There are now a number of manufacturers. BenQ's 5K model is said to be one of the best.
But don't worry, this won't have any impact on Apple's prices. Except on the open market.
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.
Review: ViewSonic's VP2788-5K Display Offers a Cheaper Alternative to Apple's Studio Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But don't worry, this won't have any impact on Apple's prices. Except on the open market.
A few years ago I bought a 32" 4K display and had to return it because everything was too small if I used it in actual 4K mode (3840x2160 pixels). So I then bought a 43" Dell 4K display and everything is the perfect size for my eyes. Just what would be the point of a 6K display (6144 x 3456 pixels) at something like 32"? Who could use it with that resolution? Obviously you'd have to bump the resolution down quite a bit for it to be useable, so is the only point is that things up very close look nicer?
I have the Dell U3224KB (32" 6K monitor) to go with my Mac Studio, and it is fantastic! B&H had it for $1,999 last month, so it was a great deal. (I think it's back up to $2,499 though now.) I got that and this Viewsonic (which just arrived yesterday, since it was out of stock everywhere for a few weeks), and it is awesome have multiple Retina-level displays.
Getting a 32" 6K monitor and a 27" 5K monitor for $2,948 total is expensive, but a great deal (at least in today's economy). If I had unlimited funds, I would have gotten the Apple monitors, but that would have been a starting price of $6,598, and alas, I do not have that kind of money.
Most MacBook models have a 120Hz screen. Nothing to do with gaming, it provides a snappier more fluid experience. It is extremely useful for productivity and design, which is the target market of Macs. Being able to actually see your 120fps video project... in 120fps might be useful lol. If you use artist tools like a drawing pad with your Mac, high refresh rate is a must, heck even just using a mouse. Most people buying a high end monitor would likely benefit. productivity tasks that are static like programming and office tasks aren't the customer for a super color accurate display, so they are irrelevant to the target audience in the first place.
Many monitors with high refresh rates have different capabilities depending on resolution selected. No reason this theoretical monitor can't be 5k 60Hz and go up to 120Hz on lower resolutions. This is super common.
I thought there was a bandwidth problem with usb-c or older thunderbolt cables which wasn't fast enough for a 120hz refresh rate with 5k resolution (OK with 4k)?
I have an M1 MBA for four years and I've started to develop vision and back problems with high PPI as a result of text too small and sitting too close. Recently got a Dell 27" that's 4K and it was a relief. Not close to 218ppi but 163ppi would suffice. What I need now is screen real estate because I deal with multiple excel spreadsheets. I tried upscaling to 5K but the text were just too damn tiny everywhere.
It doesn't matter if any display manufacturer would churn out 27" 5K or 32" 6K, bottom line is that the damn high PPIs are killing my eyes. And I still cannot fathom why macOS having issues with unoptimised PPIs.
And what scaling did you set on your Mac Book and then on your 4K Dell?
And do you wear screen glasses? It seems that with the Gaussian normal distribution, you are one of the users for whom the standard display resolution is still too small. No reason for the display industry to change the Retina resolution, but you would have to look around for special solutions, or increase the scaling factor further and thus do without display workspace.
Past performance does not guarantee future returns, but after saying that I'd had good reliability with ViewSonic monitors at work I went and checked specific dates.
We still have a 17" 4:3 (!) VG710b working and in limited service today, which came out in late 2003 and I believe was purchased in early 2004--meaning that thing is still working (and useful!) after 21 years of use. Not a whole lot of technology products I can think of that have lasted that long.
We also got a number of one of ViewSonic's first 16:9 monitors, the 19" VA1912w, back when they came out in 2006. The backlights slowly gave in over the years, but we still have one that works and is in regular use (not on an office computer, of course), which again is pretty impressive after 19 years in service.
On the other hand, someone at one point bought ViewSonic's original, super-budget 4K display, the 27" VX2880ml. That is the worst "monitor" I have ever seen in my life by a wide margin--it's just a crappy 4K TV with a computer input slapped on. The 30Hz refresh rate alone would make it virtually worthless as a computer display, but the absolutely embarrassing levels of input lag render it literally unusable. It's so bad it just got stuck in storage after being passed around a bit.
One assumes they've improved since that misstep.
We still have a 17" 4:3 (!) VG710b working and in limited service today, which came out in late 2003 and I believe was purchased in early 2004--meaning that thing is still working (and useful!) after 21 years of use. Not a whole lot of technology products I can think of that have lasted that long.
We also got a number of one of ViewSonic's first 16:9 monitors, the 19" VA1912w, back when they came out in 2006. The backlights slowly gave in over the years, but we still have one that works and is in regular use (not on an office computer, of course), which again is pretty impressive after 19 years in service.
On the other hand, someone at one point bought ViewSonic's original, super-budget 4K display, the 27" VX2880ml. That is the worst "monitor" I have ever seen in my life by a wide margin--it's just a crappy 4K TV with a computer input slapped on. The 30Hz refresh rate alone would make it virtually worthless as a computer display, but the absolutely embarrassing levels of input lag render it literally unusable. It's so bad it just got stuck in storage after being passed around a bit.
One assumes they've improved since that misstep.
Unfortunately, the quality monitors from 20 years ago don't exist for the most part today. Sales today are dictated by specs and lowest price. So monitor manufactures today look for every possible way to make the monitor as cheap a possible after securing the panel. This is how Apple is able to differentiate their monitors, as no one want to directly compete with them.
The comment I responded to wasn’t about higher refresh rate, just about lower-priced 5K 27” monitors.
I love HiDPI (retina) and my issue is with the 2x scaling formula for sharpest HiDPI modes. On a 4k 32" monitor, my eyes prefer 1440p HiDPI which doesn't align with the 2x formula without some fuzzy text. The default for display @ 1080p HiDPI, makes UI elements too big and native 4k is too small. A 5k 32" would be perfect for my eyes @ default 1440p, but BetterDisplay mostly fixes this currently so it's really a non issue for me right now. If that's what you are referring to with sub pixel anti aliasing, then ok - that.
Both monitors are using similar panels to the 5k iMacs. It true that the Apple Studio display is only marginally improved over the older versions of the panel but the Apple display's build quality is much better. It's build like an iMac and the LG is built more like the ViewSonic.
Depends on what you're looking for. Apple packages a number of functions into one compact product and if you value each of those things, it's not a bad deal. A list of factors I've seen held out for the ASD before, with some counter-arguments:
1.) Superior build quality - but does it matter? A 27" display sits on a desk or table in a protected indoor environment and is seldom moved, for many seldom touched, and if the competition's build quality is adequate, how much 'value add' is there with a sturdy aluminum body?
2.) Aesthetic appeal - decent, but many people don't find mainstream competition ugly, most of the time we only see the screen, bezels and maybe stand base, so... Maybe the back of your monitor sure is pretty, but...?
3.) Webcam - reports vary from pretty good to rather bad. Some people like Center Stage and some don't care. Many people rarely use a webcam, and some who do would prefer a superior 3rd party option or use their iPhone in Continuity Mode. As for lack of mic in the Viewsonic (based on your post), 3rd party webcams can offer that function.
4.) Spatial audio sound system - the ASD gets consistently high marks for sound by the standards of display speakers (which harkens to an old Sherlock Holmes' appraisal of a couple of Scotland Yard inspectors being 'the best of a bad lot'). From what I've been told, not hard to beat with external speakers, and many people already have external speakers or can get them fairly cheaply.
5.) Glossy display - seems most displays today are matte, which suggests a lot of people prefer matte, but yes, for maximum detail/sharpness and 'pop,' glossy is nice. And it's expensive to get the ASD matte option if you want it.
6.) Nicely integrated with your Mac (e.g.: Apple keyboard brightness controls work). On the other hand, lacks HDMI and DisplayPort, use with something other than a Mac can require some workarounds (e.g.: Thunderbolt input), and while it's technically a Thunderbolt 3 display with some ports, it doesn't have Thunderbolt output.
7.) Excellent color accuracy right out of the box. Sounds good, but some competitors in recent times get praise, too.
And let's not forget it's a ridiculously expensive up-charge to get height adjustability, if you want VESA mount capability you need to forego the stand (or vice versa) IIRC, and it doesn't do portrait mode, right? And if you don't pay for Apple Care+, you get a warranty shorter than some competitors offer at no additional charge.
When weighing the ASD against the Asus or Viewsonic 27" 5K display alternatives, a shopper may need to run that list and decide which things matter, how much and what they're worth. Apple is still selling ASDs and they still get praise.
The unsturdiness shows up with wobble for example. Some Apple monitors wobble too, but many third party monitors are much worse in this regard.
But it’s not just about that. Two Asus ProArt monitors I tried had bad backlight bleed. The Huawei monitor I eventually bought has no significant backlight bleed but the colours were completely off, so I spent extra to buy a colour calibrator to fix that. It also has significant light falloff at the corners and edges, but not enough for me to return it.
The Apple Studio Display isn’t top tier but it’s much better than average, and good enough that a lot of creative professionals are generally satisfied with them.
Interesting point, worth expanding on.
1.) Some people have desks that are small, light or otherwise subject to vibration, and set their keyboard on them to type, so wobble could be aggravating. I have a sturdy desk and sit back with a wireless keyboard and my Bluetooth mouse on the arm of my recliner, so this wouldn't occur to me.
2.) Unless weight is a factor, I doubt someone using a VESA arm would notice much difference. Maybe I'm wrong about that?
3.) It would be interesting if YouTube and other reviewers would cover the wobble factor in reviews. Like this Viewsonic; put it on a table beside an ASD and shake the table a bit; who wobbles more, and how easy would that be to correct?
Last edited:
There are other characteristics of “cheap” monitor manufacture that you only know if you have experienced them yourself, such as
- The panel is installed crookedly in the housing (e.g. 1mm too deep on the left than on the right)
- The monitor creaks when it is switched off because the materials cool down and e.g. plastic contracts more strongly again
- the monitor mount does not allow 100% horizontal alignment, i.e. the monitor is tilted (very slightly, but noticeably) or it can be aligned correctly, but only for a few minutes, because gravity then ensures that the alignment shifts again
- the monitor's shielding is so poor that other nearby devices are disturbed (e.g. LG's 1st generation 5k Ultrafine Display)
For me, a photographer who processes and prints loads of image files, it boiled down to being fussy about color accuracy out of the box and lack of drift over time. The ASD is a superb display for people who create.
Not really. It’s much better than average but it’s not what some professionals would classify as superb.