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.
Hands-On With LG's Massive 5K 49-Inch $1,500 Display
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have this monitor and it works great with my 2017 15" MacBook Pro at full resolution, but I can only get the 3840 x 1080 on my 2019 13" MacBook Pro. I find it annoying that the 13" can't drive the monitor at full resolution with a single USB-C cable. I did find it interesting from the article that this was NOT fixed by an EGPU. That means there is some software in the OS that is limiting this display. BTW, I did run two cables to the display on the 13" to treat it like two separate displays and I got full resolution that way, but that breaks things like the menu bar and and the dock spanning both screens and being centered.
I will try the SwitchResX application, but I have tried Display Menu and another similar app and neither shows the full resolution.
This screen is fantastic for wide spreadsheets and having multiple documents and websites open at the same time.
I will try the SwitchResX application, but I have tried Display Menu and another similar app and neither shows the full resolution.
This screen is fantastic for wide spreadsheets and having multiple documents and websites open at the same time.
I have a Dell UW 21:9 screen that is 3440x1440 and fits into this same family of non 4K/ non 5K displays as they are neither retina nor do they sport 2K+ vertical resolution. Good screen but not 5K in the true sense as it only sports the overall resolution due to the sheer pixel width.
They do point that out somewhere in the article, though the headline is misleading.
They do point that out somewhere in the article, though the headline is misleading.
People have developed their necks for actual movement for quite a while now. Eyes have been reported to move too.
Sarcasm aside. You are more likely to get neck staring at a single screen straight in front of you as you move less. Even more so for a laptop you look down on.
I don't understand how it would work with the 2013 MacPro which has neither Thunderbolt 3 or USB-C. I can see how someone who needs multiple displays would find this a very useful product. For me I'm really looking forward to Catalina with Sidecar.
I guess I should have said “more square” rather than “tall”.
I am pretty sure you can't say "more Square" at all... it's either square or it's a rectangle.
Eh?
"There's a single USB-C port that offers up to 80W of power for charging a MacBook, 2 HDMI ports, a DisplayPort"
MacPro 2013 has 1 HDMI + 6 thunderbolt that could take a TB2 > HDMI or TB2 > Displayport cable.
You can get a stand alone for $1000...
The speakers are good, but are not software controllable from MacOS so in this case they are worthless.
You can tell how poor quality something is by the number of outdated ports it has. This thing has USB-A, HDMI, DisplayPort, and even a headphone jack ha ha ha ha. What losers use any of these ports anymore, ha ha ha losers! Anything more than a single USB-C port is a good indication of a cheap, poor quality, out of date, electronic device these days. Recommend to not touch it.
You could run programs like After Effects, Premiere, Final Cut Pro and Logic full screen. Basically any app with a timeline would work great.
$1,500 for a display with 1440 lines of vertical resolution isn't a bargain by any stretch of the imagination.
I love these ultra wide monitors, but for me I'd go dual monitor every time. Rotating one to portrait for coding with the other in landscape for googling why the hell my code doesn't work is a godsend.
Though I have to agree for video or music editing, this monitor looks killer for showing the extended timeline.
Though I have to agree for video or music editing, this monitor looks killer for showing the extended timeline.
The marketing liars are working overtime on this one.
Calling a monitor with fewer pixels and less screen area than a 39" 4k monitor a 5k 49" display is just pathetic. I guess if I string 6,000 Christmas LEDs together 4" apart, I will have a 6k display that's a whopping 24,000 inches. Not bad considering it would be cheaper than this LG lie.
All I've learned from this article is that I won't be buying any LG products any time soon.
Calling a monitor with fewer pixels and less screen area than a 39" 4k monitor a 5k 49" display is just pathetic. I guess if I string 6,000 Christmas LEDs together 4" apart, I will have a 6k display that's a whopping 24,000 inches. Not bad considering it would be cheaper than this LG lie.
All I've learned from this article is that I won't be buying any LG products any time soon.
I had two 34” 3440x1440 for my Mac mini, but would love to have to get rid of the bezels in the middle so I really consider something like this especially since 49” fits perfectly for my desk. The 34’s go a bit outside. But I think I will wait until resolution is a bit better. While it is okay to use, every time I switch from my MacBook Pro I realise that it is not retina.
I don’t game that much, but they are cool with car games and flight sim as you get more immersed.
I don’t game that much, but they are cool with car games and flight sim as you get more immersed.
So to sum it up, if you're on a MacBook Pro and you need crisp detail, working in any thing design related, then this monitor isn't suited for you yet. At least that's the takeaway that I'm getting.
80W at 5V = 16 amps. I'd love to know what kind of conductors/PCB trace they use inside to carry that kind of current.
[doublepost=1561510364][/doublepost]
Even more than that, I wish Apple would have a decent consumer-grade desktop mac with reasonably high end consumer-grade desktop components at a reasonable price point to connect to that 5k display you want.
If the problems are the same as with other 32:9 monitors you can find a bit more about what people are discovering works, and what doesn't:
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ltrawide-display.2166555/page-5#post-27489117
TLDR: So people don't have to read that entire previous thread: Most users seem to be seeing the the problem crops whenever USB-C is thrown into the mix. I tested the 32:9 Philips (same 5120x1440 resolution) and it worked absolutely perfectly over DisplayPort on an ancient 2009 MacPro 4,1 with only a basic video card upgrade - the relatively budget Radeon rx560. It too was a no-go over USB-C however, with the same limited-resolution issue on a brand new Retina MacBook Air - even though it is well within Apple's spec for video over USB-C on that model.
There is a class of monitors (LG makes a nice curved one) that run at 3840x1600 - so it's a 21:9 ratio but you still get a fair amount of vertical. It's a size I really like; plenty wide enough for 2 or even three projects side by side, plus a bit extra vertical. The 32:9 monitor (Philips) I worked with was actually too wide unless you had a roller chair and wanted to roll sideways. (Also, the 3840x1600 monitor worked over USB-C with no issues, a bonus if you need something like this right away). I guess that won't work if you have a truly narrow workspace, but if what you are looking for is a modern monitor with a decent vertical resolution these seem like the way to go.
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ltrawide-display.2166555/page-5#post-27489117
TLDR: So people don't have to read that entire previous thread: Most users seem to be seeing the the problem crops whenever USB-C is thrown into the mix. I tested the 32:9 Philips (same 5120x1440 resolution) and it worked absolutely perfectly over DisplayPort on an ancient 2009 MacPro 4,1 with only a basic video card upgrade - the relatively budget Radeon rx560. It too was a no-go over USB-C however, with the same limited-resolution issue on a brand new Retina MacBook Air - even though it is well within Apple's spec for video over USB-C on that model.
There is a class of monitors (LG makes a nice curved one) that run at 3840x1600 - so it's a 21:9 ratio but you still get a fair amount of vertical. It's a size I really like; plenty wide enough for 2 or even three projects side by side, plus a bit extra vertical. The 32:9 monitor (Philips) I worked with was actually too wide unless you had a roller chair and wanted to roll sideways. (Also, the 3840x1600 monitor worked over USB-C with no issues, a bonus if you need something like this right away). I guess that won't work if you have a truly narrow workspace, but if what you are looking for is a modern monitor with a decent vertical resolution these seem like the way to go.