Did you get the Nano XDR or standard? I love my 30" ACD's due the matte screen. For me Nano is a must because I work on bright environments.
I am just curious as how effective is the nano deflecting glare. I wasn't able to see it in person yet.
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.
Pro Display XDR on my 16" MacBook Pro
- Thread starter Nomad110
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I am just curious as how effective is the nano deflecting glare. I wasn't able to see it in person yet.
Hi Henry,
I apologize but a co worker took the NUC for an offsite job. We use it for data inject. I haven’t forgot and I’ll get it tested ASAP. I’m off on holiday at the moment but I should be able to try after the first of the year.
If you want a 3200 x 1800 HiDPI resolution, then you need to add a 6400 x 3600 custom scaled resolution. You can do that with SwitchResX. Every HiDPI resolution as a normal scaled resolution or timing that is double the width and height.
3840 x 2160 HiDPI resolution uses an 8K scaled resolution (7680x4320).
You can double click the current resolution in the "Current Resolutions" tab for the display in SwitchResX to get timing info (Pixel Clock, Active, Scaled To, Scan Rate).
I would like to see the EDID of the display to discover if it has both 5K and 6K tiling modes as suggested by the display's mtdd override files (located at /System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides/DisplayVendorID-610). There appear to be multiple override files for the display:
DisplayProductID-ae21
DisplayProductID-ae22
DisplayProductID-ae23
DisplayProductID-ae2d
DisplayProductID-ae2e
DisplayProductID-ae2f
I don't know what they are all for. Maybe different modes, orientations, connections, or Macs will result in different EDIDs?
To get the EDID, post the results of the following command:
Code:
/System/Library/Extensions/AppleGraphicsControl.kext/Contents/MacOS/AGDCDiagnose -a > AGDCDiagnose_a.txt 2>&1It works in Boot Camp. Snazzy Labs has videos of that. I don't know what resolutions. Any computer with a Thunderbolt port should be able to show a signal.
The Thunderbolt ports on all Macs support two displays. This is required for displays like the LG UltraFine 5K or the Apple Pro Display XDR to support their maximum resolution because they use a dual link SST mode - either DisplayPort 1.2 for the 5K, or DisplayPort 1.4 for the 6K. Dual link SST means they take two DisplayPort 1.2 or 1.4 signals.
Many PCs have Thunderbolt ports that are limited to one display.
A Thunderbolt port supporting only one display will be limited to at least 4K. Intel graphics is limited to DisplayPort 1.2. Intel graphics also doesn't support timings having a width greater than 4K - but I'm not sure if that's true in Windows - I haven't seen evidence otherwise.
If the Thunderbolt controller is Alpine Ridge then it is also limited to DisplayPort 1.2. If the Thunderbolt controller is Titan Ridge, and the GPU is AMD or Nvidia, then it can support DisplayPort 1.4. With DisplayPort 1.4, there could be a single link SST mode but I didn't see any hint of that in the macOS mtdd override file. We have to look at the EDID to see if there's a single link SST 5K mode.
A Thunderbolt port supporting two displays should work at least up to 5K using DisplayPort 1.2 dual link SST. The mtdd files hint at this mode but I have not seen it confirmed.
For DisplayPort 1.4, you need a Titan Ridge Thunderbolt controller. For 6K the Titan Ridge controller requires two DisplayPort 1.4 inputs from the AMD or Nvidia GPU.
If the EDID has two tiling modes (for 5K and 6K), it would be the first example of such that I've seen. Who knows how other OSs will handle that...
Can you explain what you mean by this in a bit more detail? Are you saying you have the same 3008 pixels of horizontal workspace regardless of whether you connect at 13" MBP that is only supposed to be rendering 2560px as you do when connecting the 16" which renders 3008px? I am having a hard time understanding how that could be true or what else it could mean.
So if you look at the second image I posted. You'll see the system profiler. If you look at the "UI Looks Like" value, you'll see that the screen is rendering the UI at 3008x1692. If you look at the window next to that you can see that the display is being driven at 5120x2880 (effectively 5K). So the while there is less pixel doubling (what apple calls retina effect) the UI is running at the same effective resolution as when you are connected at 6K on either a Mac Pro or 16" MBP.
This means that the Pro Display XDR is actually a very versatile screen for connecting to lesser powerful Macs that don't have discrete graphics cards (Mac Mini, Mac Book Air, 13" Mac Book Pro, etc). Although it pushes a 5K signal the maximum effective scaled UI resolution is the same (3008x1692). Just a lower pixel density.
Remember that at 6K (6016x3384), a UI resolution of 3008x1692 is exactly a 2x pixel doubling (HiDPI mode) of the user interface. That is what makes the UI look so sharp. I keep saying this, that I would like Apple to give us a higher "more space" UI resolution like they do on the UltraFine 5K display.
I hope that answers your question.
[automerge]1577052399[/automerge]
Yes that is correct. There is no option to drive the UI resolution higher than 3008x1692 whether you are connected at 6K (Mac Pro or 16" MBP) or a lesser Mac at 5K. The only way to get around this is to use a third party software solution like SwitchResX that will open up more UI resolutions in HiDPI mode. As I've stated in my first post, the perfect (to my eyes) UI resolution is 3840x2160@60hz in HiDPI mode which gives you much more screen real estate but still maintains a significant sharpness from pixel doubling.
Last edited:
You have two cases:
- MBP 13" is limited to DisplayPort 1.2 because of Intel graphics. With two DisplayPort 1.2 signals over Thunderbolt 3, it can output 5K.
- AMD graphics and Titan Ridge Thunderbolt controller can supply two DisplayPort 1.4 signals over Thunderbolt 3 to output 6K.
The GPU takes the frame buffer and scales it for the output signal, 5K for case 1, and 6K for case 2. Both have the same area but case 2 will be smoother/less blurry (actually not blurry at all since 3008x1692 is exactly a quarter of 6K).
Things to remember:
- HiDPI modes always use a frame buffer with 4 times as many pixels as the corresponding low resolution mode (2 times in each dimension). Early macOS versions had a scale that let you choose the multiplication factor - I don't know if that is available and just hidden now.
- The frame buffer can be larger or smaller than the display's resolution.
- The GPU scales the frame buffer to produce the output signal.
- macOS does not tell you the output timing of the signal. To do that, use SwitchResX, double click the current resolution in the Current Resolutions tab to see Pixel Clock, Active, Scale To, Scan Rate numbers.
- macOS does not tell you the output pixel format. It might say "30-Bit Color (ARGB2101010)", but that is only for the frame buffer. It could output 24 bit color, or could output with chroma sub sampling YCbCr 4:2:2 or 4:2:0).
The features of SwitchResX that adds scaled timings or custom timings just modify files in the
/System/Library/Displays/Contents/Resources/Overrides folder. It can be done manually.
Adding/Using HiDPI custom resolutions
I've tried to do this quite a few times. My 4540s has a 15" 1920x1080p monitor. Most of the time, I can work close enough to the display such that the text is not too small. But sometimes, it would be useful to work at 1600x900. Unfortunately, if you use a normal scaled resolution at...
That's a great piece of info!
How would you judge the picture quality in this setup? Are you able to reliably tell the difference between XDR display being driven at 6K by 16" MBP, versus 5K by 13" MBP?
It looked great honestly. You’d have to have them side by side to likely tell a difference.
I can also barely tell the difference between 5k and 6k on the Pro Display XDR, and I think the “default for display” at 5k looks pretty nice. It’s bigger than the default at 6k but sharp.
What do you mean by bigger than the default? The UI resoltuion is the same. They should look the same. Only one should be slightly sharper than the other.
Working a little late tonight and the team decided it was break time. We take our breaks usually with a LAN game. Quake 2 was the game today. Just in case anyone was wondering...yes you can play Quake 2 full screen full res 3840x2160 HiDPI mode all settings maxed out (buttery smooth...duh...lol) on your Pro Display XDR and 16" MBP. ? Having grown up with this game on CRTs, it was a pinch me moment. Just thought I'd share! ?
![IMG_0735.jpeg]( "IMG_0735.jpeg")
How is the reflection of the monitor? Does it disturb? Are the fans also running on normal use, just like editing pictures or programming?
Reflection is really not a problem for my set up. But I am conscious to not to place lights behind me. And honestly unless I'm compiling something huge or running an intensive process there is no fan noise. If you are referring to the display, it is completely silent. My fully spec'd out 16" MBP under normal load handles the Pro Display silently if that's what your asking. But if you know this machine, you can make it spin up it's fans. I wear headphones while working so I never hear it anyway. I can't imagine someone being disappointed with this display. It's freaking awesome.
Thanks a lot. So you can recommend this combination? I am about to replace my 5,1 with a MBP 16 i9/64/1TB/5500 8 and the new XDR. The "5K view resolution" still causing me to resize the ui windows in my software all the time, so a bigger monitor would really be a benefit. But not if the corners of the screen have reflections.
I've got my own office so I can set up my light around, but I am still not sure if the glossy screen would be fine as I am currently working on a matte screen (AOC) and checked the iMacPro in the Apple store and I think that's too strongly reflecting. But the iMacPro does have an unused black bezel that reflects more that a screen with content.
But would you say that if there are no light sources behind you the reflections are not disturbing and I'd be fine with it?
Yes to me if you can control the lighting in your workspace and you don’t with your back to a bunch of windows then I‘d say your better off with the glossy display. Especially after I’m hearing all the reports on how “delicate” and fussy the nano texture display is.
[automerge]1577463525[/automerge]
For what the display enables for me and it’s longevity in my work flow I’d say yes.
Today I received mine with the nano-texture matte finish, hooking it up to my 16" MBP.
Using the $200 vesa mount adapter (which also has a satisfying magnet experience for all you worried about missing out if you don't get the $1000 stand)
The matte finish is very nice. Looking at it right next to my glossy MBP screen, it doesn't feel any bit fuzzy.
The brightness is nuts.. having to turn it down significantly to keep my eyes from bleeding.
I've been anticipating this display for a long time so I had to try it out, but I'm not sure I can justify the $6k price when the 5K LG monitor goes for $1300 and is a very good display.
Yes I know this is a color ref monitor and competes with $33k monitors. I use this for professional video production, but still the cost seems high (I wouldn't be shopping for a $33k color ref monitor in the first place).
![IMG_1702.jpg]( "IMG_1702.jpg")
Using the $200 vesa mount adapter (which also has a satisfying magnet experience for all you worried about missing out if you don't get the $1000 stand)
The matte finish is very nice. Looking at it right next to my glossy MBP screen, it doesn't feel any bit fuzzy.
The brightness is nuts.. having to turn it down significantly to keep my eyes from bleeding.
I've been anticipating this display for a long time so I had to try it out, but I'm not sure I can justify the $6k price when the 5K LG monitor goes for $1300 and is a very good display.
Yes I know this is a color ref monitor and competes with $33k monitors. I use this for professional video production, but still the cost seems high (I wouldn't be shopping for a $33k color ref monitor in the first place).