You can make a difference in the Apple Support Community!

When you sign up with your Apple Account, you can provide valuable feedback to other community members by upvoting helpful replies and User Tips.

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

User profile for user: Border Heeler
Border Heeler Author
User level: Level 1
83 points

New M2 Pro Mac Mini and monitor resolution

I see that the new M2 Pro Mac Mini will support up to an 8K single monitor or a combo of 6K and 4K monitors. OK, so here is where my somewhat fuzzy understanding of resolution comes in. People say that Macs generally have a "native resolution" of 5K; hence, scaling a 4K monitor to 1440 can create problems. So it is better (e.g., with the M1 Mac Mini) to get a 1440 or a 5K monitor, especially if you like the size of text and objects in 1440 mode.


Does this change, then, with the new M2 Pro Mac Mini? Is its "native resolution" different? (If so, is it 8K? 6K? 4K?) I am interested in the Studio Display but will that 5K monitor no longer be congruent with the "native resolution" (or ideally scalable)? Any insight is appreciated!


(BTW, I would only be getting one monitor, 27" or a bit bigger.)

Mac mini 2018 or later

Posted on Jan 19, 2023 7:17 PM

Reply
Question marked as Top-ranking reply
User profile for user: woodmeister50
woodmeister50
User level: Level 7
20,473 points

Posted on Jan 21, 2023 5:42 AM

Forget "native" resolution for the moment.


What is required is to run the display at a "visual" resolution at which you're most comfortable viewing it at. If you ran an 8K display the desktop and apps at full "visual" resolution, things would be so incredibly small you could not read them. So, you would actually compose the content of the screen at a much smaller "visual" resolution. So, with an 8K display, if a 4K visual resolution or even 2K would be comfortable for you to use, what the 8K display buys you is a much sharper display of that "visual" resolution.


The general computer industry calls operating in these modes HiDPI where as Apple coins the phase "Retina".


Example, for many people on a 4k display, displaying the "visual" resolution of the desktop and apps at 4K is way to small for them. So, they will opt for a smaller "visual" resolution until they have one that is comfortable for viewing.



View in context

Similar questions

6 replies
Question marked as Top-ranking reply
User profile for user: woodmeister50
woodmeister50
User level: Level 7
20,473 points

Jan 21, 2023 5:42 AM in response to Border Heeler

Forget "native" resolution for the moment.


What is required is to run the display at a "visual" resolution at which you're most comfortable viewing it at. If you ran an 8K display the desktop and apps at full "visual" resolution, things would be so incredibly small you could not read them. So, you would actually compose the content of the screen at a much smaller "visual" resolution. So, with an 8K display, if a 4K visual resolution or even 2K would be comfortable for you to use, what the 8K display buys you is a much sharper display of that "visual" resolution.


The general computer industry calls operating in these modes HiDPI where as Apple coins the phase "Retina".


Example, for many people on a 4k display, displaying the "visual" resolution of the desktop and apps at 4K is way to small for them. So, they will opt for a smaller "visual" resolution until they have one that is comfortable for viewing.



Reply
User profile for user: Border Heeler
Border Heeler Author
User level: Level 1
83 points

Jan 21, 2023 9:30 AM in response to woodmeister50

Thank you all for explaining this. Extremely helpful! So, just two clarifications:


  1. If I like the size of print and objects on my older iMac, with a 2560x1440 resolution, then a 5K monitor would be a good choice then, right? (Having the text be a bit crisper would be nice.)
  2. The resolutions mentioned for the new Mac Mini M2 Pro - 8K, 6K, 4K - are just maximums, then, not requirements or ideals? In other words, a 5K monitor would not be incompatible? (I kept reading that Macs "work better" with 1440 and 5K monitors and to avoid 4K monitors, so I thought that meant that the monitor resolution had to match the computer. There's a lot of fuzzy info out there...)
Reply
User profile for user: woodmeister50
woodmeister50
User level: Level 7
20,473 points

Jan 22, 2023 4:53 AM in response to Border Heeler

  1. yes
  2. exactly they are just maximums. 5K would work just fine which is the resolution of the Apple Studio Display.


FWIW I use a 4K display with my Mac and it works just fine. It displays at a 2560x1440 resolution quite well and is clear and crisp if that answers your question. However, I generally use it at the full 4K resolution as I like having the extra desktop space and my eyes can deal with the smaller text the vast majority of the time.

Reply
User profile for user: robertdownunder
robertdownunder
User level: Level 1
14 points

Jan 20, 2023 11:15 AM in response to Rudegar

I assume Border Heeler was actually referring to the resolution limits of the M2 Mac Mini and how that will look on a 27” widescreen monitor. Both the Mac Mini and Monitor will have limitations on what can be displayed at a useful resolution.

The question remains as to which is the best compromise that enables the optimal use of the display.

At this point I have not seen any screen manufacturer discuss this issue. It seems this will be reliant upon trials as to what looks best given the difficulties in assessments. This is beyond just the “native resolution” of the display. Which only describes an upper resolution and not, necessarily, the most practical.

Reply

New M2 Pro Mac Mini and monitor resolution

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.
Learn more Sign up