Dell U4919DW / MacBook pro 5k issue

I've had the U4919DW for a few days now.

Giving it two monitor feeds is, as discussed, the only solution for many (I have a Macbook pro 13" (2107) with touch bar).

It works but can be frustrating: You can see a colour difference down the middle, no matter how hard you try to calibrate.

I use BetterTouchTool and with custom snap areas I can divide the screen into three and snap windows which is neat but all the apps (including BTT) get confused. Many of them are designed to open the File dialog in the middle of the screen, many of the windows shift when you open another dialog etc...

It's workable and in my opinion worth it as it's a great screen. But I have had to compromise. I was running it off a USB-C signal and a USB-c to DP adaptor as two cables running from my Macbook which was just about acceptable but although I could plug a USB Gigabit network adaptor into the screen (hub), I couldn't get the same throughput compared to if it was plugged into the Macbook directly - which was a killer for me. So I still have to use my LandingZone docking station and I don't use any of the hub features of the screen.

I'm looking forward to not having to use the docking station (when Apple allow the Macbook to work with the resolution) but I think I will still need two cables from the MacBook (one for the screen and one for a network adapter)

I've just got this screen and its working at full res even though sys prefs say (low res) next to the resolution. I'm using a Anker USB-C Thunderbolt 3 cable (40gb) if that helps anyone (https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B076D76DRQ)

I can't state yes or no for the 2018 MacBook Pro - but I have a 15 inch 2017 MacBook pro with an Radeon Pro 560 GPU and MacOs 10.14.4 and I am indeed able to achieve full 5k resolution - with one monitor.

However, it sure looks like there's a software bug though that Apple needs to fix with regard to the resolution Apple is displaying via Apple->About this Mac->Displays. For me, that's not showing the actual resolution I'm getting - it's showing (falsely) 3840x1080 whereas it certainly looks as if I'm getting the full 5k. And that's confirmed by Apple->About this Mac->System Report->Graphics/Displays, which does indeed show that I'm getting 5120x1440 @60Hz. And I'm not using any 3rd party apps to get there (like SwitchResX, etc).

Clearly, both of those things cannot be true at the same time - so this sure seems like a software bug on Apple's side. I nearly returned the monitor before realizing that the display resolution being described wasn't actually correct (as I mention above). I've called Apple support on this - and that whole experience has been very disappointing. The apathy is breathtaking.

Did you try the Picture-by-Picture mode? This mode splits up the display to 2 virtual 2560x1440 screens, and these are recognized at least with SwitchResX. Use one USB-C-only cable and another USB-C-to-Displayport cable to connect both virtual screns to the Mac.

Has anyone tried setting a custom EDID using this guide? I was able to get a MBP '13 to work with a 3140 x 1440 60hz monitor. https://gist.github.com/ejdyksen/8302862. This might work with newer 32:9 monitors as well.

"I cannot believe that Apple can get away with advertising that this

MacBook Pro can drive 5120x2880 resolution when it is not true with all

the monitors."

Your MBP works properly with 5120x2880. It is this special 5120x1440 resolution that does not work - and it is macOS-related. Try Windows with Bootcamp, and you get 5120x1440 OOB. It's the way how they implemented the Intel graphics driver. Looks like there should be a table with valid resolutions to be updated. However, they don't care.

askingretail wrote:

I have been struggling to get the U4919DW to run at 5120x1440 for about a week now and the best solution would be to purchase an eGPU enclosure, GFX Card and possibly a PSU. Currently, using one Thunderbolt 3 connection to my 13" 2019 MacBook Pro I was able to achieve this result using the equipment as follows:

a. OWC Mercury Helios FX eGPU Enclosure ($300)

b. XFX AMD Radeon RX 580 Graphics Card. ($179)

c. Corsair CX650M Modular PSU (Although might not be necessary) ($80)

d. Apple Thunderbolt 3 Cable (Host - eGPU) ($60) 

e. DIsplayPort Cable included with U4919DW (eGPU - U4919DW)

When I initially connected the eGPU to the Host, the entire system shutdown and subsequently went into an infinite boot -reboot crash cycle. To resolve, I completely reformatted the BootDrive to factory conditions including any partitions or APFS containers I had created to "start fresh".

Once MacOS 10.14.6 was installed, I connected the Thunderbolt 3 cable from the eGPU to the left hand side of my MacBook Pro and the display woke up and to my relief in all its 5k glory.

It's only a $600 work around and I needed an eGPU anyways because they are awesome, but it is the only solution so far that works for me, and I've tried everything - including every suggestion posted in the forum.

The dual display trick is ratchet to be clear to anyone who endorses it.

I don't endorse the PbP solution, but I use it. It seems more reasonable to buy a second cable than to buy an $800 eGPU, on top of having spent over $3k for my 13" MBP, and $1.5k for this monitor.

It's insulting to have to buy an eGPU when you know the issue is only a matter of Apple / someone creating a display overlay for MacOS. And from I've read the eGPU solution doesn't work with Catalina.

Apple's attitude towards their customers having this problem -> https://tenor.com/view/south-park-too-bad-nipple-rub-rub-nipple-gif-4759593

I'd like to share my experiences here.

I thought about buying this display for a long time, and after reading this topic over and over, I finally decided to do it, even if the full resolution would only be possible with the PbP-"hack".

And I don't regret it at all!

First, my setup:

• A Dell U4919DW
• A Macbook Pro 15'' 2017 with Intel HD Graphics 630 1536mb (integrated) + Radeon Pro 555 2GB (dedicated), OS X 10.15.2
• A Macbook Pro 13'' Mid 2014 with Intel Iris 1536mb (integrated), OS X 10.15.2

First I plugged in the 15'' via the USB-C cable that shipped with the monitor. And it worked OOTB! Full 5120x1440x60 resolution, no upscaling. Just the full native resolution. The macbook got charged automatically and the integrated usb hub worked flawlessly as well. One single cable to the Macbook, that's all. Perfect!

Then I plugged in the 13'' via the HDMI cable that shipped with the display, and a (very cheap, and a few years old) 3rd-party mini-dp to hdmi cable. Turned on the PbP-mode on the monitor, and second success! The monitor renders 2 displays at native 2560x1440x60 each. So in total, there is the full native resolution here too.

Both setups run fine, no problems at all with sleep mode etc. The monitor gets recognized every time without any hassle.

Also, there is absolutely no change on closing the lid oder powering the macbooks. Both macbooks work with lid open/closed and power source connected/disconnected. (The 15'' with usb-c connected does actually charge the macbook as I wrote earlier, so I can't guarantee that it works without it, but I'm fairly sure it should be fine).

However, I see 2 minor downsides on this monitor:

• Imho the radius is too large for this display. The edges are a bit far away from the eyes. But that's personal preference. Maybe you should go see the monitor somewhere in a store before you decide if you wanna buy it or not.
• The on-display menu is only accessible if a display source is present. Therefore you have to toggle the PbP mode before you change the input. That is a bit weird, but no problem if you do so.

Apart from this, the monitor is just WOW! Very massive, nice and clean design, no dead pixels at all. Very high quality as usual and expected by Dell.

So the EDID issue was not reproducable, at least for me. But I'm happy to help if you need further specific information regarding my setup!

Apple support are generally unknowledgeable. You need to talk to an Apple developer.

The problem is with Intel graphics (or Apple's Intel graphics driver). If you have a Mac that uses AMD graphics then it shouldn't be a problem. If you have a problem with a Mac that has AMD graphics then post details here.

5120x2880 works on Intel graphics only if the display uses dual cable or dual link SST DisplayPort 1.2 (e.g. LG UltraFine 5K) where it actually uses two signals (each 2560x2880) for two side-by-side tiles.

The LG 34" UltraWide 5K2K is tiled 5120x2160 and is supported by macOS. It also has an untiled mode using DisplayPort 1.4.

As far as I know, there are no 5120x1440 displays that are tiled.

The custom resolutions that you can create in SwitchResX are validated by different pieces/levels of the operating system. At the highest levels are the CoreDisplay framework. At the lowest levels are the drivers for the GPU (Intel, AMD, Nvidia). Any of those levels may reject a resolution. The "log stream" command (posted earlier) can be used to see what resolutions/timings/pixel formats are attempted and which are accepted or rejected (and a reason why it was rejected).

I don't know why the macOS Intel graphics driver rejects resolutions greater than 4096 wide, while Boot Camp / Windows allows it.

If you are using mac mini 2018 or older, Macbook air that without external graphic card, you CANNOT use native 5120x1440 until you die because the internal graphic card only support maximum up to 4096 x 2160. APPLE can never solve this.

**In this case, I bought my mac-mini 2018 over a year, and last month a bought a CRG90 that mac mini do not support, Apple finally have to make a full refund to me due to false advisement. **

If you are using Macbook pro or iMac, congrats your computer support 5120 x 1440, all you need is a 8k/60 Hz (same is 4k/144Hz) cable with Display port 1.4 output and Thunderbolt 3 Cable with usb-c input. I believe Apple consider horizontal pixels more than 3840 is not 4k anymore so you need a 8k cable to make it works. This cable is extremely rare, let me clarify below. ( I have a iMac 2017 and Macbook Pro 2019 in which both support native 5120 x 1440 )

USB-C only = USB 3.1 = up to 10 Gbps which support 4k/60Hz ONLY

USB-C with thunderbolt 3 = up to 40 Gbps which do support 8k/60Hz and 4k/144Hz

Display port 1.4 = up to 32.4 Gbps which support 8k/60Hz and 4k/144Hz

**So you need a cable with displayport 1.4 speed with another head as usb-c thunderbolt 3**

Some of you guys may find a cable selling cheap around 20-30 USD having usb-c and Displayport, this cable do not support 8k because it is just USB-C = USB 3.1 which support up to 4k/60Hz only, definitely not Display port 1.4 level.

[Edited by Moderator]

I stated early-on in this discussion that the Hardware (I was thinking display-generator Hardware) was completely separate for the separate displays. Thats is basically true, but the RAM used for screen buffers is Not separate, it is shared.

There is an interesting discussion that has been going on for five months concerning the 16-in MacBook Pro 2019. It is up to about 114 pages at this writing.

Rrecently, some new information came forward:

• The interface you choose is EXTREMELY important. HDMI requires the Mac to reproduce the "heartbeat" refresh -- a row-by-row sending of the display data with very strict timing requirements, and just in time to be displayed properly. And it must be sent every interval -- 60 times a second. Being late causes that row to be blanked, which may cause flickering. At 5120 x 1440 at 60Hz, that is a LOT of data.

So use DisplayPort family (or USB-C). Don't even consider HDMI.

• if another display using a heartbeat refresh is connected at the same time, it may cause so much additional strain on memory timing that your Mac cannot maintain this resolution.

(the built-in display is a heartbeat refresh display.)

So DO try the experiment of using Closed Clamshell mode. You may get dramatically different results.

Use your Mac notebook computer in closed-display mode with an external display - Apple Support

.

Mister_Highping wrote:

Here is the output of the terminal logging:

<Terminal output.log>

Are you already using Big Sur and don't have the default resolution or are you trying to achieve it with Catalina? Maybe they wrote new Intel drivers for it?

I installed Big Sur on my Mac mini 2018 to try and reproduce your success. My 4K display doesn't have the 5120x1440 timing so I added it as a custom resolution and I also tried using your EDID. Both work with my AMD eGPU but not with the Intel GPU. My 4K display is able to accept higher resolution timings like 5120x2880 5120x1440 and scale them down so that's not the problem. Your EDID doesn't have HDR options but does have Underscan option - both of those changes also affect my display (in the Displays preferences panel for my display, your EDID removes the HDR option and it adds an under scan option).

Your log stream result shows that 5120x1440 30Hz and 60Hz timings succeeded at 8 bpc. I believe 10 bpc is not possible for resolution width > 4096 on Intel graphics. The problem with log stream is that it might not catch all messages (it says "=== Messages dropped during live streaming (use `log show` to see what they were)"). To use log show, first you need to turn on capture of info or debug messages from the com.apple.CoreDisplay subsystem:

sudo log config --subsystem com.apple.CoreDisplay --mode level:debug

Then you can repeat the test without log stream. Use log show to show the last minute of the log like this:

log show --last 1m --style compact --info --debug --predicate 'message contains "5120x1440"'

Your log stream shows that your Intel GPU uses the following driver:

AppleIntelKBLGraphicsFramebuffer

My Mac mini 2018 uses the following drivers (Coffee Lake is a newer version of Kaby Lake):

AppleIntelCFLGraphicsFramebuffer
AppleIntelKBLGraphics

Maybe Apple fixed the older Kaby Lake Framebuffer driver but not the newer Coffee Lake Framebuffer driver.

Use the following command to find which drivers are used:

kextstat | grep Intel | egrep "Graphics|Framebuffer"

SwitchResX should be version 4.10.0. SwitchResX creates overrides in /Library instead of /System/Library now. You may need to disconnect and reconnect the display for custom resolutions to get used.

The preponderance of evidence suggests that only the 2020 model MacBook Pro 13-in can run such a wide display with one DisplayPort cable.

Older MacBook Pro 13-in require two DisplayPort cables and picture-beside-picture, which is why there has been so much continuing discussion on that option.

Yes ! Now, I have my brand new Displayport to USB C (1.4) cable, and it was plug and play : my monitor detect my Mac and go to 5120x1440 directly!

Now it's all good !

MacBook Pro 2018 i5 13" (Big Sur Beta 4 Dev) + Displayport 1.4 to USB C cable + Samsung 49" CRG9 = everything is compatible and look awesome

No, it's 5K wide by 1440 pixels high instead of 5K wide by 2880 pixels high. The height doesn't matter. In Catalina, the Skylake, Kabylake, Coffee Lake, and older Intel GPUs are limited to 4096 width.

The LG UltraFine 5K displays work with those GPUs because they use two 2560x2880 signals.

The 5K by 1440 displays that don't work with those GPUs in Catalina will work in Big Sur for those GPUs except for SkyLake and older GPUs.