Dell U4919DW / MacBook pro 5k issue

I am waiting for Type-C to Disport port cable arrive.

I dont think splitting it solve the problem.

I dont want to be solved.

I ONLY need Apple to solve the problem because it is their mistake, their false advisement.

After someday they may add the description of the mac as below:

Up to two displays:

One display with 5120-by-2880 resolution at 60Hz connected via Thunderbolt 3 plus one display with 4096-by-2160 resolution at 60Hz connected via HDMI 2.0

*Only apply to ratio at 16:9*

Note for Mac users:

https://www.dell.com/support/article/zh-hk/sln314416/dell-u4919dw-system-requirements-and-supported-configuration?lang=en&ref=topsolutions

If you are using an Intel Graphics card on your Mac, you will be able to display upto 3840 x 1080 resolution with the USB-C connection to the Dell U4919DW monitor.

For a higher resolution of 5120 x 1440 with the USB-C connection, use a Mac with a non-Intel discrete graphics card (NVIDIA or AMD).

PersistentOptimist wrote:

Note for Mac users:

https://www.dell.com/support/article/zh-hk/sln314416/dell-u4919dw-system-requirements-and-supported-configuration?lang=en&ref=topsolutions

If you are using an Intel Graphics card on your Mac, you will be able to display upto 3840 x 1080 resolution with the USB-C connection to the Dell U4919DW monitor.

For a higher resolution of 5120 x 1440 with the USB-C connection, use a Mac with a non-Intel discrete graphics card (NVIDIA or AMD).

I would be fine with answer that if it didn't work perfectly [5120 x 1440 resolution] on the exact same hardware (Mac Mini or MBP 13") running Windows 10. Try it. Boot Camp windows 10 on a Mac Mini or MBP 13" with the Intel graphics card and you will see that you can get 5120 x 1440 resolution no problem. The hardware is not the problem. It is capable of the desired resolution. Common sense would dictate that the issue is Mac OS. Unfortunately, Apple refuses to acknowledge / address / fix 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."

We have already explained that this is nonsense. Apple itself advertises the Mini as compatible with 5k, which is 5120x2880. And again, technically display resolutions are a product from refresh rate x lines x pixels. In this way, even the cheap Intel graphics chips allow even unusual resolution ratios. (And they do using Windows 10 on a Mac with Intel Graphics - the 49" DELL works like a charme there)

Secondly, electronically there is no difference between a 4k and an 8k cable. it is just a question of shielding that allows higher data transfer rates.

The new 2020 MacBook Pro 13 inch has new 10th gen CPU with Gen11 graphics (don't get the MacBook Pro with the 8th gen CPU) which can support DisplayPort 1.4 and "Display Stream Compression" so it shouldn't have a problem with single link SST 6K (with DSC) or single link SST 5K displays.

MacBook has only USB-C. MacBook Air and MacBook Pro have Thunderbolt 3.

Thanks JeanLuc7. I realized after I made my original post I could test it out myself. As you posted that, I was testing PbP on a 27in LG display I already have. I currently have my 2019 13" MacBook Pro with Intel Graphics connected with 1 USB C cable and 1 Apple USB C > HDMI adapter + an Amazon HDMI cable.

1. I had a slight difference in color between the two monitors. (See in the video below) They both had the LG monitor's color profile. I didn't try to calibrate or fix.
2. When scrolling, I noticed some "tearing" where each page scrolled at a different speed. https://youtu.be/YNGpsfc83B4
3. As you mentioned there are two options: by default apps can only be on one screen, but going full screen only affects 1 app. If you disable "Displays have separate Spaces", apps can be on multiple screens, but going full screen "blacks out" the other screens. This is weird that you have to choose. On Windows, you have the best of both worlds without needing a setting. Apps can be between windows. Going full screen takes over only the monitor your app is mostly on. Back to Mac, I think maximizing instead of true full screen works for most apps. However it's annoying that Windows has best of both worlds, where as Mac forces you to choose. You also need to log out/in to change the setting.
4. I had a small bug where System Prefs would not let me drag the menu bar until I reverted to the original arrangement of the monitor. I was able to move the menu bar first THEN arrange the monitors.
5. The login screen is on one monitor. Again, minor quibble.
6. The default photo wallpaper makes the gap apparent - might want a flat color wallpaper.

I think I would keep the"Displays have separate Spaces" off and just maximize apps instead of proper full screen. Do you keep "Displays have separate Spaces" on or off?

Have you noticed the different colors and tearing when scrolling? That would probably be most annoying.

-Plaz

Hello guys, quick update:

The full resolution works on the new MacBook Pro 13 with the 10th gen CPU. I contacted Apple support regarding this problem and managed to get a full refund for my MacBook Pro 13 2019 model and got myself the new 2020 model with the new CPU.

My MBP is also not in the refund window. Apple made it seem like I can get a refund if I had bought it directly from them. Unfortunately, I had bought it thru a reseller via the military base exchange and I can see the reseller not accepting returns due to the refund window passing. I haven't tried going in the store to try since this COVID thing. Makes me rethink on buying any apple products other than directly from Apple for proper support/returns especially in this situation. You would think the apple warranty support should cover it but I'm getting tired of spending additional hours on top of the countless hours I've already spent.

Thanks for the info!

I was having the same issue with my late 2017 12" MacBook. The max resolution I could do is 3840x1080. Downloaded

SwitchResX, I was able to achieve 5120x1440 (low resolution). Was not useable at all. I also tried a couple things, used a Dell USB-C doc, still the same result. Guess there isn't a solution to get 5120x1440. I sold this 12" MacBook last week and purchased 16" MacBook (2019). I happy to report that 5120x1440 works perfectly !

"It's not Apple! It's not us! It's Intel!"

But you are wrong, Apple. The Intel Graphics Processing Unit supports 5120x1440 - which is actually not 5k, but 2.5k. Just install Windows on Bootcamp on your Intel-GPU Notebooks, and you will see a perfectly supported DELL, Philips or whatever 49" 32x9 display with 5120x1440.

So Sajhd, you may get a refund, but they are not telling the truth - they have to upgrade their Apple Graphics Driver for Intel. And it is possible - iof you read through the thread, you will find that Apple itself launched a work-around for the LG 49" monitor, which makes this one work at its original resolution.

JeanLuc7 wrote:

So Sajhd, you may get a refund, but they are not telling the truth - they have to upgrade their Apple Graphics Driver for Intel. And it is possible - iof you read through the thread, you will find that Apple itself launched a work-around for the LG 49" monitor, which makes this one work at its original resolution.

Apple did not make a work-around for Intel graphics. The new Intel graphics with 10th gen CPU and Gen11 graphics just doesn't have the 4K width limitation but it's not the same GPU as the Macs with older Intel GPUs or the MacPro6,1 with the broken AMD GPUs. Apple's workaround was for newer AMD GPUs only.

With Linux Intel graphics drivers, it appears all the Intel GPUs use the same code and the fix for 5K was just one line of code.

Look at: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display.c

Compare

skl_max_plane_width (Skylake, 6th gen CPU, Gen 9 GPU)

glk_max_plane_width (Gemini Lake SoC, Gen 9.5 GPU)

icl_max_plane_width (Ice Lake, 10th gen CPU, Gen 11 GPU)

Patch:

https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/329143/?series=66286&rev=2

Linux GPU Driver Developer's Guide:

https://dri.freedesktop.org/docs/drm/gpu/index.html

Intel graphics documentation:

https://01.org/linuxgraphics/documentation

Ice Lake supports 5120 for all tile types (Linux doesn't support 6K?) while Skylake has 5120 only for I915_FORMAT_MOD_X_TILED type with 4 bytes per pixel. Actually, if 8 bytes per pixel allows 4096 then 4 bytes per pixel should allow 8192?

Perhaps Apple's graphics drivers have other limits that don't allow this fix (uses other tile types?)?

Mister_Highping wrote:

The System Information.app shows the following information:

Intel UHD Graphics 617:

And the AGDCDiagnose is attached to this post.

<AGDCDiagnose_Big_Sur.txt.log>

It looks like System Information.app in Big Sur has not improved on the set of info it reports. It's still basically useless because it does not show output resolution or output pixel format or output color space.

Your AGDCDiagnose output from Big Sur is very similar to the last version you sent from the previous macOS version. I forgot that AGDCDiagnose does not include output resolution size for Intel graphics (unlike AMD graphics) so there's nothing there we can use as sufficient evidence. We need a screenshot of the timing info from SwitchResX in the Current Resolutions tab (double click the resolution to see the timing info), or output from the command

log stream --style compact --debug --predicate 'message contains "5120x1440"'

showing 5120x1440 timing (not scaled) succeeded.

SwitchResX works in Big Sur but there are some minor issues:

• the menu icon sometimes gets drawn in the middle of the screen - click it to restore its position to the menu bar
• the radio button in the Current Resolutions list does not always point at the current resolution - use the menubar instead
• the Custom Resolutions status is not always updated after an Activate - turn off or disconnect display, then turn on or reconnect

I did try adding a 5120x1440 60Hz CVT-RB timing on my Mac mini 2018 (Intel UHD Graphics 630). It works for my DisplayPort display when connected to AMD RX 580 but not Intel.

I tried looking at CoreDisplay.framework for strings that might be new preferences but the code for frameworks is not in the usual place. https://lapcatsoftware.com/articles/bigsur.html

Grant Bennet-Alder wrote:

When you use Picture BY Picture in conjunction with Arrangement on the Mac, the two screens are connected at the virtual "seam" between them and work completely as one. The mouse moves freely across the "seam" and you can park a window half on each display -- filling as much or as little of each display as you like. when you scroll that window, it will scroll "the right way".

Oh so I could also "split" the screen in 3 windows - left, middle, right? If so, what's the difference between this workaround and the "real deal" using it as one screen with the full resolution?

But yes on older MacBook Pro this requires two cables. At this writing, it continues to be thought of as a deficit in the graphics chips used -- the 2020 models [four ThunderBolt ports] with more advanced graphics chips have no problems. No one knows whether Apple will release software that can work around the issue. It may not be possible.

Huh, I thought Mister_Highping got it working with his MacBook 2018 on Big Sur (see screenshot he posted on june 26th)? Plus I thought I read that on a Windows installed on an older MacBook it's working too. That's why I was sure it was a software issue. Is that wrong?

There is no way to know for certain whether Big Sur will make anything "better" in this regard. My advice: "Don't bank on it, until Big Sur is released."

****. I really like the Dell and the 49" curved screens in general. Do you know if it's the same issue with all of them? e.g. the Samsung C49RG94SSU or the LG 49WL95C-W?

Hi,

if you are speaking of macOS, with PbP you must always disable the „Desktops use different spaces“ option. Otherwise windows will be cut, when they cross the middle of the screen. With Windows 10, this is not necessary.

Awesome, thank you guys! That was it. The displays were not aligned properly.

Now I have only one issue left: The color or brightness on the "left screen" is slightly different than on the "right screen":

I can't find a setting for each individual virtual screen. Do you know what to do?