Finding the perfect monitor for your macOS setup can be a bit more intricate compared to the PC realm. Hence, I’ve taken the liberty to provide some sensible recommendations regarding specifications and budget-friendly models from reputable brands. However, I understand that not everyone can adhere to these suggestions, perhaps due to existing monitor ownership or limited access to preferred retailers.
In this guide, I’ll delve deeper into why I recommend specific resolutions and sizes, taking into account the current market landscape. Additionally, I’ll address how to address any scaling issues that may arise when deviating from these recommended sizes.
Before you make your selection, it’s essential to consider your budget and specific usage scenarios. Avoid the temptation to opt for a large monitor with subpar color accuracy, akin to attending a rave in an earthquake.
When it comes to acquiring a monitor for your Mac, there are three primary avenues: those subject to the “Apple tax,” those offering a good balance of size and resolution, and the remaining options.
Let’s begin with the first category—the monitors endorsed by Apple:
The Apple Way or None: While not everyone can afford them, those who can invest in one of the following top monitors for macOS will experience seamless integration:
- LG UltraFine 5K ($1,200)
- Apple Studio Display 5K ($1,600)
- Apple Pro Display XDR 6K ($5,000)
These monitors aren’t just about impressive specs and hefty price tags. Modern macOS systems prioritize monitors with high pixel density, with 218 pixels-per-inch (PPI) being the optimal threshold. Notably, 5K/6K monitors, as listed above, boast this 218PPI standard.
Apple’s engineers have designated this pixel density as the gold standard for their “Retina Display” technology on desktops, leaving the rest of us to abide by it.
The primary purpose of such high pixel density is to render individual pixels nearly invisible, resulting in sharper images without sacrificing screen real estate—a concept that Steve Jobs famously introduced.
Conversely, the broader market, driven by PC sales, prioritizes size and resolution over PPI. Consequently, monitor manufacturers may compromise on factors like color accuracy and brightness to cater to their target demographics, such as incorporating high-refresh panels for gaming enthusiasts.
Thus, when exploring options beyond Apple-endorsed monitors, it’s crucial to focus on models with at least 109PPI and then evaluate additional features based on your requirements.
Considering the Retina Display ratio for desktops, we can identify five monitor types with an optimal size and resolution ratio for consideration:
- 1080p monitor (20 to 24 inches): 110PPI to 91PPI
- 1080p Ultra-Wide monitor (25 to 30 inches): 111PPI to 92PPI
- 1440p monitor (27 to 29 inches): 109PPI to 91PPI
- 1440p Ultra-Wide monitor (34 to 38 inches): 109PPI to 98PPI
- 2160p/4K monitor (27 to 32 inches): 163PPI to 137PPI
Once you’ve narrowed down your options based on resolution and size, consider additional features such as color accuracy, brightness uniformity, USB-C Power Delivery (for MacBook charging), refresh rate, HDR support, integrated KVM, speakers, and more, depending on your specific needs.
There’s a method behind this selection process, which I’ll elaborate on shortly.
Concerning the suitability of a 1440p monitor for macOS:
Some users may question whether a 1440p monitor is too small for macOS, particularly on a 27-inch screen. If you’re unsure, my recommendation is to seek advice from someone with a similar setup and make an informed decision based on your preferences.
The contemporary Mac interface operates on a straightforward principle: it thrives at 218PPI or remains satisfactory at 109PPI.
When you opt for a monitor exceeding 109PPI, macOS triggers “Retina Display” (HiDPI), quadrupling the level of detail. Essentially, the UI renders at four times the resolution, accounting for the remarkable clarity and detail evident in the top-tier Mac monitors.
However, in the unpredictable market, locating 218PPI monitors, especially at reasonable prices, proves challenging. Consequently, we often settle for 109PPI monitors but must tread carefully within this pixel density range:
Choosing a monitor with a lower PPI, around ~70PPI, results in oversized elements, creating a peculiar appearance. Opting for a higher PPI, approximately ~160PPI, renders everything uncomfortably small. For instance, a 29-inch 1080p Ultra-Wide monitor offers 96PPI. At the default resolution, the macOS interface appears larger, potentially revealing pixels to the naked eye. Nevertheless, this can be rectified by adjusting your viewing distance from the screen.
Conversely, a 27-inch monitor boasting 4K resolution provides 163PPI. Utilizing the default resolution renders the macOS interface impractical due to the small pixel density, necessitating scaling to enlarge it.
Having a monitor that presents the interface larger proves less bothersome than one displaying it smaller, particularly on a 4K monitor. Hence, users with high PPI monitors often resort to screen scaling.
Screen scaling on a larger display, summarized:
When macOS detects a high PPI monitor, such as a 27-inch 4K model, it offers users various scaling options. Let’s use this monitor size and resolution as an example to elucidate further.
macOS typically provides five scaling steps by default.
The initial scaling, 2:1, entails filling the 4K frame buffer while doubling the size of everything, essentially emulating an 1080p monitor with exceptionally crisp graphics but reduced screen real estate.
Conversely, the final scaling, 1:1, involves macOS displaying the interface without any scaling, resulting in an unusably small size, akin to a 13-inch Full HD monitor, proving equally vexing.
Therefore, the most commonly selected scaling option on a 4K monitor is “Looks like 1440p.” This choice affords users more screen real estate and sharper imagery, albeit with some imperfections.
However, this method of scaling can introduce certain issues, particularly noticeable during intensive graphic tasks like photo manipulation, video editing, 3D modeling, and graphic design. These may include uneven patterns and compromised 3D performance due to the uneven scaling process, wherein a 5K frame buffer (double that of 1440p) is compressed by 33%, resulting in distorted imagery.
It’s a well-established fact that macOS doesn’t always cooperate seamlessly with text rendering on monitors lacking high pixel density. This is primarily because macOS typically disables sub-pixel smoothing by default, as it’s unnecessary on HiDPI displays where text appears naturally crisp.
While this arrangement may suffice under normal circumstances, issues arise when employing uneven scaling. Due to the discrepancy between framebuffer pixels and physical pixels on the monitor, sub-pixel information becomes compromised.
Therefore, if you find your text resembling a bakery window at 7:00 AM while using uneven scaling, it’s time to employ BetterDisplay. Additionally, you may need to re-enable sub-pixel smoothing using a free application called Font Smoothing Adjuster.
