You probably won't notice the performance hit, but its basically a dirty hack. macOS is not made for displaying native high resolutions, since the UI is not scaleable, like the UI scaling that Windows has. They cover it up by providing 27 inch iMacs / pro displays with 5K screens (and not 4k). I hope that they will come up with a new affordable Apple display (which will certainly have 5K and not 4K) and have the QHD screen estate without any performance loss,
or an iMac with 5k screen. No 4K screen on a mac for me.

 

[BishUK]

I opted for the 27UN850. So much for trying to save money.

Great monitor. I have the 27UL850 and I run mine at 2560x1440 with no noticeable loss of performance on a 8GB M1 Mini.

So, is there a significant performance loss with all 4k monitors that allow you to run in 1440p?

In my experience I 'd say no and can't understand why anyone would avoid a 4K monitor because of this.

 

[jenkinmac]

Well... I really went above the price I was trying to stay within, but I think I’ll be happy. Only thing I am questioning is the CalDigit TS3+. Once everything arrives I’ll get it all setup and see if the TS3+ is necessary. May return it for something far cheaper.

As far as monitor goes.. I looked at QHD’s and found a few, but I kept going back to the LG27UL550 that was recommended for some reason. For <$40 more I opted for the 27UN850. So much for trying to save money.

Great choice! I bought essentially the same monitor, the LG 27BL85U, to use with my 2020 intel mbp. It works really well. I also installed the MonitorControl plug in to be able to control the screen brightness and speaker volume with my keyboard.

 

[Nihilvor]

What Mac do you have?

The monitor will be for a M1 mac mini that I've ordered.

My wife has a 2018 mini and has been running a 25inch 1440p 2k monitor on that at some resolution between 1080 and 1440. I do see some difference in text clarity since the last OS release, but she hasn't complained.