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

[ignatius345]

So, what's better, 4K at 120-Hz or 5K at 60-Hz and another hundred bucks?

Both? Completely depends on use case. I have an iPhone with ProMotion and I have two Macs that don't. I never look at the Macs and find the movement of things on screen jarring and rough. I also don't do any real gaming. So, 60 hz is absolutely fine for my purposes.

On the other hand, what I DO a fair bit of is working in graphic design, in which case perfect pixel scaling and high PPI is a big help. The bright 4.5K display on my M4 iMac at home means I can see fine line details accurately in Illustrator without constantly zooming in and out. That's a 24" display, but if I wanted to spread out and maintain the same PPI I'd surely be looking at a 5K display @ 27", like the Apple Studio Display or similar -- because it's well suited to that kind of work.

So, for me, 4K at 27" is I'm sure OK but not optimal, but 5K at 27" is a sweet spot for both pixel accuracy and PPI, and refresh rate is not a factor. If I was doing totally different stuff, needed HDR for video or did a bunch of gaming or whatever, then yeah, maybe a 4K 120hz display would be my pick.

I feel like so many heated arguments on here can be avoided by just remembering that different people have different uses and preferences and that's normal.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

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.

Completely disagree. I use a 4k 27” every day for my Mac mini. Looks fantastic. It replaced a 27” 1440p gaming monitor which looked very pixelated and awful on Mac.

 

[drrich2]

Both?

So a 27" display with both 5K resolution and a 120-Hz refresh rate. Sounds great! But at this point in time, I suspect market realities could hurt us...

5K 2" displays are already a narrow market segment in terms of choice of models and brands, and command a premium. The new ASUS ProArt model is considered value priced at $799, roughly a 1/3rd more to nearly double compared to a good 4K model.

When you combine 5K and 120-Hz refresh rate, you limit the computers that can support that. From some quick Googling (since I'm shaky on some specifics):

From a thread on Hacker News: "

https://news.ycombinator.com/vote?id=30608772&how=up&goto=item?id=30605310

zuwvcfxanh on March 8, 2022 | parent | next [–] DisplayPort 1.2 cannot even do 5k at 60Hz at 10 bits per channel. You might be thinking about DisplayPort 2.0, which is not yet widely supported in video cards or monitors, and even then it needs the (essentially non-existent) UHBR 20 data rate to get to 120Hz. HDMI 2.1 does support 5K@120Hz@10bpc but requires DSC as you say, which is not very commonly found either. (Note that unlike what a sibling comment states, DSC is lossy. Some argue that the less is not noticeable to the human eye, but not everyone agrees)

"

From DataPro's Thunderbolt Guide and FAQ:

Thunderbolt 4

2020

40 Gbps

1x 4K @ 120 Hz 2x 4K @ 60 Hz 1x 5K @ 60Hz 1x 8K @ 60Hz

USB Type-C

On MacRumors Feb. 2023, user Pressure noted: "Technically both HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.4a (TB4) could support 5K@120Hz."

And then there's the question of whether your computer's graphics system can maintain that, and do so without compromising your computer's performance (as some people report with using 27" 4K scaled resolution with demanding workloads).

Not all 2024 Macs even have Thunderbolt 5, and adoption on P.C.s is slow so far.

My point is, a hypothetical 27" 5K 120-Hz display would service a rather small customer demographic and be quite expensive. I'd like to see it enter the market!

If ASUS will soon have out a roughly $1,200 6K 32" display (I assume at 60-Hz), that might pull some potential customers away.

 

[ignatius345]

So a 27" display with both 5K resolution and a 120-Hz refresh rate. Sounds great! But at this point in time, I suspect market realities could hurt us...

Not really what I meant, actually. I meant "both" as in either of the 5K/60hz or 4K/120hz options could be the right choice for a given person. Sloppy wording on my part!

 

[jeffpeng]

On MacRumors Feb. 2023, user Pressure noted: "Technically both HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.4a (TB4) could support 5K@120Hz."

TL;DR: 5K@120 displays won't happend until HDMI2.2/TB5 is widely adopted.

To push 5K@120 over 40 gigs you need to make compromises. Either you need to resort to chroma subsampling - which really defeats the purpose of even having a color accurate display - or you need to use display stream compression (DSC), which, contrary to rumor, isn't lossless. It's good enough for media comsumption or gaming, but again defeats the purpose of a calibrated color accurate diplay in the first place. Macs have the claim to be professional machines, and you simply can't do certain work if you cannot trust the fidelity of what you are working on.

Modern Macs support DSC - technically (I believe the standard M1 lacked that). So it's technically feasible to make a 5K@120 display for the mac, but considering the aforementioned drawbacks I doubt such a display would gain a lot of traction, and the windows/linux/gaming market really doesn't care for 5K at all so there really is no incentive to produce a 5K@120 that has compromised picture fidelity because quite literally nobody (sane) would want it.

What I fully expect (and I think I've read about it here somewhere) is that now that TB5 is out and has plenty bandwidth for such shenanigans the next Studio Display will adopt 120hz ProMotion, and will support a 60hz fallback mode for "old" TB4 devices. 5K@85 would technically work over TB4, but it would really push the limit of the Link, and it would render the Hub in the Studio display basically inert.

All that being said I can't see Apple releasing a new IPS based Studio Display right when they are on the "verge" of going full OLED. So I guess we won't see this before WWDC 2027. I can see a Studio Display XDR successor coming 2026, maybe even this year if Apple can pair it with a MacPro that again lives up to the name, but I guess we would have heard about that by now. (Or would we?)

As for other manufacturers offering 5K@120 displays for TB5: if any will, they will be so expensive that they will be relegated to "actual" professional use, since there are nowhere enough any TB5 devices out there to give such a display a fighting chance on the consumer market. So before that becomes a thing I'd say we'll again be in 2027.

 

[Jack Burton]

I'd rather have pixel perfect crisp 5k retina scaling vs refresh rate.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

I'd rather have pixel perfect crisp 5k retina scaling vs refresh rate.

The great thing is with 4k gaming monitors you can have both 4k crispness and 120-144Hz for like $350. Well I guess I paid $391 for mine...

 

[Scarrus]

"95% P3 color gamut" - I'll pass, thanks.

 

[Jack Burton]

The great thing is with 4k gaming monitors you can have both 4k crispness and 120-144Hz for like $350. Well I guess I paid $391 for mine...

It must be nice to have working eyeballs! ;-)

Can't dispute the value - but my old, broken eyes may not let me use anything at full fat 4k! The most I can get away with is 27 inch at full 1440p, or a 27 inch 5k pixel doubled to 1440p for crispness.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

It must be nice to have working eyeballs! ;-)

Can't dispute the value - but my old, broken eyes may not let me use anything at full fat 4k! The most I can get away with is 27 inch at full 1440p, or a 27 inch 5k pixel doubled to 1440p for crispness.

Intereesting! That's what I do with the 4k 27 incher. 1.5x to 1440p. To these older eyes it looks absolutely sharp.

 

[Jack Burton]

Intereesting! That's what I do with the 4k 27 incher. 1.5x to 1440p. To these older eyes it looks absolutely sharp.

honest question - why not get a 1440p monitor? Does it double as a 4k entertainment/gaming screen?

 

[marko232]

honest question - why not get a 1440p monitor? Does it double as a 4k entertainment/gaming screen?

pixel density of course. Text is blurry at 1440p, heck even 4k is visibly worse than the apple studio 5k at 27"

 

[eltoslightfoot]

honest question - why not get a 1440p monitor? Does it double as a 4k entertainment/gaming screen?

pixel density of course. Text is blurry at 1440p, heck even 4k is visibly worse than the apple studio 5k at 27"

Exactly as @marko232 says. Everything is very sharp at 4k, and when I want to game, if it's something like Cyberpunk 2077 or Baldurs Gate 3, I just go for 4k and get 60ish frames. If I need more frames--say Apex Legends or something, then I lower the res to 1440p in those games.

But yes, I get glorious sharpness the rest of the time for reading, editing, coding, etc.,

 

[drrich2]

As for other manufacturers offering 5K@120 displays for TB5: if any will, they will be so expensive that they will be relegated to "actual" professional use, since there are nowhere enough any TB5 devices out there to give such a display a fighting chance on the consumer market.

And that relegation could doom it. The impression I've gotten from the input of others is that the people who want 5K 27" for professional use for the most part don't value high refresh rates, and the people who value high refresh rates are often games, who are predominantly on Windows and/or consoles, and those people are generally happy with 4K.

People with a strong desire for 5K and 120-Hz refresh rates are a small minority. Such people with the means and desire to pay a large premium to get it are a really small segment. People like that who have Thunderbolt 5 or USB4 2.0 setups...well, like you, I'm not holding my breath for such a thing anytime soon.

And since ASUS is releasing a 6K 32" display ('retina' classic resolution, I believe) for roughly $1,200, I ask...if someone were looking at a retina class 27" display and cared to spend more for a better experience, would the people who really need retina class (e.g.: some professionals) benefit more from 120-Hz at 27", or the added real estate of a 32" (albeit at 60-Hz)?

So, for the more demanding display buyer, we're looking at 27" 4K/120-Hz (or more), 27" 5K/60-Hz and 32" 6K/60-Hz. If a vendor tried to wedge in a 27" 5K/60-Hz, seems like a very tight market.

With those choices, what would the people here pick?

 

[eltoslightfoot]

And that relegation could doom it. The impression I've gotten from the input of others is that the people who want 5K 27" for professional use for the most part don't value high refresh rates, and the people who value high refresh rates are often games, who are predominantly on Windows and/or consoles, and those people are generally happy with 4K.

People with a strong desire for 5K and 120-Hz refresh rates are a small minority. Such people with the means and desire to pay a large premium to get it are a really small segment. People like that who have Thunderbolt 5 or USB4 2.0 setups...well, like you, I'm not holding my breath for such a thing anytime soon.

And since ASUS is releasing a 6K 32" display ('retina' classic resolution, I believe) for roughly $1,200, I ask...if someone were looking at a retina class 27" display and cared to spend more for a better experience, would the people who really need retina class (e.g.: some professionals) benefit more from 120-Hz at 27", or the added real estate of a 32" (albeit at 60-Hz)?

So, for the more demanding display buyer, we're looking at 27" 4K/120-Hz (or more), 27" 5K/60-Hz and 32" 6K/60-Hz. If a vendor tried to wedge in a 27" 5K/60-Hz, seems like a very tight market.

With those choices, what would the people here pick?

I would pick the cheapest, good enough option. There's always a sweet spot and that's what I go with.

In this case, we all know that is the 144Hz 4k 27" option.

 

[jeffpeng]

With those choices, what would the people here pick?

Really depends on who you are and what you use it for. And that's kinda your point, I get it. And you're right. The crowd that would be willing to go non-apple and either pay a big premium on a 27" 5K@120 or simply compromise on picture fidelity is just not there.

Apple will go there, in time, when TB5 has some saturation in their specific walled garden market. And it won't cost (a lot) extra then. It's natural progression. And shortly after that point there will be competing products. But it really hinges on TB5 adoption. And even then: 5K will never become standard anywhere else.

The Windows market is just too value driven, and computers for now and all eternity will remain mainly Windows computers - mostly because the need to have a desktop or even laptop at home is getting smaller and smaller with the smartphone being the only device you really "need". The vast majority of desktops are already and even more so will be sold to companies. And unless you have a high margin business that has to pander to a scarcely available workforce that doesn't just work on those computers, but actually work "with" them .... the cheapest mass available device to meet basic ergonomic standards it is. And that's 27", and often not even 4K. Nevermind anything beyond 60hz.

 

[philosopherdog]

I prefer 32-inch monitor. I bought the LG Ultrafine 32UN880-B last year for about $415USD ($599CAD).

IPS, Anti-Glare, Contrast 1000:1, 178˚
Brightness is 350nits --> It's actually more like 420 nits in reality
LG Ergo Stand (Extends/Retracts/Swivels/Height/Pivot/Tilt)
DCI-P3 95% Color Gamut with HDR 10
USB Type-C with 60W PD

Changed the scale to 150%. Probably not as sharp as Apple's but for coding it's more than enough.

Edit: The LG 32UP83A-W has the same panel as the 32UN880-B if someone prefers a regular stand instead of the ergo stand.
Review:

I especially want crisp for text. That’s why as a coder on a Mac I go with Apple’s display

 

[PaulD-UK]

@jeffpeng "Modern Macs support DSC - technically (I believe the standard M1 lacked that)."

The M1 Macs are fine with DSC, no problems running a 5K/60 RGB 4.4.4 10 bit screen single cable USB-C/DP1.4, which only happens with DSC.
Turn off DSC, and the result is 8 bit, and most likely YCbCr 4.2.2, though Better Display can coax RGB 4.2.2.

Edit: That’s not to say that an M1 GPU/Display Engine can actually supply 5K’s worth of new data to the screen every 60th of a second….
Fast full screen animations are definitely laggy, maybe more like 24-30 fps., when rendered at 5K.
So it’s alright for watching movies. :-(

Things are OK (60Hz) with an M4 Pro mini.

 

[BrightDarkSky]

So the same silliness is going on when it comes to RGB values? Where is the mention of adobe rgb? You know, that photographers especially will need? P3 color profile is tilted towards video creators.

How is a monitor in this day and age not able to hit srgb at 100% it's literally a web color profile..a REDUCED color profile. It's almost like consumers have just gotten sillier and less aware.

Even Google's AI gets it right:

"while P3 (also known as DCI-P3) is a good color profile for video creation, it's not considered as ideal as Adobe RGB for professional photo editing and printing, as Adobe RGB offers a wider color gamut in certain areas, particularly blues and greens, which are crucial for print work. "

Don't give these products any points for srgb. It is the most basic bare minimum standard that you should be able to achieve with a modern monitor. If you thought 100% srgb was something amazing you are amazingly wrong.

So again.. what's the RGB values? Cmon. Good price looks like a good product with good features but the devil is always in the details. For You video only folks looks like a winner.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

So the same silliness is going on when it comes to RGB values? Where is the mention of adobe rgb? You know, that photographers especially will need? P3 color profile is tilted towards video creators.

How is a monitor in this day and age not able to hit srgb at 100% it's literally a web color profile..a REDUCED color profile. It's almost like consumers have just gotten sillier and less aware.

Even Google's AI gets it right:

"while P3 (also known as DCI-P3) is a good color profile for video creation, it's not considered as ideal as Adobe RGB for professional photo editing and printing, as Adobe RGB offers a wider color gamut in certain areas, particularly blues and greens, which are crucial for print work. "

Don't give these products any points for srgb. It is the most basic bare minimum standard that you should be able to achieve with a modern monitor. If you thought 100% srgb was something amazing you are amazingly wrong.

So again.. what's the RGB values? Cmon. Good price looks like a good product with good features but the devil is always in the details. For You video only folks looks like a winner.

Yeah I mean, there are those of us who need neither professional color accuracy for photos or videos. There are some of us that are perfectly content with a gaming monitor level of color accuracy. Mine, for instance, (which I just looked up) was DCI-P3 95%.

Now my wife (professional photographer) needs something a bit more accurate. So I got her an Asus ProArt display 4 years ago. It is "Calman verified" whatever that is. And it is 100% SRGB and also 100% Rec. 709 Color Gamut?

My point is that I wanted 4k, good HDR, good brightness, FreeSync at least, and high Hz (160 in this case). Color accuracy is meh to me. I just want it to not suck. There are a lot of people in that boat.

 

[BrightDarkSky]

Yeah I mean, there are those of us who need neither professional color accuracy for photos or videos. There are some of us that are perfectly content with a gaming monitor level of color accuracy. Mine, for instance, (which I just looked up) was DCI-P3 95%.

Now my wife (professional photographer) needs something a bit more accurate. So I got her an Asus ProArt display 4 years ago. It is "Calman verified" whatever that is. And it is 100% SRGB and also 100% Rec. 709 Color Gamut?

My point is that I wanted 4k, good HDR, good brightness, FreeSync at least, and high Hz (160 in this case). Color accuracy is meh to me. I just want it to not suck. There are a lot of people in that boat.

The comment is confusing to me. Your referencing a type of monitor that I don't need so I'm not sure what is the point of communicating that a lot of people don't need the type of monitor that I'm looking for? My desire for Adobe RGB monitor has no bearing on whether it's useful to you or not.

Again, If you're saying that a lot of people don't need it what does that have to do with the folks like us or your wife that do need it? Market is not hurting for DCI P3 color monitors. The market is also not hurting for monitors that exclusively Target srgb like it's a great thing.

I'm not really sure the point you're getting it at least in terms of my comment. My comment is more akin to your wife needing a new monitor and being frustrated by the limited options and obtuse hidden specs when it comes to Adobe RGB. That's been a dilemma I've been dealing with for the last several years. I used to be really in touch with the monitor market but the last five six years has been especially bizarre when it comes to professional designer and photography focused monitors unless you stick to the high-end guys like easel and BenQ s more expensive options.

100% srgb... No trophies given.

 

[jakey rolling]

The comment is confusing to me. Your referencing a type of monitor that I don't need so I'm not sure what is the point of communicating that a lot of people don't need the type of monitor that I'm looking for? My desire for Adobe RGB monitor has no bearing on whether it's useful to you or not.

Your comment came across as a petulant tirade over the fact that this monitor is not targeted at professional photographers like yourself. Eltoslightfoot was pointing out in as nice a way as possible that you and other profressional photographers are not the majority population of the computer using public (heck, as much as Apple would like to pretend otherwise, you're not even the majority of the Mac using public). There are a lot of users who would buy a Macbook and have absolutely no need for the super accurate colour reproduction expected of a professional photogropher's monitor. That is the market most underserved by Apple and so happens to be the market that this monitor is aimed at.

Professional photographers know (or aught to know) what to look for in a monitor. You clearly know what to look for - a high-level Adobe RGB accuracy measurement. The lack of such on this monitor should be indication enough that you need to move on.

Again, If you're saying that a lot of people don't need it what does that have to do with the folks like us or your wife that do need it? Market is not hurting for DCI P3 color monitors. The market is also not hurting for monitors that exclusively Target srgb like it's a great thing.

Nobody said it was a "great thing", just like nobody says that 60Hz is a "great thing". It is a thing. It is a measurement meant to inform you of the capabilities and limitations of the monitor. It is up to you to decide if it fits your purpose.

I'm not really sure the point you're getting it at least in terms of my comment. My comment is more akin to your wife needing a new monitor and being frustrated by the limited options and obtuse hidden specs when it comes to Adobe RGB. That's been a dilemma I've been dealing with for the last several years.

There are (and have always been) monitors that fit your and OP's wife's use-case. You and OP's wife are a niche market, so you are going to have to find a niche market monitor. Your dilemma isn't that such monitors don't exist, it is that they don't exist at the price point you are willing to pay.

Purchasing equipment for professional use requires a higher commitment than purchasing consumer equipment. Not only financially, but also in terms of research and understanding how you are going to fit that equipment into your business.

This isn't just limited to computer equipment, either. Try shopping for what seems like the simplest professional kitchen equipment sometime. Just look up a hot dog roller/warmer, for instance. The price and specifications on those things will blow your mind.

 

[eltoslightfoot]

The comment is confusing to me. Your referencing a type of monitor that I don't need so I'm not sure what is the point of communicating that a lot of people don't need the type of monitor that I'm looking for? My desire for Adobe RGB monitor has no bearing on whether it's useful to you or not.

Again, If you're saying that a lot of people don't need it what does that have to do with the folks like us or your wife that do need it? Market is not hurting for DCI P3 color monitors. The market is also not hurting for monitors that exclusively Target srgb like it's a great thing.

I'm not really sure the point you're getting it at least in terms of my comment. My comment is more akin to your wife needing a new monitor and being frustrated by the limited options and obtuse hidden specs when it comes to Adobe RGB. That's been a dilemma I've been dealing with for the last several years. I used to be really in touch with the monitor market but the last five six years has been especially bizarre when it comes to professional designer and photography focused monitors unless you stick to the high-end guys like easel and BenQ s more expensive options.

100% srgb... No trophies given.

Gotcha. My point was that there are people who don’t really care about color accuracy. That’s it. My impression of the post to which I was replying was that the customer base was binary, and my point was there is another audience—one that doesn’t see color accuracy as the highest priority.

 

[BrightDarkSky]

Your comment came across as a petulant tirade over the fact that this monitor is not targeted at professional photographers like yourself. Eltoslightfoot was pointing out in as nice a way as possible that you and other profressional photographers are not the majority population of the computer using public (heck, as much as Apple would like to pretend otherwise, you're not even the majority of the Mac using public). There are a lot of users who would buy a Macbook and have absolutely no need for the super accurate colour reproduction expected of a professional photogropher's monitor. That is the market most underserved by Apple and so happens to be the market that this monitor is aimed at.

Professional photographers know (or aught to know) what to look for in a monitor. You clearly know what to look for - a high-level Adobe RGB accuracy measurement. The lack of such on this monitor should be indication enough that you need to move on.

Nobody said it was a "great thing", just like nobody says that 60Hz is a "great thing". It is a thing. It is a measurement meant to inform you of the capabilities and limitations of the monitor. It is up to you to decide if it fits your purpose.


There are (and have always been) monitors that fit your and OP's wife's use-case. You and OP's wife are a niche market, so you are going to have to find a niche market monitor. Your dilemma isn't that such monitors don't exist, it is that they don't exist at the price point you are willing to pay.

Purchasing equipment for professional use requires a higher commitment than purchasing consumer equipment. Not only financially, but also in terms of research and understanding how you are going to fit that equipment into your business.

This isn't just limited to computer equipment, either. Try shopping for what seems like the simplest professional kitchen equipment sometime. Just look up a hot dog roller/warmer, for instance. The price and specifications on those things will blow your mind.

Thank you for this long-winded ridiculous, petulant explanation of stuff that us "professionals" know already.

I practically used to sell consumer electronics and and I've been involved with computer hardware since computer shopper days. Remember that?

Stuff isn't that hard to figure out so thank you for enlightening me, or more so just trying to feel that you're correct and somebody else doesn't understand.

I made one very specific point and it still stands. I didn't say anything that since this monitor isn't for photographers it's time to riot. Not did I say that this particular monitor should be for us photo pros. It was a very specific point about the state of the market and how manufacturers market these products. (ie. Srgb = amazing).

Just saying that someone's observation isn't valid because you don't need what talking about is not helpful to any kind of conversation. I don't need your ham sandwich, that doesn't affect you at all does it. So...ok move on, next.

Thanks anyway.

 

[jakey rolling]

Thank you for this long-winded ridiculous, petulant explanation of stuff that us "professionals" know already.

You're welcome.