Nvidia 750M 4K Display Performance

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by Traverse, Feb 5, 2015.

  1. Traverse macrumors 603

    Traverse

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Location:
    Here
    #1
    I am trying to decide on an external monitor for use with my 2013 15" Macbook Pro to use in clamshell mode. I wanted a 27" 2560 x 1440 display, but several people on these forums keep insisting on running a 4K display at a scaled 1440p.

    Those of you who use a 4K display with your 15" MacBook Pro, how is the performance at native 4K? How is the performance (and appearance) at 1440p scaled?

    When I run my internal display at anything less than "Best for Retina" I notice a drop in clarity and a performance hit in terms of the fluidity of system UI (swiping between desktops, mission control, etc.). I need some feedback before I make a decision.

    Thank you.
     
  2. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #2
    I run my Sharp PN-K322B at scaled 1080p (basically retina-fied 3840x2160), and no lags on my 750M.

    I've not tried scaled 1440p though.
     
  3. cbautis2 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    #3
    My 2011 MBA can output 2560x1440 to the UHD TV and my Surface Pro 3 tablet with Intel HD graphics can output 3840x2160 at 150% scaling without lag whatsoever, 750M should do it without breaking a sweat (aka not even using 1% GPU usage)
     
  4. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #4
    I run my rmbp 15" with 750M at 1920x1200 scaled, so the computer is already rendering at 3840x2400. It runs well. 2gb of dedicated vram is a lot for osx.
     
  5. Traverse thread starter macrumors 603

    Traverse

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Location:
    Here
    #5
    Thank you everyone.

    Ugh, now I gotta pick between a native 27" 2560 x 1440 panel or a 24/27" 4K for HiDPI mode.

    Dell has some 4K displays for around $600-$700, but they only have 3.5 stars. I'm kind of hesitant to embrace 4K panels because they are just know affordable and I worry their still kind of finicky.

    I wish I could see one in person. :(
     
  6. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #6
    Depends how close the monitor will be to your face. From a few feet away, I doubt you can see the pixels anyway. From arms length or so, it would probably make a difference.
     
  7. Traverse thread starter macrumors 603

    Traverse

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Location:
    Here
    #7
    Ranges from 20 to 22 inches depending on how I sit.
     
  8. austinpike macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    MN
    #8
    Well if you run the 4k monitor at 2560x1440, then it wouldn't really be hiDPI, just scaled somewhere in between. You'd have to drop to 1080 to get the retina resolution, and 1080 just sucks compared to 1440 regardless of how clear it is. I usually set my 15" retina to 1920x1200, and it looks tolerable, but I don't love it - I would rather have the native 1920x1200 on my old (dead) 17" MBPro. A 4k 27" would be a similar situation.

    Any chance you have a Microcenter nearby? They usually have a few 4k Dell screens to look at. Personally I would just get a decent 2560x1400 for ~$400 and let the 4k thing mature for awhile.
     
  9. Natzoo macrumors 65816

    Natzoo

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Not sure where i am
    #9
    why does apple even put 2 yr old graphics card on macs.
     
  10. Traverse thread starter macrumors 603

    Traverse

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Location:
    Here
    #10
    No, I've never heard of Microcenter.

    You share my thinking. I know 4K is nice but I already have a 1080p display and want the extended room of 1440p. 4K may have a higher PPI, but any scaling other than HiDPI looses quality and taxes the system more than a native panel.

    I just feel a 1440p display will be smoother.

    EDIT: also, I feel like 4K is still finicky. Whether it's OS X or quality issues on sub-$700 4K displays, but I hear bad things and they often have 3/5 or 3.5/5 ratings.
     
  11. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #11
    Because Broadwell wasn't available at that time. Blame Intel for delaying Broadwell-HQ.

    Apple only upgrades the GPU microarchitecture when Intel releases a new CPU micro architecture.
     
  12. goMac macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    #12
    I use my Macbook Pro with a 4k TV every so often (with a 750m) and it's definitely more chunky, but usable.

    Looks very very pretty though.
     
  13. steveyo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    #13
    Most Apple consumers don't know any better?
     
  14. BomexM3 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2014

Share This Page