Review: BenQ's Affordable MA270U 4K Monitor Is Made for MacBooks

[kiranmk2]

Why is it so few non-Apple companies produce a 5K display? What I really want is a 27 inch 5k display with 600 nits of brightness (minimum). Are these too difficult to make?

I think it's because there is little demand for 5K from the Windows crowd. Windows has much better font scaling so people can quite happily use 4K 27" panels and retain sharp text, even when scaling to prevent UI elements that are too small. 5K demand is almost uniqely from the the Mac crowd (and therefore, a small percentage of the market).

Waiting for the next big breakthrough in the desktop display market. The state of it is so sad.

All I want are options for large wide and ultra wide displays that are 250+ ppi and 120Hz or higher. And, for them to cost a reasonable price $1k.

Same here. First company to release a decent 7k3k 21:9 ultrawide screen with 120 Hz gets my money... Sadly all, the display development money is being funelled into ultrahigh refresh rates (360 Hz and up). The market has seemingly decided that 144-165 ppi displays (2160p at 27" 16:9, 40" 21:9, 57" 32:9) are "high res" enough.

 

[ThailandToo]

How was this review considered complete when it didn’t mention the lack of a webcam compared to the Apple display?

More like advertising!

 

[FloatingBones]

This is the best journalism I've seen from MacRumors in a very long time. Thank you.

 

[glitch44]

Can someone who is more knowledgeable about displays compare this to the upcoming Dell U2725QE (and update of the U2723QE)

Dell U3225QE and Dell U2725QE are unveiled at CES 2025 with a new IPS Black display and 3000:1 contrast

Dell U3225QE received NRRA certification and TÜV Rheinland 5-star Eye Comfort rating in October 2024. It has a smaller sibling dubbed and Dell U2725QE. Both models have just been unveiled at CES 2025. They feature an enhanced IPS Black technology...

www.displayspecifications.com

 

[AlexESP]

Because it wouldn't sell well, as Apple found out with the Studio Display. 5K is a no-no for gamers, and casual users don't care about hi-res. Who's left? Pros? That's a rather niche market.

Do you really think ‘professionals’ is a niche market? The Studio Display doesn’t sell in high volumes because it’s expensive compared to alternatives. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t sell *well*. I bet it’s the best-selling display at its price point.

 

[GeoStructural]

4K at 27 inches... wouldn't the pixels-per-inch be noticeably lower than the Apple Studio Display? It's probably not a huge deal for gaming or watching movies, but text and images might look a little fuzzy. I doubt it would really bother casual users, but if you're someone who spends several hours a day working with either one...

It is not that noticeable. I have the studio display and a 4K 27” next to each other. I probably noticed for one day and that was it.

 

[name99]

4K at 27 inches... wouldn't the pixels-per-inch be noticeably lower than the Apple Studio Display? It's probably not a huge deal for gaming or watching movies, but text and images might look a little fuzzy. I doubt it would really bother casual users, but if you're someone who spends several hours a day working with either one...

I don't think so.
My eyes are not what they used to be, so I run my iMac Pro (ie 5K 27") at 2048x1152, which is what you'd get from running a 4K 27" display at "native" 2x HiDPI; in fact the 4K 2x "native" would be slightly crisper.
And I find this mode (2048x1152) just fine. I suspect you'd have to be aggressively looking for something to complain about to be unhappy.

Alas, looking at this thread lots of people do indeed want to complain and be unhappy...

 

[name99]

Yes, it's called USB Alt-Mode or something. Basically Displayport over USB. So you only need one cable. Quite a few displays (and mostly better ones) support it these days.

But does that get you audio?
Presumably not a problem if you are augmenting a primary (HDMI) screen with a second screen, but an issue to be aware of if you want the USB-C as your only screen?

 

[ignatius345]

Why is it so few non-Apple companies produce a 5K display? What I really want is a 27 inch 5k display with 600 nits of brightness (minimum). Are these too difficult to make?

I think the vast majority of people have decided 4K is "good enough" and leave it at that.
I also appreciate the extra 77% more pixels (and better scaling with Macs) in a 5K display, but unfortunately it's a bit of a niche at this point.

 

[bunce66]

I don't understand how someone can use a non-Retina level DPI monitor in 2025. Macbooks, iPhones, and iMacs have super high DPI screens, and anything else just looks grainy and terrible imo.

For a litle more money, you can get a 5K 27-inch from ASUS, which meets 218DPI and is on the level of the Apple Studio Display for half the price. BenQ has a similar one coming out soon.

 

[bradman83]

I think it's because there is little demand for 5K from the Windows crowd. Windows has much better font scaling so people can quite happily use 4K 27" panels and retain sharp text, even when scaling to prevent UI elements that are too small. 5K demand is almost uniqely from the the Mac crowd (and therefore, a small percentage of the market).

This is exactly the reason why. I don't think people realize that macOS's poor performance with fractional scaling on a 4k display (which happens on 5k too at non-integer resolutions) is entirely because of the way Apple designed macOS to handle HiDPI scaling. Windows and most Linux distros approach scaling differently, with their own unique drawbacks, and as such text and other vector-based items look much sharper at fractional resolutions. And most people can't tell the DPI difference between 4K and 5K when viewed from a normal sitting distance at a desk.

 

[bunce66]

Well, I am using the LG 5K 27" now 5 years old monitor and it was only $799, with 60% more pixels!

I've got the LG 21-inch 4K version of that, which is really old, but still better than 90% of the ones out there. I muhc prefer smaller with tight pixel density than some big grainy screen most people are using.

 

[jordanm86]

Am I the only mac user who actually likes a glossy display? Colours are deeper and with the brightness (and when positioned correctly) there is almost no reflection.

I spent ages looking for a decent 'made for mac' display and in the end had to fork out for a apple studio display as I couldn't find anything that suited :/

 

[Nathan King]

4K at 27 inches... wouldn't the pixels-per-inch be noticeably lower than the Apple Studio Display? It's probably not a huge deal for gaming or watching movies, but text and images might look a little fuzzy. I doubt it would really bother casual users, but if you're someone who spends several hours a day working with either one...

Yep. That's a non-starter.

 

[MagicWok]

60hz? No thanks...

 

[ignatius345]

Spend a few extra bucks and get 5k (like the ASD) with the ASUS ProArt Display 27” 5K HDR Professional Monitor.

I looked at this one when considering getting an M4 Mini. Looks like a great display.

(In the end, the thing that didn't work for me was the lack of camera, mic, speakers. But it would make a fine display for a MacBook-based setup where one already has that stuff on board the Mac.)

 

[Jeeve Stubbs]

Do you really think ‘professionals’ is a niche market? The Studio Display doesn’t sell in high volumes because it’s expensive compared to alternatives. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t sell *well*. I bet it’s the best-selling display at its price point.

By professionals I mean graphic designers, game developers, and the like. Those that really need a 5K over a 4K. They are a niche market in the sense that they represent a relatively small percentage of all the people and companies that buy monitors.
At this point, most people and companies don't even have 4K monitors. I work for a successful, large corporation and we still all have 1080p. Even the majority of gamers aren't into 4K yet because their computers/graphics cards can't handle it properly. They give priority to refresh rate over resolution. Monitor manufacturers know it and that's why they're focusing on that too.

 

[ikramerica]

It seems some people can spot the difference right away, and others not at all; I'm the same as you and can't see what the big deal is. For me, it's the brightness that makes a difference; I prefer at least 500 nits. Too bad, because otherwise this monitor seems like a decent value.

I think it’s what you do with the monitor. I am using it for cad, excel and other static data work. Not much scrolling. 3D walkthroughs in Cad wouldn’t keep up with 120Hz anyway.

But on a phone or ipad, facebook (and all the copycat interfaces) has made scrolling performance the most important thing.

 

[klasma]

Why is it so few non-Apple companies produce a 5K display?

Too little interest for that in the PC market. PC gaming already struggles with 4K at high frame rates and detail level, and it’s not the kind of monitor companies buy en masse for their employees. Also, no 5K video content, and cost of panel yield, because the likelihood of dead pixels increases quadratically with the “K”. It’s more cost-effective to just expand in one dimension, i.e. ultra-wide monitors, or even vertically like the 3:2 4K+ BenQ RD280U.

 

[Adora]

I have a HP Omen 27K with up to 144Hz that is very similar and has two DisplayPorts in addition. The first mentioned USB-C port is like a Display Port too when connected to a Thunderbolt port on a Mac, don't know if it also can power a MacBook, but I don't think so.

All those ports are also not that good accessible.

The two USB 3.2 ports are USB-A.

It's a good cheap alternative too. The price is very similar. And you can also turn it and change the height.

OMEN 27k 4K Gaming Monitor | HP® Official Site

Play, create, and enjoy with the 27 inch OMEN 27k 4K gaming monitor. Learn more about the OMEN 27k 4K gaming monitor here.

www.omen.com

P.S.: The speakers are crap. And for me gladly it has no camera.

 

[Altis]

I wouldn't call a 4K 27" monitor as "made for Macs".

Please stop spreading manufacturers' lies. Even a simple old 2K (2560X1440) panel from 15 years ago looks better and uses less GPU power than any 4K 27" display.

Not even remotely true.

I own both a 27" 4k (Dell U2723QE) and 27" 1440p (Dell U2713HM) and the 4k looks much, much better and especially on macOS.

Apple got rid of subpixel aliasing some years ago, so low-ppi text looks very poor on them, much worse than it used to (and did the same to my old MacBook Air non-retina). There's nothing I can do to make the 1440p look good on macOS anymore. I only use that monitor with a Windows machine now.

Sadly macOS lazy scaling means you should run the 4k at "looks like 1080p", meaning 2x 1080p scaling, then reduce the default text size and UI elements a bit as needed. If you run at "looks like 1440p" is does soften a bit and taxes the system more since it's rendering at 5k and downsampling to 4k.

 

[ikramerica]

I think 5k is a dead resolution. You will see 6k or more likely 8k in the longer term.

8k would give you various scaled retina options at 27” and 32” and native retina at 40”.

 

[Mr Koot]

I don't even understand the lack of customer connection going on regarding external monitors. Apple in particular. Somebody at some tech company...wake up to the opportunity here.

Over the past five years, I have bought two used 27” LG Ultrafine 5K monitors and two used 22" LG Ultrafine 4K monitors, the only Mac-centric ones available during the time when Apple stopped making displays. I am praying they will continue to work as well as they have, for some time. My total outlay for the FOUR monitors was less than me buying one Apple studio display with the adjustable stand. Hullo?

 

[StudioG]

• 99% sRGB

Why is sRGB still a thing? It's crappy and obsolete. Better would be 99% Display P3, and many monitors already do that.

 

[john123]

I have an original 27” LG Ultrafine 5K monitor from 2018, and there is still no compelling reason to upgrade. It’s still a better monitor than most of what is available on the market. Apple Display’s only advantage is 100 nits of brightness, and that relatively minor difference doesn’t justify the hefty upgrade cost. Despite the hype, very little has changed in the display market in the last 6 years.

^ this. I have two LG 5Ks and love ‘em. They hit 500 nits and are generally plenty bright for me, even when some afternoon sunlight (albeit indirect) comes in.