Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is that in swiss francs? If so then that is a lot, no?

Because it is 27" 5k DCI P3 and factory calibrated, supposed to be cheaper alternative to Studio Display (which was designed specifically for use with Mac OS)

Some signs of its live are starting to come through : a Swiss retailer had published S9 page on its website with price and also the S9 specs page had recently appeared on the Samsung Australia website.
 
If you use a 4K display and render 2560x1440 hires on it, it is not a blurry mess. If you compare side to side with a true 5K it won't look quite as sharp on the smallest text but that is to be expected as there are fewer pixels. Performance does not take a hit in spite of Apple legal department giving you a warning "might impact performance". You would have to run some performance specing tools to be able to tell any difference. At least for Apple Silicon Macs. An older Intel Mac might struggle but they get hot no matter what.
🤔... this post is pretty delusional tbh...🤔 2560x1440 in 4K is pretty "off" if you have a normal eyesight...🤔 .... performance wise, anything that involves 2D and 3D work takes a big hit 🤔...is a well-known fact among professionals...🤔....
 
Last edited:
If I'm gonna spend 2,500 on a monitor might as well spend the extra 1,500 on a Vision Pro and kick resolution limitations to the curve. Since I can have apps way bigger than that 49 inch in my physical space and its a full computer at the same time and more portable.
That definitely is one of the issues we want to test out in person. Odds are that v1 of the AVP will not come close to our current three Viewsonic pro 4K displays (>$1k each), but who knows? The displays are several years old and one of the displays is failing so we will be checking it all out. It could be use an AVP for everything but color-critical image work - - or it could be that using an AVP to replace 2D display simply is a fail. We will have to see.
 
Because it's 78% more pixels for only 20% smaller pixel width and height, since the area is exponential.

Pretty much nobody cares to use a non-standard that requires more resources and costs more with no real benefit. 4k is absolutely sharp enough at 27-32" at the viewing distances people use for every purpose. Even doing content creation, 4k is the standard. The only reason 5k seems to exist is because of macOS janky scaling.
This:
4k is absolutely sharp enough at 27-32" at the viewing distances people use for every purpose. Even doing content creation, 4k is the standard.

Not to say trained eyes/brain cannot perceive improvement with 5K, but 4K is enough.
 
Where are all the 5K and 6K third party monitors?

There is no competition, so Apple rakes us over the coals on pricing. Especially for 6K.

I just want a fairly standard HDR600 32" 6K display for less than $2000. This will be my main central display for the 14" MBP M3 Max that I want to get next year when I replace my iMac and 16" MBP with one device, flanked on either side with my existing LG 4K 27" displays.
the closest you get is the Dell 32” 6K display, but that one only has an IPS LCD display and is $3200. i suspect that the problem is that 4K displays are cheap because they are so common. Higher resolutions sell in smaller volume and don’t have the benefit of the high volume production to bring the prices down.

It will be interesting to see what price Samsung sets for their 27” 5K S9 monitor when they are finally ready.
 
I've been trying to find a true Thunderbolt monitor for under $1,600. By which I mean, one that supports brightness and volume control from a Mac keyboard. A monitor that doesn't support this feature can't be called "iMac like" except in the most superficial way. Reviews like this one never seem to say one way or another, so they miss an important point for anyone looking to replace an iMac.
You may want a utility like some of these

I had one until last week when I got a new MBP and reinstalled “everything” but I missed that one . Funny thing is, i can remember the icon but not the name of the app. 😊
 
Actually I've found out that (theoretically) apple studio display has the scaling issue while being used with latests macbooks pro as those two have different PPIs and at theirs natives resolutions those two show UI elements in visibly different sizes. So one has to use non-native resolution on one of those 2 displays in order to make UI looking consistent, and this can potentially lead to scaling issues like on 4k displays (couldn't find anything about it in the web unfortunately).
Are you just mirroring your laptop display, then the studio display image will always be interpolated. If you turn off mirroring and just use the Studio Display as “looks like 2560x1440” (2x scaled) you will get the best image quality and the scaling will be fine.
 
I wish they would make a version without the smart components. The last thing I want is another wifi connected device made to show me ads.
exactly. monitors could last almost forever. smart BS will need sw updates - which won’t come after 2-3 years - and the entire contraption simply becomes a trojan horse. unless it’s already one of them at day 1.
 
Because it's 78% more pixels for only 20% smaller pixel width and height, since the area is exponential.

Pretty much nobody cares to use a non-standard that requires more resources and costs more with no real benefit. 4k is absolutely sharp enough at 27-32" at the viewing distances people use for every purpose. Even doing content creation, 4k is the standard. The only reason 5k seems to exist is because of macOS janky scaling.
Nah. You may not notice the differerence, but don't make the mistake of extrapolating your experience to others. I have a 5k 27" as my main monitor, and a 4k 27" as one of my side monitors. I run both at native 2:1 integer scaling for max sharpness. And I definitely find the 5k more pleasingly sharp. That's in part because I'm very sensitive to text sharpness, and in part because my comfortable viewing distance is a lot closer than yours.

Also, FYI, it's a power law, not an exponential: For constant aspect ratio, no. pixels ~ (side length)^2.

The difference between the two is that power laws are of the form f(x) ~ x^a, while exponentials are of the form f(x) ~ a^x, where a is a constant. I.e., with a power law, it's the value of the base that increases. With an exponential, it's the value of the exponent that increases (hence the name). That's why exponentials ultimately blow up more rapidly than power laws.
 
DESK:


DESK Shelf:

Thank you! I've been considering a standing desk since so many times I need to run into my office to do something really quick; would be nice to not have to sit down.
 
Nah. You may not notice the differerence, but don't make the mistake of extrapolating your experience to others. I have a 5k 27" as my main monitor, and a 4k 27" as one of my side monitors. I run both at native 2:1 integer scaling for max sharpness. And I definitely find the 5k more pleasingly sharp. That's in part because I'm very sensitive to text sharpness, and in part because my comfortable viewing distance is a lot closer than yours.
Who said I can't tell the difference? Did you not read the query I was replying to? I use both the 5k iMac display and several 4k displays... I can tell the difference, but it's marginal to the point where very few people care. I actually think the perceived sharpness increase is much more due to the glass display increasing contrast over the matte since that has a blurring effect.

If there was enough of a difference that people would be willing to pay, you'd see more of them on the market, would you not? 4k is the standard and is beyond sharp enough for just about everyone. 5k is just for macOS janky (and lazy) scaling, for the same reason that the 32" is 6k and the 24" is 4.5k. I've seen more people asking for the 28" 3:2 display of the Surface Studio than for 5k.
Also, FYI, it's a power law, not an exponential: For constant aspect ratio, no. pixels ~ (side length)^2.

The difference between the two is that power laws are of the form f(x) ~ x^a, while exponentials are of the form f(x) ~ a^x, where a is a constant. I.e., with a power law, it's the value of the base that increases. With an exponential, it's the value of the exponent that increases (hence the name). That's why exponentials ultimately blow up more rapidly than power laws.
Saying it's due to an exponential increase is far more descriptive in practical use; ie. 4k only appears as "double" the resolution of 1080p but requires four times the number of pixels. This is argument for arguments' sake rather than trying to make a point on topic.
 
Is this still a tn panel? Wish i could see one in person before i pull the trigger. I'm worried about viewing angles.
It is a VA panel in the M8. They generally have worse viewing angles than IPS, but better than TN. The benefit is VA usually has better blacks, and appear more often on TVs than monitors.
 
Who said I can't tell the difference? Did you not read the query I was replying to? I use both the 5k iMac display and several 4k displays... I can tell the difference, but it's marginal to the point where very few people care. I actually think the perceived sharpness increase is much more due to the glass display increasing contrast over the matte since that has a blurring effect.

If there was enough of a difference that people would be willing to pay, you'd see more of them on the market, would you not? 4k is the standard and is beyond sharp enough for just about everyone. 5k is just for macOS janky (and lazy) scaling, for the same reason that the 32" is 6k and the 24" is 4.5k. I've seen more people asking for the 28" 3:2 display of the Surface Studio than for 5k.

Saying it's due to an exponential increase is far more descriptive in practical use; ie. 4k only appears as "double" the resolution of 1080p but requires four times the number of pixels. This is argument for arguments' sake rather than trying to make a point on topic.
The aspect ratio is a different requirement. I would love a display with the Surface Studio panel of 4500x3000 as the squarer ratio is great for vertical content such as documents and websites, plus most relevant for me, coding. And the 192 DPI is near enough that I could use it at a Mac friendly retina 2x.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Altis
Is that in swiss francs? If so then that is a lot, no?
Indeed, the price is in CHF, and if compared to the price of same specked Studio Display (height adjustable stand + matte screen) it is 1000chf cheaper, or 500chf cheaper than ASD with glossy screen.
 
Hmm, that is very expensive monitor then. I guess I would rather get the studio for little extra

Indeed, the price is in CHF, and if compared to the price of same specked Studio Display (height adjustable stand + matte screen) it is 1000chf cheaper, or 500chf cheaper than ASD with glossy screen.
 
Some signs of its live are starting to come through : a Swiss retailer had published S9 page on its website with price and also the S9 specs page had recently appeared on the Samsung Australia website.
Ausie product page has been removed and rumours suggesting Sept launch now. :(
 
  • Sad
  • Like
Reactions: Ener Ji and Alex.ne
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.