Returning 4K Monitor

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by fate0311, Dec 1, 2016.

  1. fate0311 macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2015
    27" 4k

    Running it without scaling text GUI/text too damn small.

    Scale it even one notch to 2560 and the GUI/text is too big. Seems counter intuitive and although the screen is larger the GUI makes it feel cramped still.

    No happy medium.

    Only use I see for this is for photo editors and even then you'd have to switch resolutions depending on whether your editing or dicking around the web etc.

    Going back.
  2. beaub93 macrumors newbie


    Nov 29, 2016
  3. fate0311 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2015
  4. RichMSN macrumors newbie


    Dec 2, 2016
    Madison, WI

    I have my LG 4K connected with a USB-C cable directly into the machine. When I choose "Default for Display" it looks exactly like my desktop on the laptop.

    I can choose other scaling options to make text, etc. look incredibly small, but I'm not sure why I'd want to do that. 4K video plays exactly the same with either setting, the monitor is crystal clear, and I'm happy with the purchase.
  5. double329 macrumors 6502

    Sep 10, 2008
    I just purchased the LG 4K 27" to use with my rMBP 15. I love the monitor. I scaled it to default as well. It is super nice and it is as good as my iMac 27 5k. I thought OS X can and do best job in term of scaling properly for such high res monitor? Win is the one that I will not do 4K with, not now at least.
  6. fate0311 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2015
    I actually changed the resolution back to full 4K and although it is small I'm beginning to get use to it just after a few hours of sticking to it.

    Does anyone else use full 4K without scaling?

    I feel like scaling a 4K is counter-intuitive and makes it feel like I'm mirroring to a TV which always to me feels like I'm magnifying everything.

    I want 4K for productivity (real estate) not magnification, which is why I'm trying to keep it unscaled.
  7. spacebro macrumors 6502

    Oct 1, 2015
    27" is really small for a 4k. You need a 40-50" to get text the right size.
  8. xraydoc macrumors demi-god


    Oct 9, 2005
    Personally I'd rather have a 27" "retina" quality display with laser-sharp text at an effective 1920x1200 (i.e., Apple's pixel-doubled retina rendering) than a 27" display at native 4K resolution with tiny, tiny text - no matter how spacious the desktop.
  9. Freyqq macrumors 601

    Dec 13, 2004
    Confused. My 4k screen lets me pick scaling levels just like the internal screen. I do "looks like 1080p," which is native res at 60hz but the display elements look like 1080p.
  10. dogslobber macrumors 68030


    Oct 19, 2014
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    Most 4k are wide screen so only give 1080 vertical pixels for 1920 across.
  11. Salty Pirate macrumors 6502

    Salty Pirate

    Oct 5, 2005
    kansas city
    I am running one of the LG 34 inch widescreen monitors. Not 4K, but it is fantastic. Very crisp and readable. Pretty sure I am 3880 x 1440. I had to buy the USB-C to Thunderbolt adapter.

    I can have three full size apps side by side. Incredible work flow with the wide screen.
  12. macbook123 macrumors 68000

    Feb 11, 2006
    That's why if somebody made a larger 4K monitor than 27", I would buy it in a heartbeat. I really don't understand why nobody does this. I had a 2560x1600 30" monitor for almost a decade that I loved. The resolution was sufficient. So a 35" 4k monitor would still have plenty resolution. But we can only pick between fifty 27" and twenty 21" panels. Quite sad and confusing really.
  13. xraydoc macrumors demi-god


    Oct 9, 2005
    I think Sharp makes (or at least did) a 30" or 32" 4K display.
  14. CaliKW macrumors member

    Jan 8, 2016
    Loving my tbMBP

    NewEgg carries a bunch of 4K bigger than 28"

    Also see: for calculation of DPI - retina is about 220ppi / dpi
  15. Hung_Solo macrumors member

    Apr 13, 2016
    I have my 4k monitor set at the scaled resolution of 2048 x 1152 which is absolutely perfect for me. Texts are very clear without being small and having a good amount of screen real estate for windows, iMessage, etc.
  16. jerryk macrumors 68040

    Nov 3, 2011
    SF Bay Area
    Have you noticed any performance impact versus running without the scaled external display?
  17. Hung_Solo macrumors member

    Apr 13, 2016
    I haven't noticed anything when I have it unplugged from the display. Usually I have it plugged into the external for most of the day I use it, and then when it gets closer to bedtime I have my MBP in bed to surf the web and haven't seen any performances issues either.
  18. macmee Suspended


    Dec 13, 2008
  19. double329 macrumors 6502

    Sep 10, 2008
    This sounds like you really want to use the full 4k resolution with fonts not being too small. As few other had mentioned, the only way to have large enough fonts on full 4k res is to get the bigger physical screen size, say 34+. As much I like to use the entire of 4k res on my LG 4K 27", the fonts are simply too small for me. I have no choice but scale the desktop. I was thinking about 4k 39" at one point, but that seems to big in size. Bottom line is: 4k 27" with scaling is acceptable for me for now.
  20. fate0311 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2015
    Weird, I went back into the Display settings in OS X and it seems it gave me more scaling options now. Before the first step down from full 4K was 2560 which was too big of a I'm able to choose 3360x1890 which is a very happy medium for still utilizing real estate and not feeling like my external is just a magnify glass.

    Why all of a sudden I have those other options I'm not sure....either that or I just did not see them before.
  21. KillaMac Suspended

    May 25, 2013
    This is why I enjoy my Dell 34" Ultrawide curved monitor. :)
  22. trifid macrumors 65816


    May 10, 2011
    When you option-click on "Scaled" it gives a ton more resolution options.

Share This Page