Mac external display questions

[Doublej]

I have a 2019 21" iMac and figured it was time for an upgrade. So I bought a 13" MacBook Air and figured I would just purchase a 27" 4K monitor to connect to it.

Then I found this article which (am I interpreting it correctly?) says a 2K display would be better for the MacBooK than a 4K display.

Mac external displays for designers and developers, part 2

Since writing about Mac external displays in 2016, not much has changed. LG, Dell, Samsung, and other display makers have either never catered for the specs many Mac designers and developers want, or they’ve reluctantly produced products that have been short-lived or compromised.

bjango.com

My 2019 iMac display is set to 1680x945. I love the clarity of the text and images not matter what resolution I choose. My question is would I be happier with a 2K or 4K display? I currently have a FHD display connected to my Macbook Air through a USB-C port adapter with the monitor set to 1920x1080 and the text is often grainy.

The follow up question is then which monitor shoudl I get? I use my computers to read emails, create and edit for work basic spreadsheets and documents, surf the web, and watch an occasional video on Hoopla or Kanopy.

Thanks in advance for your input.

 

[Martini]

Is it a current MacBook Air? If so, it supports:

• Supports up to two external displays:
• Two displays up to a native resolution of 6K at 60Hz or 4K at 144Hz
• One display up to a native resolution of 8K at 60Hz or 5K at 120Hz or 4K at 240Hz

I'd recommend 4K, something like the Asus ProArt or a BenQ.

 

[Roland68]

I have a 2019 21" iMac and figured it was time for an upgrade. So I bought a 13" MacBook Air and figured I would just purchase a 27" 4K monitor to connect to it.

Then I found this article which (am I interpreting it correctly?) says a 2K display would be better for the MacBooK than a 4K display.

Mac external displays for designers and developers, part 2

Since writing about Mac external displays in 2016, not much has changed. LG, Dell, Samsung, and other display makers have either never catered for the specs many Mac designers and developers want, or they’ve reluctantly produced products that have been short-lived or compromised.

bjango.com

My 2019 iMac display is set to 1680x945. I love the clarity of the text and images not matter what resolution I choose. My question is would I be happier with a 2K or 4K display? I currently have a FHD display connected to my Macbook Air through a USB-C port adapter with the monitor set to 1920x1080 and the text is often grainy.

The follow up question is then which monitor shoudl I get? I use my computers to read emails, create and edit for work basic spreadsheets and documents, surf the web, and watch an occasional video on Hoopla or Kanopy.

Thanks in advance for your input.

I used a 27" Thunderbolt display for over 10 years and was very happy with it. About three years ago, I needed a different monitor—primarily because I needed wall-mounting capabilities.
I read some good things about the Samsung 28" UHD monitor (UR55, 4K 60Hz, LU28R550UQPXEN) and picked up a demo unit for a bargain price of €150. I’ve been absolutely satisfied with it, even for photo and video editing as well as CAD applications.
I occasionally work with monitors that cost many times more—including the newer XDR and Studio Displays—but I can’t think of any reason to spend that much extra money.
Of course, if you genuinely need a higher resolution than 3,840 x 2,160 pixels, or something faster for gaming, that’s a different story.

Just take a look at what well-rated, affordable monitors are currently available.

 

[EJasonC]

Coming from an Asus 4K, I splurged on a 5K Apple Studio Display; there's no turning back. I will never go back to anything less!

 

[staticV3]

Here are all monitors 27" and up, with 200+ PPI, sorted by price: https://geizhals.de/?cat=monlcd19wide&xf=11939_27~12018_200

 

[Martini]

Coming from an Asus 4K, I splurged on a 5K Apple Studio Display; there's no turning back. I will never go back to anything less!
View attachment 550279

I just picked one up last week. I had ordered a new 2026 BenQ 5k, that reviewed well. But the panel brightness faded about 1.75in at both sides. So back it went, and off to the Apple Store I drove. Only thing I don't like is its lack of an ON/OFF button. It looks like if I send a movie to the TV, I've got to unplug the monitor, so I don't have that showing off to the side.

 

[EJasonC]

I just picked one up last week. I had ordered a new 2026 BenQ 5k, that reviewed well. But the panel brightness faded about 1.75in at both sides. So back it went, and off to the Apple Store I drove. Only thing I don't like is its lack of an ON/OFF button. It looks like if I send a movie to the TV, I've got to unplug the monitor, so I don't have that showing off to the side.

Hmm . . . I almost went for a 5K BenQ monitor since I have a fantastic BenQ 4K Projector. Alas, after hearing from you, I'm glad I got the Apple instead! I wonder if that fading is a one off; BenQ seems to make some fairly decent gear. My Son also has an even higher end BenQ PJ.

 

[Martini]

Hmm . . . I almost went for a 5K BenQ monitor since I have a fantastic BenQ 4K Projector. Alas, after hearing from you, I'm glad I got the Apple instead! I wonder if that fading is a one off; BenQ seems to make some fairly decent gear. My Son also has an even higher end BenQ PJ.

It may have been just a bad unit, since none of the review I saw mentioned it. But, we also know how tilted web reviews can be, especially on new product releases.

 

[ATB]

A 4k monitor with a Mac is fine. I’ve been using a 4k Dell with my M1 MacBook Pro as my main screen for my work from home setup. 5k would be better but the Studio Displays are not only significantly more expensive, they can’t have multiple machines connected to them at once ( my personal Mac is on the same desk and it’s really handy to switch between them).

 

[sam_adams]

I have a 2019 21" iMac and figured it was time for an upgrade. So I bought a 13" MacBook Air and figured I would just purchase a 27" 4K monitor to connect to it.

Then I found this article which (am I interpreting it correctly?) says a 2K display would be better for the MacBooK than a 4K display.

Mac external displays for designers and developers, part 2

Since writing about Mac external displays in 2016, not much has changed. LG, Dell, Samsung, and other display makers have either never catered for the specs many Mac designers and developers want, or they’ve reluctantly produced products that have been short-lived or compromised.

bjango.com

My 2019 iMac display is set to 1680x945. I love the clarity of the text and images not matter what resolution I choose. My question is would I be happier with a 2K or 4K display? I currently have a FHD display connected to my Macbook Air through a USB-C port adapter with the monitor set to 1920x1080 and the text is often grainy.

The follow up question is then which monitor shoudl I get? I use my computers to read emails, create and edit for work basic spreadsheets and documents, surf the web, and watch an occasional video on Hoopla or Kanopy.

Thanks in advance for your input.

A recent article that explains the external monitor limitations that Apple has imposed on M-series Macs (Thanks, Tim Apple!) and how to get around them with appropriate hardware/software solutions. Like everything Mac, many of the solutions presented are not cheap.

How to connect two or more external displays to an M1, M2, M3, M4 or M5 MacBook or Neo

Get around Apple's annoying M1/M2/M3 Mac single-display limitation via software and adapters

www.macworld.com

MacBooks with a screen under 14 inches have a native screen aspect ratio of 16:10 (WUXGA). Recent MacBooks with screens of fourteen inches to sixteen inches will have slightly different aspect ratios. Somewhere between 16:10.4 and 16:10.3 ratios for the fourteen inch and sixteen inch respectively. The best external monitor solution for use with MacBooks is a monitor with the same aspect ratio as the built-in screen.

Unfortunately, twenty-seven inch 16:10 monitors are hard to find and if found, are quite expensive. Here's a few twenty-four inch WUXGA monitors from Dell:

WUXGA - Monitors | Dell USA

WUXGA - Explore Dell's wide selection of computer monitors for any need. Find gaming, business, and home displays with the latest features. Shop now at Dell.com!

www.dell.com

My suggestion is to buy two twenty-four inch WUXGA monitors and some cheap, but sturdy, desk mount monitor arms (monitor arms are great because you can ditch the monitor stand and reclaim all the desktop space to throw more junk on), and an appropriate adapter to drive both monitors.

I have two of the Dell P2425 Pro Plus WUXGA monitors, the linked monitor arms, a four computer, dual monitor KVM, and multi-monitor adapters, connecting a 2019 MacBook Pro sixteen inch A2141, a 2020 M1 thirteen inch MacBook Pro A2238, and a 2022 MacBook Pro M2 A2338—and that's just for the Macs. I have roughly the same setup for the Win and Linux PCs just with Dell 16:9, 2421H monitors.

 

[Soundproof]

People have different budgets, needs and prefs, I have used a 60Hz 4K BenQ 32 for my now obsolete MBP and then M4. Just an "office monitor" but as long as I stick to native resolution and don't set it on intermediate resolutions which MacOS tends to immensely dislike, it is great. Not fantastic, it is after all a low budget monitor and delivers more than expected for it's price range. It's pretty solid too. I dropped from 1 meter on a vinyl floor, and both the floor and the BenQ 32 was fine with no damages.

Both BenQ and Asus have monitors with a specific focus on Macs, and they should be fine indeed. Like the fairly recent (Thunderbolt 4) 60Hz Asus ProArt 6K PA32QCV or 120Hz 4K BenQ PD3226G and others. The Asus got 218 DPI, and that just about matches Apple's "retina". Great. 60Hz is nothing to brag about, but it would work just fine for the usage they've made it for.

If you want to use monitor arm(s), Ergotron LX are pretty good in quality and value. I've had a couple, and find no reason to go beyond or below Ergotron. When settled in, the properly adjusted spring can be left untouched for years.

 

[Klonatans]

If you are looking for clarity, go for a 5K glossy monitor. If Apple Studio Display Mk2 cost is of concern, BenQ MA270S is significantly more affordable (though it will have no True Tone or integrated webcam and wake-up time is slightly longer). Perhaps a second hand 1st generation ASD is a good option too.

 

[theBoomer]

A 4k monitor with a Mac is fine. I’ve been using a 4k Dell with my M1 MacBook Pro as my main screen for my work from home setup. 5k would be better but the Studio Displays are not only significantly more expensive, they can’t have multiple machines connected to them at once ( my personal Mac is on the same desk and it’s really handy to switch between them).

Have you considered using a switch? I have a HDMI/USB A switch which I use to share monitor, keyboard and mouse between my desk-side Linux PC and my work Windows laptop. Although I don't really use it that way, it also works with my Mac Book Pro.

 

[JIW]

From what I can tell, the argument of the article is that the external displays pixel density should be inverse integer multiples, i.e. 1/n, or possibly even integer multiples. The latest 13 inch MaxBook Air has a pixel density of 224 ppi and thus, according to the article, you should look for a monitor having around the same or half that at around 112 ppi. Both 25 and 27 inch 5K monitors have that as well as 1440p 25 and 27 inch monitors at half scaling. A 2K monitor with half pixel density is 20 inches, with a third pixel density it is 30 inches. Similarly, a 4K monitor is 20 inches at equal pixel density and 40 inches at half pixel density.

The general formula is

d = p_h/s*sqrt(1+(1/ar)^2)/ppi

where d is monitor diagonal in inches, p_h is monitor horizontal pixels, ar is aspect ratio as a fraction, i.e. for 16:9 it is 16/9, and ppi is the pixel density of the Apple computer.

Keep in mind however, that at half scaling or lower, pixels per degree can fall below Apple's threshold for a retina display even if viewed from an arm's length away.

I have been using a 25 inch 1440p display with an M1 MacBook Air just fine. As the pixel density of the monitor of 118 ppi is close to half of the MacBook Air's 227 ppi, it being fine is as expected based on the article.

Overall, if you trust the article and you want a 27 inch screen, go with 5K or alternatively 1440p if you don't sit too close to it and want to save some money.

 

[Soundproof]

From what I can tell, the argument of the article is that the external displays pixel density should be inverse integer multiples, i.e. 1/n, or possibly even integer multiples. The latest 13 inch MaxBook Air has a pixel density of 224 ppi and thus, according to the article, you should look for a monitor having around the same or half that at around 112 ppi. Both 25 and 27 inch 5K monitors have that as well as 1440p 25 and 27 inch monitors at half scaling. A 2K monitor with half pixel density is 20 inches, with a third pixel density it is 30 inches. Similarly, a 4K monitor is 20 inches at equal pixel density and 40 inches at half pixel density.

The general formula is

d = p_h/s*sqrt(1+(1/ar)^2)/ppi

where d is monitor diagonal in inches, p_h is monitor horizontal pixels, ar is aspect ratio as a fraction, i.e. for 16:9 it is 16/9, and ppi is the pixel density of the Apple computer.

Keep in mind however, that at half scaling or lower, pixels per degree can fall below Apple's threshold for a retina display even if viewed from an arm's length away.

I have been using a 25 inch 1440p display with an M1 MacBook Air just fine. As the pixel density of the monitor of 118 ppi is close to half of the MacBook Air's 227 ppi, it being fine is as expected based on the article.

Overall, if you trust the article and you want a 27 inch screen, go with 5K or alternatively 1440p if you don't sit too close to it and want to save some money.

There are a few calculators around like this one: https://pixelcalculator.com/en/index.php

Agree the Apple Retina approach is the ideal to aim for, but hardware quality for 3rd party contenders has been a bit hit and miss from the reports/reviews I've seen in the past. Getting Retina level PPI (200+) is one thing, panel quality/construction and quality of controllers/glass/plastic, chassis and so one may vary more than people may appreciate, as pricing tends to follow ppi more than it follows panel/hardware quality. The brands like to bolster their profit margins cheating a bit with overall build qualities. I tend cease my following of topics once I have made my purchases, tus there may very well be improvements in quality and more sober pricing --> value for money in the couple of years since.... But one shouldn't drop decent quality for ppi alone....

 

[ATB]

Right, that is what the math says for it to be near “perfect”. What I am saying is that a 27” 4k display is fine. My 2 Mac’s are 254 ppi and 227ppi and both show text fine.

Sounds similar to other discussions we have arround here.

 

[JIW]

There are a few calculators around like this one: https://pixelcalculator.com/en/index.php

Agree the Apple Retina approach is the ideal to aim for, but hardware quality for 3rd party contenders has been a bit hit and miss from the reports/reviews I've seen in the past. Getting Retina level PPI (200+) is one thing, panel quality/construction and quality of controllers/glass/plastic, chassis and so one may vary more than people may appreciate, as pricing tends to follow ppi more than it follows panel/hardware quality. The brands like to bolster their profit margins cheating a bit with overall build qualities. I tend cease my following of topics once I have made my purchases, tus there may very well be improvements in quality and more sober pricing --> value for money in the couple of years since.... But one shouldn't drop decent quality for ppi alone....

Retina is pixels per degree being at least 57. It is about the threshold of visual perception of individual pixels being discernible. This has as much to do with pixel density as viewing distance but also screen size. A general formula is

ppd = p_h/(2*atan((W/2)/D)).

where W is the width of the screen, D is the viewing distance and the trigonometric function calculate with degrees. Strictly speaking this applies only if the screen has equal curvature to the circle drawn with the viewing distance so applies applies approximately at the center for all displays and exaggerates ppd for flat displays and displays curved less than the viewing distance circle.

I get Retina threshold with my 25 inch 1440p display with 118 ppi at around 64 cm, which is typical for me. A general formula for that is

D_retina = (W/2)/tan(p_h/ppd_retina*1/2).

where ppd_retina is 57. If you work with inches, you can use p_h = ppi*W. This is derived from the above formula, so the same limitations apply.

 

[Soundproof]

Retina is pixels per degree being at least 57. It is about the threshold of visual perception of individual pixels being discernible. This has as much to do with pixel density as viewing distance but also screen size. A general formula is

ppd = p_h/(2*atan((W/2)/D)).

where W is the width of the screen, D is the viewing distance and the trigonometric function calculate with degrees. Strictly speaking this applies only if the screen has equal curvature to the circle drawn with the viewing distance so applies applies approximately at the center for all displays and exaggerates ppd for flat displays and displays curved less than the viewing distance circle.

I get Retina threshold with my 25 inch 1440p display with 118 ppi at around 64 cm, which is typical for me. A general formula for that is

D_retina = (W/2)/tan(p_h/ppd_retina*1/2).

where ppd_retina is 57. If you work with inches, you can use p_h = ppi*W. This is derived from the above formula, so the same limitations apply.

Yeah, am aware of the concept. I was just providing an example of a tool (there are several much simpler variants).

Monitors have been "a thing" since Eizo were the great ones for CRT, and then Samsung came up with som decent budget LCD (for its time) 17" when 14" was the norm. I had 3 which I had set up for frequent alternations between combos of the 3.

Then Apple kind of stopped the target from moving with Retina. I do just fine with 32" 4K, but of course it was never as neat as my MBP retina, and I would probably never go back to 4K 32 if I got accustomed to 32 or bigger 6K /5K2K.... Everything tends to be fine until one gets something better.

 

[Martini]

If you are looking for clarity, go for a 5K glossy monitor. If Apple Studio Display Mk2 cost is of concern, BenQ MA270S is significantly more affordable (though it will have no True Tone or integrated webcam and wake-up time is slightly longer). Perhaps a second hand 1st generation ASD is a good option too.

The BenQ MA270S is the display I had to return due to fading along the sides.

 

[BJL]

I have a 2019 21" iMac and figured it was time for an upgrade. So I bought a 13" MacBook Air and figured I would just purchase a 27" 4K monitor to connect to it.

Then I found this article which (am I interpreting it correctly?) says a 2K display would be better for the MacBooK than a 4K display.

Mac external displays for designers and developers, part 2

Since writing about Mac external displays in 2016, not much has changed. LG, Dell, Samsung, and other display makers have either never catered for the specs many Mac designers and developers want, or they’ve reluctantly produced products that have been short-lived or compromised.

bjango.com

My 2019 iMac display is set to 1680x945. I love the clarity of the text and images not matter what resolution I choose. My question is would I be happier with a 2K or 4K display? I currently have a FHD display connected to my Macbook Air through a USB-C port adapter with the monitor set to 1920x1080 and the text is often grainy.

The follow up question is then which monitor shoudl I get? I use my computers to read emails, create and edit for work basic spreadsheets and documents, surf the web, and watch an occasional video on Hoopla or Kanopy.

Thanks in advance for your input.

You work on spreadsheets? Buy the best 27" 5K monitor that you can afford. The Apple Studio Display ($$) and Studio Display XDR ($$$$) will integrate perfectly with your Air, and provide complete support for the various Apple display technologies. I do not know anything about the non-Apple display, but there have been suggestions here, just be sure to stick to 5K. Your eyes will thank you.