Help me understand output resolution and monitor choices?

Question

Level 1

9 points

Help me understand output resolution and monitor choices?

Will a 1440p monitor look good, or do i really need a 2160 (4k) for the Mac Mini’s onboard graphics chip?

I need to replace my ten-year-old 1920x1200 aRGB-capable display that doesn’t perform well with my brand new Mac Mini running Mojave. As I finally have come to understand it, the mini’s higher native resolution, when scaled to my display, doesn’t look great, especially regarding the font smoothing/subpixel anti-aliasing changes to Mojave that have been discussed elsewhere. (I’ve tried various terminal commands with some improvement, but still quite unsatisfying.)

My primary use is 80% high resolution photography, complemented by video production of various resolutions, audio, and graphics. I have concerns about window and text size, too, but would hope to avoid a 30” display if possible. There are some good choices for wide-gamut displays, but budget is a consideration too, so I want to know the tradeoffs, if any, of 1440 vs 4k, and 24” vs 27” or larger. (not really looking for a specific product recommendation, but to understand the specs.) And if there are important differences in the connection type...HDMI vs DP, etc.

I understand an eGPU might be of benefit, but that’ll have to be down the road.

Thanks for reading, and sharing your wisdom and experiences.

Mac mini 2018 or later

Posted on Oct 10, 2019 11:28 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Top-ranking reply

woodmeister50

Level 7

20,497 points

Oct 11, 2019 5:08 AM in response to LloydL

LloydL wrote:

....

I understand an eGPU might be of benefit, but that’ll have to be down the road.

...

In terms of just using for display, eGPU for your application really

has no benefit.

However, since you have mentioned you do photo work. and video

production, many of the apps leverage the use of the graphical

processing power of discrete GPUs. Some will simply not even work

on systems with the integrated graphics or will be molasses slow

even on the 2018 Minis. So, down the road, it may be a consideration

to improve your workflow speed.

I had seriously considered a new MacMini/Display replacement for

my 2013 27" iMac, but my photo work and apps would pretty

much require me to buy an eGPU as well.

BTW, in a normal desktop environment and my photo use, I find

the 27", 2560x1440 combo to work fine (I actually have 2), especially

with any "light table" form of viewing photo sessions.

Reply

Answer 2

den.thed

Level 10

82,342 points

Oct 10, 2019 11:43 AM in response to LloydL

For starters have a look at > Use 4K displays, 5K displays, and Ultra HD TVs with your Mac - Apple Support

Then over to > https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/12/07/how-to-pick-the-best-monitor-for-your-new-mac-mini

Reply

Answer 3

Tesserax

Level 10

152,145 points

Oct 10, 2019 12:49 PM in response to LloydL

FWIW, I went with a 27" Dell 4K monitor with my 2018 Mac mini. It is connected via a "Premium High Speed" HDMI cable (there are different HDMI cable levels with the premium level supporting 4K @ 60Hz and HDR). This worked perfectly with my mini running Mojave. Interestingly, after upgrading to Catalina, I was having issues getting a video signal to my Dell via this direct HDMI connection. I opted to use a USB-C-to-HDMI adapter which resolved this.

As the others have mentioned, the display size will matter when it comes to higher resolutions. I believe 27" is the minimum size where 4K is useable.

A few things that you may find helpful in narrowing down your display selections are:

Available video port: For 4K, look for any or combinations of the following: HDMI 2.0+, DisplayPort or Mini DisplayPort 1.2+, or Thunderbolt 3.
For general use, Full HD (1920 x 1080 @ 60Hz) is plenty. For photographic work both Quad HD (2560 x 1440 @ 60Hz) or DCI 4K (4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz).
Display size: This is very subjective, but I would suggest 27" or greater for 4K. Better still, I would recommend a 32" display.

Reply

Answer 4

hcsitas

Level 6

12,806 points

Oct 10, 2019 12:10 PM in response to LloydL

4K is overkill for standalone monitors 27” or under (too many pixels for the real estate). eGPU is too, nobody honestly understands what it’s for, especially Apple. Best avoided. As for resolution 2560x1440 on 24-27 with HDMI is imo just right, unless you prefer a larger display in which case Thunderbolt 4K is better. LG is the only one offering certified Thunderbolt 3 ($$$$). If you have any money leftover, expand RAM. Good luck.

Reply

Answer 5

Tesserax

Level 10

152,145 points

Oct 10, 2019 12:58 PM in response to LloydL

Again, FWIW. I found anything displayed originally at 4K to be too small. I just used the System Preferences > Display > Display tab > Resolution = Scaled and choose a setting that worked best for me.

The key here is the overall display size. The smaller the display, the smaller the text will appear at higher resolutions. That's why 27" is the minimum I suggest for 4K.

Reply

Answer 6

LloydL Author

Level 1

9 points

Oct 10, 2019 12:56 PM in response to LloydL

Thanks. Any sense of how text (menu bar, finder windows, etc.) will appear at 1440 though? Looks mediocre on my 1200, and I don’t want it to be just passable.

Reply

Answer 7

robby163

Level 1

117 points

Oct 10, 2019 2:22 PM in response to Tesserax

I had the exact problem with the hdmi connector on the Mac mini after upgrading to Catalina . Using a usb c to hdmi adapter worked perfectly . I am running a lg 33” 4 k display

Reply