4 ms·

I've tried a lot of different monitor setups for productivity - ranging from three 24" 4k displays to a single 49" ultrawide, and ultimately have found the best

I've tried a lot of different monitor setups for productivity - ranging from three 24" 4k displays to a single 49" ultrawide, and ultimately have found the best setup for me is dual 27" 4ks, each running at a "scaled" 2560x1440. MacOS in particular does an excellent job of rendering 2560x1440 to a 4K screen, and the increased DPI over a regular 1440p 27" screen is very noticeable. Another option if you're not a fan of 27" displays is a pair of 24/25" 4k screens which can be run at a scaled 2304x1296 resolution. This still provides a decent amount of space without text being too tiny. Alas, 4k monitors <27" are increasingly rare these days.

clktmr 5y ago
> rendering 2560x1440 to a 4K screen How does this work? Will it just upscale or is e.g. text still rendered at 4K? Rendering not at native resolution results always in blurred edges in my experience.
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  In macOS, the entire display is rendered at 4K no matter what you pick from the resolution box. Most apps have learned to provide 2x-3x “retina” icons so that their bitmap resources look crisp alongside the system UI resources at user-selected “resolutions”. The Windows UI scaling slider behaves in exactly the same way, though fewer apps include 2x or 3x bitmap resources.
  - CharlesW 5y ago
    > In macOS, the entire display is rendered at 4K no matter what you pick from the resolution box. This makes it sound as if macOS upscales a 4K render when displaying to (for example) 5K monitors, but on a 5K monitor everything is ultimately rendered at a full physical resolution of 5120x2880. But in the Displays Preference Pane, the logical resolution is set by default to 2560x1440 (2:1). One can choose a logical resolution of 5120x2880 (1:1), but I can't imagine anyone working like that.
    - floatingatoll 5y ago
      Correct, in the 5K case the entire display is rendered at 5K, and ditto 2K etc. (I believe the internal canvas caps at 32K, but I don’t have the tools to find out for sure.) Whatever-sized display viewports are just crop windows into it, and the crop window in internal canvas terms is scaled as necessary, and then it renders the vector canvas onto the raster viewport.
- kemayo 5y ago
  Very well, in my experience. Apple has been doing what it calls "retina" display for a while now, whereby it keeps the display's actual resolution at a high native level but scales everything it renders so the screen is effectively a lower resolution... but really smooth because of it. Here's an album with a pair of screenshots from my own 4k display: https://imgur.com/a/7AHZZZv https://imgur.com/a/7AHZZZv -- the scaled one is how I normally use it.
  - raihansaputra 5y ago
    It's sharp enough but when compared to a native 1x/2x scaling, it still looks blurry, and it's only seen physically for me. Currently I run my M1 MBA at native 2560*1600 (BetterDummy, non hiDpi), and my 27" 4k at native. Set default zoom on chrome to be 125/150%, and VSCode also at "zoomed". I mostly use Chrome and Electron based apps (Spotify), so the increase in text sharpness is worth it. Native apps (Pritunl, etc) UI becomes too small, but again it's worth it for me.
bobbob1921 5y ago
On windows , I have used over 25 different monitors over the years, I have found these two sizes to be the best: 32” at 4k (native res, 1:1) 30” 2560-by-1600 (native res, 1:1) ( few monitors support this physically, but two are my goto: old 30” apple studio displays , and a 30” old dell monitor. Both can be found on eBay at very low cost , but do use 2 to 4x the power draw as modern monitors)
tzs 5y ago
> ranging from three 24" 4k displays An option that I think might be interesting is 3 displays side by side, but with the center display in portrait mode rather than landscape mode giving overall an inverted T shape to your combined display space.
- daggersandscars 5y ago
  When I am using 24" displays, I put one in landscape directly in front of me and one in portrait off to one side. Upper/lower half of the portrait monitor works well for terminals / email / chat. Entire portrait for reading documentation. Full-screen landscape for everything else. I find this works well for the "adjustable height desk" systems one puts on top of a regular desk. They usually aren't wide enough to have two monitors with one directly in front of the user. The portrait monitor, if the cables are long enough, stays on the fixed-height desk. I'm unable to use two monitors side-by-side anymore. Working for hours with my head always turned to one side gives me headaches. --- Edited to add note on desk-placed "adjustable height" systems.
peteri 5y ago
Totally agree with this, I have mine(2x27" 4K) running in the same scaled way and I really miss it when I go back to the office with a crappy three screen 1080p setup.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  Can’t get the same monitors for the office? I always try to get the company to pay for me of course, but I have no patience for suboptimal equipment any more, so I’ll buy it myself if I have to.
  - peteri 5y ago
    Last time I asked the answer was no (which is annoying) but that is because IT don't want to support a special setup. I may try pushing for a monitor refresh again once we go back to the office.
lucumo 5y ago
> MacOS in particular does an excellent job of rendering 2560x1440 to a 4K screen, and the increased DPI over a regular 1440p 27" screen is very noticeable. MacOS in particular gets amazingly slow when you don't use a 1:1 or 2:1 scaling. I too have have two 27" 4k screens and they made the machine unbearably slow. It got so bad that I now treat them as 1440p screens and let the screens do the scaling. It's not pretty and slightly hazy, but at least the machine is usable.
- thebean11 5y ago
  The new MacBook pros can handle it
  - messe 5y ago
    I've a 2019 16" MBP that I use for work, and it handles it fine as well; probably due to the discrete GPU kicking in once an external monitor is connected. Likewise, my M1 air sees no issues.
  - ddek 5y ago
    Hell, not even the pros. My work laptop is a 2019 i7 MBP, it struggles with my 4k monitor regardless of scaling. I bought the cheapest mac mini last year to see what the M1 fuss was about, and it has no problem with the 4k screen, even with scaling. Other OS's? Windows is passable until you start transitioning in and out of full screen. Linux...
    - runjake 5y ago
      I think the parent means the new Apple Silicon-based MBPs, not the 2019 models. I may be misreading the way you phrased your comment though.
      - pixiemagic 5y ago
        I think they are saying that even the non-pro M1 machines are significantly better than the previous pro models.

clktmr 5y ago

> rendering 2560x1440 to a 4K screen How does this work? Will it just upscale or is e.g. text still rendered at 4K? Rendering not at native resolution results always in blurred edges in my experience.

floatingatoll 5y ago
In macOS, the entire display is rendered at 4K no matter what you pick from the resolution box. Most apps have learned to provide 2x-3x “retina” icons so that their bitmap resources look crisp alongside the system UI resources at user-selected “resolutions”. The Windows UI scaling slider behaves in exactly the same way, though fewer apps include 2x or 3x bitmap resources.
- CharlesW 5y ago
  > In macOS, the entire display is rendered at 4K no matter what you pick from the resolution box. This makes it sound as if macOS upscales a 4K render when displaying to (for example) 5K monitors, but on a 5K monitor everything is ultimately rendered at a full physical resolution of 5120x2880. But in the Displays Preference Pane, the logical resolution is set by default to 2560x1440 (2:1). One can choose a logical resolution of 5120x2880 (1:1), but I can't imagine anyone working like that.
  - floatingatoll 5y ago
    Correct, in the 5K case the entire display is rendered at 5K, and ditto 2K etc. (I believe the internal canvas caps at 32K, but I don’t have the tools to find out for sure.) Whatever-sized display viewports are just crop windows into it, and the crop window in internal canvas terms is scaled as necessary, and then it renders the vector canvas onto the raster viewport.
kemayo 5y ago
Very well, in my experience. Apple has been doing what it calls "retina" display for a while now, whereby it keeps the display's actual resolution at a high native level but scales everything it renders so the screen is effectively a lower resolution... but really smooth because of it. Here's an album with a pair of screenshots from my own 4k display: https://imgur.com/a/7AHZZZv https://imgur.com/a/7AHZZZv -- the scaled one is how I normally use it.
- raihansaputra 5y ago
  It's sharp enough but when compared to a native 1x/2x scaling, it still looks blurry, and it's only seen physically for me. Currently I run my M1 MBA at native 2560*1600 (BetterDummy, non hiDpi), and my 27" 4k at native. Set default zoom on chrome to be 125/150%, and VSCode also at "zoomed". I mostly use Chrome and Electron based apps (Spotify), so the increase in text sharpness is worth it. Native apps (Pritunl, etc) UI becomes too small, but again it's worth it for me.

bobbob1921 5y ago

On windows , I have used over 25 different monitors over the years, I have found these two sizes to be the best: 32” at 4k (native res, 1:1) 30” 2560-by-1600 (native res, 1:1) ( few monitors support this physically, but two are my goto: old 30” apple studio displays , and a 30” old dell monitor. Both can be found on eBay at very low cost , but do use 2 to 4x the power draw as modern monitors)

tzs 5y ago

> ranging from three 24" 4k displays An option that I think might be interesting is 3 displays side by side, but with the center display in portrait mode rather than landscape mode giving overall an inverted T shape to your combined display space.

daggersandscars 5y ago
When I am using 24" displays, I put one in landscape directly in front of me and one in portrait off to one side. Upper/lower half of the portrait monitor works well for terminals / email / chat. Entire portrait for reading documentation. Full-screen landscape for everything else. I find this works well for the "adjustable height desk" systems one puts on top of a regular desk. They usually aren't wide enough to have two monitors with one directly in front of the user. The portrait monitor, if the cables are long enough, stays on the fixed-height desk. I'm unable to use two monitors side-by-side anymore. Working for hours with my head always turned to one side gives me headaches. --- Edited to add note on desk-placed "adjustable height" systems.

peteri 5y ago

Totally agree with this, I have mine(2x27" 4K) running in the same scaled way and I really miss it when I go back to the office with a crappy three screen 1080p setup.

Aeolun 5y ago
Can’t get the same monitors for the office? I always try to get the company to pay for me of course, but I have no patience for suboptimal equipment any more, so I’ll buy it myself if I have to.
- peteri 5y ago
  Last time I asked the answer was no (which is annoying) but that is because IT don't want to support a special setup. I may try pushing for a monitor refresh again once we go back to the office.

lucumo 5y ago

> MacOS in particular does an excellent job of rendering 2560x1440 to a 4K screen, and the increased DPI over a regular 1440p 27" screen is very noticeable. MacOS in particular gets amazingly slow when you don't use a 1:1 or 2:1 scaling. I too have have two 27" 4k screens and they made the machine unbearably slow. It got so bad that I now treat them as 1440p screens and let the screens do the scaling. It's not pretty and slightly hazy, but at least the machine is usable.

thebean11 5y ago
The new MacBook pros can handle it
- messe 5y ago
  I've a 2019 16" MBP that I use for work, and it handles it fine as well; probably due to the discrete GPU kicking in once an external monitor is connected. Likewise, my M1 air sees no issues.
- ddek 5y ago
  Hell, not even the pros. My work laptop is a 2019 i7 MBP, it struggles with my 4k monitor regardless of scaling. I bought the cheapest mac mini last year to see what the M1 fuss was about, and it has no problem with the 4k screen, even with scaling. Other OS's? Windows is passable until you start transitioning in and out of full screen. Linux...
  - runjake 5y ago
    I think the parent means the new Apple Silicon-based MBPs, not the 2019 models. I may be misreading the way you phrased your comment though.
    - pixiemagic 5y ago
      I think they are saying that even the non-pro M1 machines are significantly better than the previous pro models.