Which monitor should work better for the MM2?

[rdza]

Hi,

So finally I have decided to get the MM2 after debating in other thread if it would be good for my use.

Now the question is if my current monitor would work well with the Mac or I should go for 4k. My current monitor is the TUF Gaming VG27AQZ Monitor IPS WQHD (2560 X 1440) https://www.rtings.com/monitor/reviews/asus/tuf-vg27aq

If this will not perform good on my upcoming MM2 which monitor should I be going for (250-300$ budget). Here I leave a few options that are maybe good:

LG 27UL500-W​

LG 27UL500-W - Monitor 27 pulgadas UHD, Panel IPS: 3840x2160, 60Hz, 5 ms, 1000:1, 300nit, sRGB 98%, 16:9, HDMI, DisplayPort, Conectividad Universal, Inclinación Ajustable, Color Blanco

LG 27UL500-W, monitor UHD 4K de 27" (panel IPS 3840 x 2160 pixeles, ultra hd, 16: 9, 300cd/m², 1000: 1, SRGB 98%, 60hz, 5ms) color blanco; diag. 68, 4cm; entradas: HDMI x2, DP x1.

www.amazon.es

Dell 27 4K UHD USB-C - S2722QC​

Monitor Dell 27 4K UHD con USB-C - S2722QC | Dell España

Un impresionante monitor UHD 4K de 68,58cm (27") que se adapta perfectamente a su hogar y mejora las experiencias gracias a la conectividad USB-C adicional.

www.dell.com

Will any of those two be better than my current one? (I have to say I plan on gaming on PS5 in the future as well). Feel free to post any other recommendations. Thank you as usual.

 

[iStorm]

I can't speak about the monitors themselves; but for a 27" display, I think most people go with either 1440p or a 5K display.

With a 4K display, macOS will want to scale it 2x by default to what "looks like 1080p". The UI will be larger than what most people prefer. You can scale it to "looks like 1440p" for a more comfortable viewing experience, but then you may notice a performance hit since it's not a nice integer scaling. (A 5K display is twice the linear resolution of a 1440p display, so it scales more efficiently.)

The guy in this video explains it well.

 

[meson]

I use the LG 32UL500. My office is fairly bright with a window behind me. I run the monitor at or near full brightness. A couple weeks per year when the sun sets on a certain part of the horizon, I wish it were slightly brighter for an hour or two per day. The only other small issue I is that due to the VA panel of the 32” model, the viewing angles in the periphery of my vision could be better, but the IPS panel of the 27” model would be better in this regard.

I bounce back and forth between the LG screen and my 13” M1 MBP regularly, and find the colors close enough to not bother me. Follow the setup on rtings.com, and you will be very pleased.

 

[MikeDr206]

TBH, I would say 4k is the minimum. 5K is preferred, but I get that some people don’t see the difference between 4k and 5K, and understand there is a huge cost difference between the two.

But I’d never go back to 1440p or 1080p.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I think of myself as a consumer-first thinker around here, meaning I generally am not siding with the extremists at both ends... BUT the "5K or bust" message sunk into me enough from reading it too many times to be concerned when a family member got a new Mac with an LG 4K monitor. I hooked it up for them and it looked great. I did not see the "blurry text" often slung against anything less than 5K and everything else visually looked just fine.

While I have a 5K monitor myself, I no longer believe that rampant spin. Is there a visual difference of 5K vs. 4K? Of course because one has sharper resolution. But it is a "must" decision to only consider 5K? Not at all. If my monitor was 4K, I would quickly adapt to it and not notice the difference (except in still having much more monitor cash in my wallet).

If someone is shopping for a monitor, 4K can be quite great. Be sure you have a return policy so you can pass judgement with your own eyes. But my 20:20s see 4K as a terrific resolution for a Mac screen.

OP: I encourage you to read as many reviews as you can find for each of those monitors. If both are sold on Amazon, there will inevitably be some reviews that include Mac users using them. Read their reviews carefully to see if they offer anything tangible about why you might favor one vs. the other. However, IMO, if the spin is "5K or bust" I suggest just rolling on to the next review.

Yes, 5K looks great... but there's also 6K and 8K monitors too. Yes, 5K apparently offers perfect pixel doubling for "retina" but how easily the average eyes can really see that now seems much less certain to me. I paid up at $2K for a 5K monitor. Their 4K monitor cost $500 (or 25% of what I paid). I could have easily gone with theirs too and been quite happy with it as a Mac monitor.

 

[picpicmac]

There are some very long threads here about monitors, about monitors and the M-series of chips, and about 5K monitors. Recommend you go check them out.

There are even some religions that have sprung up about these topics, and be warned that there are some sectarian battles over monitors!

Some of the religious denominations:

• There a 1440ites and anti-1440ites.
• There are 4k-ites, and anti-4k-ites.
• There are 5k-or-bust fundamentalists.

Highly recommend you go and look, with your own eyes, at some monitors.

As for me: I'm agnostic on the whole monitor-god. But I'm old, have intraocular lens replacements, and never will see as well as I did when I was young, so it doesn't matter a whole lot, other than brightness control and color accuracy.

There are a few well known issues about LCD monitors in general:
1) construction quality on many are rather poor;
2) panel failure after a year or two is not uncommon;
3) there was, perhaps still is, an interoperability issue between the M-series Macs and some third party monitors, e.g. "flickering".

 

[ozziegn]

I run dual 28" 4K monitors with my M2 Pro. Works great!