What resolution do I set my monitor too to get 5K?

[questionwonder]

I have a MB Pro M1 14" and a brand new LG UltraGear evo 27GM950B-B 5K monitor (same panel as the Apple XDR)

The only resolution that looks good that isn't too small is 1920x1080, anything bigger looks too small.

Is this normal or should I expect to set the resolution higher, say something like 2560x1440? At this resolution text looks a little too small!

I went to the Apple store and looked at the XDR monitor and they had the resolution on the monitor in the store set to 2560x1440, but that looked too small too!


Am I not understanding something about scaling and resolutions when using a 5K monitor?

I just want to ensure that I get my money's worth and that I'm utilizing 5K if I just spent $1K+ on a monitor.
For some reason I thought that when I plugged in a 5K monitor, I would see the display resolution set to 5120x2880 and the text on screen would be scaled properly and look good?

FYI - I keep getting a message box pop up on my monitor (LG message, not MB OS message) that says I'm not set to the proper resolution and should be set to 5120x2880, so this message is confusing me into thinking I have something not set correctly or not being utilized correctly.

 

[FreakinEurekan]

Sounds like the Mac isn't putting out the resolution your monitor wants. Could be a variety of reasons for that.
Is this the only external display connected?
How is it connected - HDMI, DisplayPort, USB-C?

 

[PaulD-UK]

What port on the MBP M1 do you have connected from Mac to the monitor?

What does System Settings > Displays offer as available resolutions?
Set it to show the full output List view.

With an M1 Mac the HDMI port can only support 4K.

 

[questionwonder]

Sounds like the Mac isn't putting out the resolution your monitor wants. Could be a variety of reasons for that.
Is this the only external display connected?
How is it connected - HDMI, DisplayPort, USB-C?

No I bought two of the LG monitors, but when I have jsut one plugged in, I see the same resolutions in display settings.
The monitor is connected via USB-C TB4

 

[questionwonder]

What port on the MBP M1 do you have connected from Mac to the monitor?

What does System Settings > Displays offer as available resolutions?
Set it to show the full output List view.

With an M1 Mac the HDMI port can only support 4K.

When I display all resolutions in 3840x2160, but when I select it, everything on the screen in super tiny! Is that normal?

 

[PaulD-UK]

That is only 4K, and 1920x1080 is the default HiDPI retina resolution.

Running a 5K monitor at full 5/4K will give tiny text.

It is normal to use the default Retina setting of half that - 2880 x 1440 for 5K screen.
That way any graphics on screen are still 5K, but the Menus are scaled up to a normal size.

Because a retina 5K screen is so sharp it’s normally used closer to the seating position.

 

[questionwonder]

That is only 4K, and 1920x1080 is the default HiDPI retina resolution.

I guess my concern or question is, can I keep the resolution at 1920x1080 or something a little higher like 2560x1440 and still get my money's (1K) worth out of this monitor?

 

[questionwonder]

That is only 4K, and 1920x1080 is the default HiDPI retina resolution.

Running a 5K monitor at full 5/4K will give tiny text.

It is normal to use the default setting of half that - 2880 x 1440 for 5K screen.

I'm new to scaling and resolutions, so my question is am I getting my money's worth out of this $1K 5K monitor if I have the display resolution set somewhere between 1920x1080 and 2560x1440, even though the max display resolution showing in display settings is 3840x2160?

 

[PaulD-UK]

If you are running it at a HiDPI retina resolution then graphics and video will still be 5K, but the Menus will be scaled up to be the normal size.

 

[questionwonder]

If you are running it at a HiDPI retina resolution then graphics and video will still be 5K, but the Menus will be scaled up to be the normal size.

I don't have any HIDPI options in display settings. Would that be something to configure on the monitor itself?
Or does the monitor automatically adjust using HIDPI on a certain resolution?

 

[PaulD-UK]

I think with an M1 Mac you have to select 60Hz to get 5K.
This is the same as a Studio XDR display.

Until you get a 5120 x 2880 option you are only showing 4K.

 

[questionwonder]

I think with an M1 Mac you have to select 60Hz to get 5K.
This is the same as a Studio XDR display.

Until you get a 5120 x 2880 option you are only showing 4K.

On my MB Pro M5 I see 5120 x 2880 on one monitor but only 3840x2160 on the other monitor. Both are the same monitors using the same USB-C TB4 cable. I wonder if there is a M5 limitation still even though this is the most power MB?

 

[PaulD-UK]

5K/60 for both is normal with a base M5 Mac.
It’s best to have an M5 Max Mac for two Thunderbolt 5K/120 monitors.

I don’t know how the USB-C connection of the LG monitors will work out in practice when using two.

Edit: As you have posted elsewhere, try a good quality USB-C to 8K DP adapter cable.
It sounds like these monitor work best with the DP input.

 

[questionwonder]

5K/60 for both is normal with a base M5 Mac.
It’s best to have an M5 Max Mac for two Thunderbolt 5K/120 monitors.

I don’t know how the USB-C connection of the LG monitors will work out in practice when using two.

I have the mid tier (pro chip)

 

[Ben J.]

You just use the resolution that suits your screen size, viewing distance, and personal preference. I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on both my 55" TV used at a distance, and a 32" sitting closer.

Are you getting your moneys worth? Yes. Even with a low resolution, if you switch to full screen view of a video or broadcast, the mac will provide all the available resolution of the video to fit the screen's 'native resolution'.

4K, 5K, 6K - al those number refer to the approximate number of horisontal pixels:
2K - 1920 x 1080 - full HD
3K - around 3200 x 1800
4K - around 3840 x 2160 - Ultra HD
etc.

All this hype around high resolution is just that - hype. Why should I get a 4 or 5K monitor? Well, I shouldn't - unless I have a good reason. You just found how monitor resolution works. Too many pixels just means that everything gets smaller.

Now, if you had a 150 inch screen, maybe those extra pixels would be useful…

 

[rb2112]

You just use the resolution that suits your screen size, viewing distance, and personal preference.

This.

For me, my 32" 4K is set at 3200x1800 HiDPI 60Hz(using SwitchResX) and my secondary is 24.5" is set to 2560 x 1440 HiDPI 144Hz. To figure this out, I had to put up all my usual applications and windows and monkey around with the sizes to find out what worked best. This also included setting font sizes in web browser and preferences in each application for text size. I also have a few optional (lower) resolutions I can switch to if I am using certain applications whose UIs just don't scale well with everything else. I'm not sure this process can get easier because of the application independence, but it only takes 10-20 minutes, and you'll realize later that day if something is off and needs to be adjusted.

Good luck!

 

[questionwonder]

You just use the resolution that suits your screen size, viewing distance, and personal preference. I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on both my 55" TV used at a distance, and a 32" sitting closer.

Are you getting your moneys worth? Yes. Even with a low resolution, if you switch to full screen view of a video or broadcast, the mac will provide all the available resolution of the video to fit the screen's 'native resolution'.

4K, 5K, 6K - al those number refer to the approximate number of horisontal pixels:
2K - 1920 x 1080 - full HD
3K - around 3200 x 1800
4K - around 3840 x 2160 - Ultra HD
etc.

All this hype around high resolution is just that - hype. Why should I get a 4 or 5K monitor? Well, I shouldn't - unless I have a good reason. You just found how monitor resolution works. Too many pixels just means that everything gets smaller.

Now, if you had a 150 inch screen, maybe those extra pixels would be useful…

Thanks for the advice! I do get the PPI aspect and want to have a retina level monitor (218ppi), but the main issue I'm having is that one of my two monitors isn't scaling to 5120 x 2880 in display settings. The max res. it shows is 3840 x 2160, despite having two identical monitors, same USB-C TB4 cables and try all the different USB-C ports on the MB Pro M5 with the pro chip. Even if I close the lid and just use thw two external monitors and no laptop screen, I still don't get the second monitor to scale in display settings to 5120 x 2880. So I'm trying to determine if it's a hardware limitation, which I don't think it is, or some firmware issue with either the MB or LG monitors? I've talked to both APPle and LG tech support and neither can help!

 

[MacCheetah3]

Foremost:

You just use the resolution that suits your screen size, viewing distance, and personal preference. I'm perfectly happy with 1920 x 1080 on both my 55" TV used at a distance, and a 32" sitting closer.

Are you getting your moneys worth? Yes. Even with a low resolution, if you switch to full screen view of a video or broadcast, the mac will provide all the available resolution of the video to fit the screen's 'native resolution'.

4K, 5K, 6K - al those number refer to the approximate number of horisontal pixels:
2K - 1920 x 1080 - full HD
3K - around 3200 x 1800
4K - around 3840 x 2160 - Ultra HD
etc.

All this hype around high resolution is just that - hype. Why should I get a 4 or 5K monitor? Well, I shouldn't - unless I have a good reason. You just found how monitor resolution works. Too many pixels just means that everything gets smaller.

Now, if you had a 150 inch screen, maybe those extra pixels would be useful…

I also agree, lots of the clamoring is just hype or, more accurately, people stroking egos.

I went to the Apple store and looked at the XDR monitor and they had the resolution on the monitor in the store set to 2560x1440, but that looked too small too!

For macOS, at least, the ideal/optimal GUI or displayed resolution is half of the monitor’s native/actual resolution, referred to as HiDPI. This results in four physical dots (on the monitor) representing one (software) pixel displayed.

Which monitor should I pick for Mac mini M4? (2K vs 4K confusion)

I came across this doing research on another thread and it does a decent job explaining HiDPI.

forums.macrumors.com

Any semi-recent version of macOS will ‘force’ HiDPI anyway:

For LG OLED users: Mac mini M4 does not support HiDPI 4k over HDMI 2.1

I’m not sure about the base M4 but otherwise: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/which-monitor-should-i-pick-for-mac-mini-m4-2k-vs-4k-confusion.2467831/?post=34194784#post-34194784 P.S. For anyone who might comment, it’s also possible at 120 Hz.

forums.macrumors.com

 

[PaulD-UK]

@questionwonder
If you swap the 5K monitor's cable over to the 4K monitor, and connect it to the M5 Pro MBP on it's own, does is then connect at 5K?

Cable performance problems are the usual reason that only 4K can be obtained.
A USB-C to DP 8K adapter cable may give better performance, using the monitor's DP input.

The other help in trouble shooting is an app from GitHub called Better Display, which shows details of what setting you have, and can sometime force a change. The free version is OK for this.

 

[N3ur0n79]

Quite simply, I’m reading this as the OP wants to run the native resolution and just needs to increase the scaling of the UI. On the PC it is a common display settings tic box to check “225% scaling” or whatever is recommended for the resolution. Is this not an option because I’m seeing so many answers suggesting to use resolutions lower that subjectively are viewed as the best compromise and that makes no sense to then ever buy a high resolution display!?

 

[questionwonder]

Quite simply, I’m reading this as the OP wants to run the native resolution and just needs to increase the scaling of the UI. On the PC it is a common display settings tic box to check “225% scaling” or whatever is recommended for the resolution. Is this not an option because I’m seeing so many answers suggesting to use resolutions lower that subjectively are viewed as the best compromise and that makes no sense to then ever buy a high resolution display!?

No, here's my issue!
I have a new MB M5 Pro and an old MB Pro M1.

M5 - When I plug in both of my brand new LG 5K monitors using the same USB-C cables and I go to display settings, one monitor shows a max resolution of 5120x2880 and the other monitor shows a max resolution of 3840 x 2160.

Question 1 - If both monitors are the same using the same cabling why won't the second monitor get 5K resolution?

If I unplug one monitor I get 5K(either one doesn't matter), but if both are plugged in one gets 5K the other only gets 4K.

Hardware, software, MB or monitor issue?

FYI - Same thing on my old MB Pro M1, but both monitors max out at 4K (3840 x 2160), I don't get any 5K option for either.

According to Apple I should have 5K support for both laptops.

Question 2 - If I only see 3840 x 2160 as a max resolution in display settings, does that mean that I'm only getting 4K data and not getting my full 5K data that this monitor should provide me, paying $1K for each monitor?

 

[questionwonder]

@questionwonder
If you swap the 5K monitor's cable over to the 4K monitor, and connect it to the M5 Pro MBP on it's own, does is then connect at 5K?

Cable performance problems are the usual reason that only 4K can be obtained.
A USB-C to DP 8K adapter cable may give better performance, using the monitor's DP input.

The other help in trouble shooting is an app from GitHub called Better Display, which shows details of what setting you have, and can sometime force a change. The free version is OK for this.

I have BetterDislay installed, but that doesn't change any resolutions.
I've tried with different cables, USB-USB, USB-DP, HDMI, nothing changes the fact that one monitor maxes out it's resolution at 4k.

I just want to know if it's hardware(don't think so), firmware on the lG side or Apple side?

I have a ticket open with Apple and have provided system capture data and screen vids of the issue. I'll get a call back Thursday from their tech team after they look into it.

 

[conmee]

I find the default resolution of my Apple Studio Display a little too little for my older eyes. I need to lean closer to the monitor when I have it set at 2560x1440 but it looks gorgeous. However, for comfort's sake, I sometimes go down a notch to 2048x1152 which is a good compromise and looks better and still sharper than 1920x1080.

 

[PaulD-UK]

@questionwonder "Hardware, software, MB or monitor issue?"

It sounds like the monitor that can only achieve 4K may not have its DSC setting - display stream compression - turned on.
Is there a setting in the monitor's OSD, or in any LG-supplied control software, that you can check that DSC is enabled?

It may be not turned on for both, but the Macs can mange to support only one monitor uncompressed.

"If I only see 3840 x 2160 as a max resolution in display settings, does that mean that I'm only getting 4K data and not getting my full 5K data that this monitor should provide me..."

Yes, the monitor is not receiving enough video bandwidth from the Mac to support anything higher, like 5K.
This resolution is decided on automatically - the monitors send their EDID available settings to the Mac, and the Mac sends the best signal to the monitor that it can.

The only way to improve matters is to turn on DSC on the monitor, or install new firmware on the monitor which will allow DSC to be active.

One thing to do in both your monitor's OSD (or LG s/w) is disable 165Hz and select 60Hz. If the EDID identifies that a monitor could be set to 165Hz, then any other monitor will only get a much reduced allocation of bandwidth, which will limit it to 4K.
If you have the choice, make sure the monitors are set to DP 1.4a, not DP 2.1, as a USB4 cable doesn't support DP 2.1.

 

[N3ur0n79]

No, here's my issue!
I have a new MB M5 Pro and an old MB Pro M1.

M5 - When I plug in both of my brand new LG 5K monitors using the same USB-C cables and I go to display settings, one monitor shows a max resolution of 5120x2880 and the other monitor shows a max resolution of 3840 x 2160.

Question 1 - If both monitors are the same using the same cabling why won't the second monitor get 5K resolution?

If I unplug one monitor I get 5K(either one doesn't matter), but if both are plugged in one gets 5K the other only gets 4K.

Hardware, software, MB or monitor issue?

FYI - Same thing on my old MB Pro M1, but both monitors max out at 4K (3840 x 2160), I don't get any 5K option for either.

According to Apple I should have 5K support for both laptops.

Question 2 - If I only see 3840 x 2160 as a max resolution in display settings, does that mean that I'm only getting 4K data and not getting my full 5K data that this monitor should provide me, paying $1K for each monitor?

Ah ok I understand what you are saying but sadly I am not qualified to be confident in my answer. My layman’s knowledge would assume it may be an issue of rendering throughput from so many pixels? I would guess everything is working as intended because on the M5 you are getting support for 5K and 4K simultaneously and that would be expected from the processors enhanced capabilities and may be limited right now to the standard of UBC type C if there are limitations being reached and or m5 limits.

The m1 perhaps doesn’t have the ability to render the 5K. I’m sure someone already answers this or looks it up but if there is any logic to what I’m taking a guess at, the M5 MBP may just not have the capability to run multiple 5K displays and it would be an issue to hopefully be able to return and figure out a solution that will work for what you need.

Edit: the comment above mine is much more accurate and also it is a great idea to see what refresh rates there are as that definitely can impact the resolution negatively and lowering refresh rates at very high resolutions can decrease the bottleneck and have sufficient bandwidth.