March 8th event announced!

[SuperMatt]

I'm with you on that setiment. I had been considering the same combination, but am now rethinking that purchase.

I picked up an unopened 21.5-inch 4K UltraFine on Ebay last Summer, for half MSRP, expecting it to be a "stopgap" before Apple released a new consumer grade monitor. However, I was expecting Apple to use something better than the seven-year old panel that has been in the 27-inch iMac. I don't need the added size, I'm more concerned with "Retina" density and would have liked 120Hz and mini-LED, so I don't see a reason to do a lateral move with the Studio Display. Plus, I'd spend the extra for the nano-texture process, adding additional cost. For me, it just doesn't make logical sense to switch, since my LG is working fine without issue.

That's the conundrum, there isn't a good answer to that. If you're like me and want ~219ppi then there's not much to choose from. There's the discontinued 21.5-inch UltraFine, the larger 27-inch model, and the Studio Display. Everything else is primarily targeted toward the PC market. You could try to get a 4K UltraFine off of Ebay like I did. (It's very hard, but not impossible to get a new boxed unit.) LG says that they haven't canceled the 27-inch UltraFine and plan on continuing sales once component shortages ease. The price for the LG is almost as much as the Studio Display, so I'm not sure it's worth saving a bit by going with the LG.

Hence, my advice is to do the same thing I am currently planning: wait until after WWDC. Display analyst Ross Young is still predicting that Apple will launch a device using a 27-inch mini-LED in the coming months, and he states that multiple sources in the supply chain have confirmed this. Assuming he is correct, there is no telling if it is for an iMac, a replacement for the current XDR, or something else that may fill a different part of the product line. Given that it is mini-LED, it will certainly cost more than the Studio Display, but that's probably the most that we can surmise, at this time.

So, unless you need that Studio Display to go with a Mac Studio immediately, I'd wait another three months, if possible, just to keep your options open.

I’m somewhat surprised that the market for high-DPI desktop displays is so barren.

 

[jbailey]

Apple is still selling the 24" 4K LG Ultrafine.

https://www.apple.com/shop/product/HMUA2VC/A/lg-ultrafine-4k-display

I've been using this much cheaper 24" LG 4K monitor. Not great if you are worried about color accuracy or high brightness but it meets my needs as a software developer with very crisp text. The included stand was awful so I bought a cheap VESA mount arm. It looks some fiddling to get the contrast and brightness right but all in all, for a $300 4K display, I can't complain. Unfortunately, it looks like it is out of stock again. I saw it in stock a few weeks ago.

 

[MEJHarrison]

I’m having second thoughts about getting a Studio Display to go along with my Mac Studio. But there aren’t many monitors with 5K native resolution. The LG UltraFine isn’t to be found anywhere, though it may become available in a couple months.

I'm in the same boat. I'd like to replace my 27" iMac. But at this point, I also don't want to go backwards. I don't want less than 5K or less than 27". That doesn't leave many options at all. And it leaves 0 options for replacing my iMac with a comparable system that's in the same price range as my old iMac.

I'm waiting to see what WWDC brings at this point. But regardless of what's coming, I don't suspect there's going to be a new, cheaper option.

 

[B01L]

I'm waiting to see what WWDC brings at this point. But regardless of what's coming, I don't suspect there's going to be a new, cheaper option.

Only hope of a cheaper monitor might be a 24" 4.5K display from Apple...?

 

[Roller]

I'm in the same boat. I'd like to replace my 27" iMac. But at this point, I also don't want to go backwards. I don't want less than 5K or less than 27". That doesn't leave many options at all. And it leaves 0 options for replacing my iMac with a comparable system that's in the same price range as my old iMac.

I'm waiting to see what WWDC brings at this point. But regardless of what's coming, I don't suspect there's going to be a new, cheaper option.

It’s unfortunate that Apple did away with target display mode, or I would have kept my iMac to use with my Mac Studio. It’ll arrive in ~4 weeks, and I need a monitor for it. The Studio Display will be OK, though I would have preferred features like HDR and ProMotion or a less expensive third party alternative. I was surprised that there were no good options when I looked today.

 

[Roller]

I'm with you on that setiment. I had been considering the same combination, but am now rethinking that purchase.

I picked up an unopened 21.5-inch 4K UltraFine on Ebay last Summer, for half MSRP, expecting it to be a "stopgap" before Apple released a new consumer grade monitor. However, I was expecting Apple to use something better than the seven-year old panel that has been in the 27-inch iMac. I don't need the added size, I'm more concerned with "Retina" density and would have liked 120Hz and mini-LED, so I don't see a reason to do a lateral move with the Studio Display. Plus, I'd spend the extra for the nano-texture process, adding additional cost. For me, it just doesn't make logical sense to switch, since my LG is working fine without issue.

That's the conundrum, there isn't a good answer to that. If you're like me and want ~219ppi then there's not much to choose from. There's the discontinued 21.5-inch UltraFine, the larger 27-inch model, and the Studio Display. Everything else is primarily targeted toward the PC market. You could try to get a 4K UltraFine off of Ebay like I did. (It's very hard, but not impossible to get a new boxed unit.) LG says that they haven't canceled the 27-inch UltraFine and plan on continuing sales once component shortages ease. The price for the LG is almost as much as the Studio Display, so I'm not sure it's worth saving a bit by going with the LG.

Hence, my advice is to do the same thing I am currently planning: wait until after WWDC. Display analyst Ross Young is still predicting that Apple will launch a device using a 27-inch mini-LED in the coming months, and he states that multiple sources in the supply chain have confirmed this. Assuming he is correct, there is no telling if it is for an iMac, a replacement for the current XDR, or something else that may fill a different part of the product line. Given that it is mini-LED, it will certainly cost more than the Studio Display, but that's probably the most that we can surmise, at this time.

So, unless you need that Studio Display to go with a Mac Studio immediately, I'd wait another three months, if possible, just to keep your options open.

Your key point is that if Apple does release a mini-LED 27” stand-alone monitor, it’ll be even pricier than the Studio Display. That’s more than I’m willing to pay. There are a ton of 4K monitors for less than $1000, but I don’t know how well they’d work with the Mac Studio.

 

[Colstan]

Your key point is that if Apple does release a mini-LED 27” stand-alone monitor, it’ll be even pricier than the Studio Display. That’s more than I’m willing to pay. There are a ton of 4K monitors for less than $1000, but I don’t know how well they’d work with the Mac Studio.

My main point is that it couldn't hurt to wait until WWDC is over. We had hints about the Mac Studio for a while, but it only crystalized a day or two before the actual announcement. There's no harm in keeping your options open for a little longer, unless it's vital that you make the purchase sooner.

As far as using other 4K displays, that's a personal preference. I was just involved in a discussion over at the other place where some folks are fine using standard resolution 1440p displays, while others (such as myself) are very much in the camp of getting the highest ppi monitor as possible.

And yes, it's unfortunate that we have so little choice in that way. I think we will look back at the Intel era as an oddball moment in the history of the Mac. During the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, the Mac was its own little island. Apple's foray into x86 land for a decade and half gave us some measure of compatibility with PC hardware and software that Mac users didn't used to have. Now, it looks like the Mac is sailing back to its own fruity tropical island, replete with proprietary parts. Whether that is good, bad, or somewhere in between is a matter of perspective and priorities.

 

[Roller]

My main point is that it couldn't hurt to wait until WWDC is over. We had hints about the Mac Studio for a while, but it only crystalized a day or two before the actual announcement. There's no harm in keeping your options open for a little longer, unless it's vital that you make the purchase sooner.

As far as using other 4K displays, that's a personal preference. I was just involved in a discussion over at the other place where some folks are fine using standard resolution 1440p displays, while others (such as myself) are very much in the camp of getting the highest ppi monitor as possible.

And yes, it's unfortunate that we have so little choice in that way. I think we will look back at the Intel era as an oddball moment in the history of the Mac. During the 80s, 90s, and early 2000s, the Mac was its own little island. Apple's foray into x86 land for a decade and half gave us some measure of compatibility with PC hardware and software that Mac users didn't used to have. Now, it looks like the Mac is sailing back to its own fruity tropical island, replete with proprietary parts. Whether that is good, bad, or somewhere in between is a matter of perspective and priorities.

I'd wait and see, but I'm trading in my iMac when the Studio arrives, and I doubt whether Apple would wait a few months for me to send it to them. I also doubt that Apple will offer a less expensive alternative to the Studio Display. So I'm trying to find a good 4K monitor with high PPI while I can still cancel my order. There's a thread about monitors on that other forum, but I haven't seen anything that would make me take the plunge.

 

[Cmaier]

I'd wait and see, but I'm trading in my iMac when the Studio arrives, and I doubt whether Apple would wait a few months for me to send it to them. I also doubt that Apple will offer a less expensive alternative to the Studio Display. So I'm trying to find a good 4K monitor with high PPI while I can still cancel my order. There's a thread about monitors on that other forum, but I haven't seen anything that would make me take the plunge.

I‘d maybe go for something cheap, and replace it with a high PPI display when they become available? Otherwise really the only real choices are Apole or the LGs, it seems.

 

[MEJHarrison]

Only hope of a cheaper monitor might be a 24" 4.5K display from Apple...?

But again, I've spent years on a 27" 5K. To go back to either less than 27" or less than 5K, is going to be a very tough thing to accept. Also, I'm a developer who now works from home full time. All indications point to that becoming a permanent thing moving forward. It's not just a computer, but the main tool I use to make a living now.

That might be a good solution for some. But it's not really an acceptable solution for me. Fortunately my iMac is fine at the moment, so I don't need to rush into a decision.

 

[Herdfan]

I'm in the same boat. I'd like to replace my 27" iMac. But at this point, I also don't want to go backwards. I don't want less than 5K or less than 27". That doesn't leave many options at all. And it leaves 0 options for replacing my iMac with a comparable system that's in the same price range as my old iMac.

Same boat here.

Might just do what I did last time and pick up a refurb from Apple. You can get an August '20, 27" with i5/5K for under $1500.

My late '15 that I got refurb from Apple in the fall of '16 is still running fine, but for how long.

Would love an iMac Pro, but mainly that is for the color and not the performance.

 

[Roller]

Same boat here.

Might just do what I did last time and pick up a refurb from Apple. You can get an August '20, 27" with i5/5K for under $1500.

My late '15 that I got refurb from Apple in the fall of '16 is still running fine, but for how long.

Would love an iMac Pro, but mainly that is for the color and not the performance.

TBH, I was expecting an Apple silicon iMac to replace my 2017 model, though I would've been OK with a higher end Mac mini. But when I heard about the Mac Studio, I couldn't resist and rationalized my way into ordering one. I don't think I'm going to find a suitable non-Apple monitor though. All the 27" or 32" 4K displays are deficient in areas where I'm not willing to compromise. I've read the reviews about poor web cam performance, but I expect Apple to address that.

 

[MEJHarrison]

But when I heard about the Mac Studio, I couldn't resist and rationalized my way into ordering one.

I'm certainly drooling over them, but honestly, I don't see a need for my use cases. I do think a Mac mini is all I'd really need. I'm waiting to see now if there's going to be a new M2 mini on the way this year.

 

[Nycturne]

I’m somewhat surprised that the market for high-DPI desktop displays is so barren.

I’m not.

Apple’s insistence on going for integer scaling vs resolution independence means they want higher density panels than pretty much everyone else. A 4K 27” display in Windows at 150% does look pretty good in the apps that can handle it properly, and games look quite nice with one. And when you can get a 4K 27” panel for a fraction of the cost of any 5K option or a 4K 120Hz panel for just over half the cost, Windows users aren’t really going to be lining up for a 5K panel. Especially since it wasn't until DP 1.4 that you could drive a 5K display with a single cable, and we're now at the point where DP 1.4 is common on displays you can buy and GPUs in the field can generally be assumed to support 1.4. Apple being a really early mover here, and a full-throated adopter on Thunderbolt 3 let them get here years before DisplayPort had caught up. Apple still needs to support tiled display in the Studio Display because of how many Macs are still on Alpine Ridge TB controllers vs Titan Ridge for example.

Monitors today already use up as much bandwidth as they can get from DisplayPort 1.4 (with some starting to rely on DSC to squeeze into the bandwidth available, like the 4K 144Hz and 6K XDR displays). It's just it seems that on the Windows side, they spent the bandwidth on refresh rate while Apple spent it on resolution.

 

[Deleted member 215]

Which makes sense since a big Windows market is gaming, where refresh rate matters more than resolution.

I remember when "retina" displays first came out, most Windows laptops were still on crappy 1366x768 TN panels that paled in comparison.

But this is why is why all-in-ones have the advantage; you don't have to rely on the limits of DP. That's why I'd still like to see a 27" iMac...or a 24" iMac with mini-LED and ProMotion.

 

[Nycturne]

I remember when "retina" displays first came out, most Windows laptops were still on crappy 1366x768 TN panels that paled in comparison.

But this is why is why all-in-ones have the advantage; you don't have to rely on the limits of DP. That's why I'd still like to see a 27" iMac...or a 24" iMac with mini-LED and ProMotion.

There is certainly an advantage to being able to guarantee how everything is connected.

That said, my fingers are crossed we might see some improvement in this space going forward. While I don’t think 6K @ 120Hz fits into DP1.4 even with DSC, and I’m not sure Thunderbolt can carry it either (I’m a bit fuzzy on the exact math and what’s available to DisplayPort in TB3/4), it should fit into a 40Gbps DP2.0 link, or be very close to it. But DP2.0 also brings 80Gbps links which should help. At least until it gets saturated again.

 

[Andropov]

Has anyone seen any proof that the Studio Display is actually the same panel as the UltraFine 5K or the 27" iMac? Everyone is saying that it is, but I've seen no proof of it. For starters, the brightness is higher (600 nits vs 500 nits), and I've seen videos were the contrast, compared to the 5K UltraFine, looks much better (yeah, not the most scientific test, but I haven't been able to find any data on the measured contrast, and Apple doesn't disclose the number).

From this video

Also, YouTube apparently shows the HDR mode toggle on the Studio Display but not on the UltraFine. This makes *some* sense, since some HDR specifications don't require local dimming. I haven't found any measurement of the black level of the Studio Display (cd/m2 of the darkest black), but maybe it even fits onto the DisplayHDR 600 standard, even if Apple doesn't advertise it as HDR.

Honestly, media outlets have provided very weak reviews for the Studio Display. Most only parrot back Apple's listed specs, and compare it to other displays based on a bunch of spec numbers whose meaning they don't seem to grasp. The Verge has this spectacularly idiotic fragment, for instance:

The Studio Display has… well, it has none of that. It’s a regular old LED backlight that lights the entire screen all the time, and the darkest black it can produce is basically gray. In normal use in a well-lit room, it looks fine enough — LCD displays have looked like this for a long time now — but if you’re watching a movie in a dark room, the letterboxing will look light gray. There are $379 TVs with more advanced local-dimming backlights than this.

 

[Buntschwalbe]

Has anyone seen any proof that the Studio Display is actually the same panel as the UltraFine 5K or the 27" iMac? Everyone is saying that it is, but I've seen no proof of it. For starters, the brightness is higher (600 nits vs 500 nits), and I've seen videos were the contrast, compared to the 5K UltraFine, looks much better (yeah, not the most scientific test, but I haven't been able to find any data on the measured contrast, and Apple doesn't disclose the number).



Also, YouTube apparently shows the HDR mode toggle on the Studio Display but not on the UltraFine. This makes *some* sense, since some HDR specifications don't require local dimming. I haven't found any measurement of the black level of the Studio Display (cd/m2 of the darkest black), but maybe it even fits onto the DisplayHDR 600 standard, even if Apple doesn't advertise it as HDR.

Honestly, media outlets have provided very weak reviews for the Studio Display. Most only parrot back Apple's listed specs, and compare it to other displays based on a bunch of spec numbers whose meaning they don't seem to grasp. The Verge has this spectacularly idiotic fragment, for instance:

"This is maybe a bit off-topic"
I'm amazed that the picture you posted is actually quite close where i live. it's a mountain called niesen. anyway, just excitement about a random coincidence.

 

[Cmaier]

"This is maybe a bit off-topic"
I'm amazed that the picture you posted is actually quite close where i live. it's a mountain called niesen. anyway, just excitement about a random coincidence.

In der Schweitz? Willkommen!

 

[Buntschwalbe]

In der Schweitz? Willkommen!

Ja, genau. Aus Bern. Vielen Dank, ich fühl mich sehr Willkommen in diesem Forum. Ich lese und lerne viel neues hier, auch wenn ich selbst leider keine Expertise zu den technischen Diskussionen einbringen kann.