How to choose an external monitor for your MacBook and not regret your purchase. Comparing Mac Mini and iMac: kids are not for hard work Which monitor to choose for apple mac mini

• The availability of certain features, packages and device configurations may vary by country and / or region of distribution.
• Software and content may be sold separately. Availability not guaranteed.

1. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 6-core Mac mini units. Intel Core i7 @ 3.2GHz, 64GB RAM and 2TB SSD. Comparison included commercially available Mac mini with 2-core Intel processor Core i7 3.0GHz with 16GB RAM and 1TB SSD. Testing using Autodesk Maya 2018 app with 144.8 MB episode. Tests were conducted using specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of your Mac mini.
2. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7 processor-based Mac mini units with 64GB RAM and Intel UHD Graphics 630. Compared with shipping Mac mini models with 3.0 GHz 2-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16 GB RAM and Intel Iris GPU. Testing conducted using Tomb Raider v1.0.5 using built-in performance benchmark at 1024x768 pixels, minimum settings and Vsync disabled. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
3. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. Comparison was made of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing with Adobe photoshop 19.1.6 was run on a 10 GB file using rotation, unsharpening, automatic color correction, and scaling. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
4. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 1TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. The FIO ‑ 3.8 benchmark was used with the following settings: 1024 KB request, 150 GB test file, and queue depth 8. Tests were conducted on specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini.
5. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 1TB SSD. Comparison was made of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing conducted using Xcode version 10.0 (10A255) and the Solar System Application Snippet shown at WWDC 2018. Testing conducted on specific computer systems and reflects approximate Mac mini performance.
6. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing was done using Xcode version 10.0 (10A255). Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
7. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Work Adobe applications Photoshop 19.1.6 was tested using the following filters: Crystallization, Dotting, Circular Blur, Shape Blur, Dust & Scratches, Median. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
8. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. The comparison involved a commercially available Mac mini with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Tested with Pixelmator Pro 1.1.5 using 54.6MB image. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
9. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. Comparison was made of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. KeyShot 8 Version 8.0.247 was tested using the coustics.bip demo scene at 3840x3840 pixels using 12 slices for quality assessment. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
10. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing conducted using Compressor Preview on a 60-second project with Apple video ProRes 4444 at 4096 x 2160 pixels and 23.98 frames per second. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
11. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing conducted using Final Cut Pro preview and RED Apple Workflow Installer v13 plug-ins on a 50-second project with 3: 1 REDCODE® RAW video at 4096 x 2160 pixels and 23.98 frames per second. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
12. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing conducted using Logic Pro X 10.4.2 and a 85-track Alchemy synthesizer project. Playback was set to single track playback until CPU overload occurred. Tests were conducted on specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini.
13. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. Comparison was made of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Testing was carried out using Logic Pro X 10.4.2 and a project that included 253 tracks created using the Amp Designer plug-in. During playback, the mode of playing individual tracks was turned on until the CPU was overloaded. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.
14. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD. The comparison was made up of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Tests were carried out using MainStage 3.4.0 in Concert mode with one Kontakt instance and using the 8Dio Intimate Strings library. During playback, individual channel strips were turned on until CPU overload occurred. Tests were conducted on specific computer systems and reflect approximate Mac mini performance.
15. Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini units with 64GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. Comparison was made of commercially available Mac mini models with a 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 processor with 16GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD. Tests were conducted using MainStage 3.4.0 in Concert mode with Sculpture synthesizer instruments. During playback, the mode of playing individual bands of the channel was turned on until the CPU overloaded. Benchmarks are based on specific computer systems and represent the approximate performance of Mac mini.

Despite a certain stagnation, the monitor market is gradually undergoing changes. Models with Ultra resolution HD, also known as 4K.

"Super clear" monitors are especially popular among users working with graphics and video editing. But those users who like space on the desktop are also eyeing ultra-high-resolution displays. MacDigger offers three of the best 4K monitors for your Mac.

Dell P2715Q

Panel diagonal Dell monitor The P2715Q is 27 inches and has a resolution of 3840 x 2160 pixels. The company has adopted an IPS matrix that provides horizontal and vertical viewing angles up to 178 degrees.

The model has a brightness of 350 cd / m2 and a response time of 9 ms. Typical and dynamic contrast ratios are 1000: 1 and 2,000,000: 1.

The manufacturer positions the model as tools for professionals: the monitor covers 99% of the sRGB space, and the declared value is Delta E3.

The stand allows you to adjust the tilt and swivel angle of the display, as well as its height in relation to the table top. You can also change the screen orientation from landscape to portrait if needed.

The panels are equipped with digital interfaces Mini DisplayPort, HDMI (MHL) and allow the use of an integrated 4-port USB 3.0 hub. With a DisplayPort connector, multiple monitors can be daisy-chained together.

The average price of Dell P2715Q in Russia is 45,200 rubles.

LG 27UD88

Monitor LG 27UD88 - more new model in the ranking, it is presented at CES 2016. The device is also equipped with a 27-inch IPS matrix, the screen resolution is 3840 x 2160 pixels.

The model provides coverage of 99% of the sRGB color space, the manufacturer's declared brightness is 350 cd / m2, the pixel response time is 5 ms (Gray-to-Gray), the maximum screen refresh rate is 60 Hz.

Feature of LG 27UD88 is the presence of a USB-C connector, which will be appreciated by owners of 12-inch MacBooks. The interface can be used for both signal source and power supply. However, in addition to it, other video inputs are provided: two HDMI 2.0, one DisplayPort 1.2.

For connecting peripherals and charging mobile devices a USB 3.0 hub for two ports is provided.

The average price of Dell P2715Q in Russia is 43,400 rubles.

ASUS PB287Q

ASUS PB287Q is positioned by the manufacturer as a budget solution, while its diagonal is one inch larger than that of the previous two models. The device is equipped with a 28-inch matte screen based on a fast TN-matrix with an aspect ratio of 16: 9, a resolution of 3840 x 2160 pixels.

ASUS PB287Q response time is 1ms (Gray-to-Gray), which is suitable for fast-paced games in high quality... The stand allows you to adjust the position of the screen in four directions, including turning it 90 degrees, and the built-in speakers save space on your desktop without cluttering it with external acoustics.

I must say right away that Asus PB287Q should not be chosen by professionals. In fact, the feature set and the low price point are more intended to appeal to enthusiasts, and the monitor has attractive features such as VividPixel, QuickFit and GamePlus. So, along with the fast response time and low latency of TN panels, this model is best suited for gamers.

If required, ASUS PB287Q LCD Monitor can be wall-mounted using the optional VESA mount.

Average ASUS price PB287Q in Russia is 41,200 rubles.

IN small devices undoubtedly has its own charm. For example, Mac Mini is very convenient on the road or in a cafe, and you can simply take it to work and plug it in if necessary. But what if you need to work with heavy graphics or high quality audio? Should you choose a big Mac or a small Mac? And if small, then which one?

Compare Mac Mini and iMac

Both the iMac and Mac Mini have a sleek, streamlined aluminum body.
Both are powered by a 1.4GHz dual-core Intel processor. A large iMac can run at 3.5 GHz if upgraded with a quad-core processor, and new iMac with Retina display 5K can even be overclocked to 4.5 GHz. However, the upgrade could double the cost of the all-in-one, as the iMac add-ons are significantly more expensive than the Mac Mini.

Both models can be purchased with a choice of either a hard drive or a Fusion Drive, they do not differ in terms of memory. But note that the smaller 21-inch iMac has a slower HDD than all other models.

Mac Mini and small iMac come with Intel HD Graphics from the 5000 series or Intel Iris Graphics. But when you buy a 27-inch iMac or iMac with Retina display, you can choose a much more powerful one. graphics processor... As for the processor, for the iMac it will be one of the models NVIDIA GeForce, but for iMac with Retina display you will have to choose between AMD Radeon R9 M290X and AMD Radeon R9 M295X with 2 or 4 GB of memory.

By the number of ports and installed applications Mac Mini and iMac are the same. All are equipped with USB 3.0, Thunderbold, Bluetooth, Gigabit Ethernet, or come with OS X Yosemite.

The smallest iMac has a Full HD display, its bigger brother has a 2560 x 1440 pixel display, and the iMac has a 5K Retina display at 5120 x 2880 pixels. If we talk about the Mac Mini, then do not forget that you will have to buy a monitor for it, and this is a separate item of expenses.

So, Mac Mini with a clock speed of 1.4 GHz can be purchased today at a price of about 35 thousand rubles. The most inexpensive iMac with 21.5 inches and 1.4 GHz parameters can be found for about 65 thousand rubles, but does it make sense if a faster model with a processor, for example, 2.8 costs only 10 thousand rubles. expensive.

CHIP Output: iMac and Mac Mini

Undoubtedly, buying a Mac Mini or a small iMac is a great assistant for both home and work. However, if you're looking for professional photo retouching, audio, video, or cartoons, it's best to buy one of the larger iMacs.

However, it must be admitted that the final price of a large iMac and iMac with Retina display, especially if you want to upgrade them - for example, buy more powerful processors, may turn out to be unreasonably high. After reviewing the Chip tests, you can choose the Apple product that works best for you.

Photo: manufacturing companies, pixabay.com

When you buy a brand new monitor for your MacBook, you are likely to run into one of three problems: the macOS interface is small, large, or cloudy. In this post, I'll explain why this happens and how to choose a monitor to make macOS look as good as it does on an iMac.

Features of macOS: Retina and pixel density

Apple's current lineup has four kinds of MacBooks and two kinds of iMacs. Everyone has a different screen size and resolution, but the macOS interface is the same in terms of clarity and proportions. Why?

To understand why this is happening, you need to understand the concepts of Retina and PPI. And since we're talking about external monitors, let's break down these terms using the example of the iMac 4K.

The physical resolution of the 21-inch iMac 4K is 4096 × 2304 pixels, but the visible image is half the size - 2048 × 1152. This resolution is also called HiDPI. With this scaling, every visible pixel on your iMac is made up of four physical pixels. This is how Retina is obtained - a high definition image.

In Apple products, the visible pixel size in Retina and non-Retina resolution is the same

To make macOS look equally good on devices with different diagonal and resolution, Apple tied the size of the macOS interface to PPI (Pixels Per Inch) - the number of pixels per inch that can be calculated from the diagonal and screen resolution.

The macOS interface looks good with PPI values ​​of 110 for non-Retina and 220 for Retina. The MacBook 12 ″ and iMac 27 ″ have roughly the same pixel density at 226 and 216 PPI. So the font and button sizes seem familiar when we switch from MacBook to iMac.

macOS looks good on MacBook and iMac because the pixel density of their screens is always the same

Why is the macOS interface small

4K resolution starts at 3840x2160, also referred to as Ultra HD. In terms of the number of pixels, such a screen consists of four screens with a resolution of 1920 × 1080. And if you look at the assortment of any store, the vast majority of 4K monitors have a resolution of 3840x2160.

Alas, this 4K is not enough for macOS.

Each monitor always has its own "native" resolution. This is when the number of displayed pixels matches the number of physical pixels on the screen. For the picture to look sharp, macOS must run at 3840 x 2160 pixels on a 27-inch 4K monitor. But such a picture will look shallow compared to the iMac 27 ”.

Notice how much the window " System settings"Smaller on a 4K monitor than an iMac 5K

This is because the PPI for 27 inches with a resolution of 3840 × 2160 is 163, which is much more than the standard 110. You will not be able to work comfortably at this resolution even with 100% vision. Everything will be too small.

If the PPI of the visible resolution is more than 110 points, then the macOS interface will be small

Why is the interface large

The image will also be sharp if you scale the visible image by 200% so that each visible pixel consists of four physical ones. This is how Retina works: the native resolution of the 27-inch iMac is 5120 × 2880 pixels, but the visible resolution is 2560 × 1440.

For a 27-inch 4K monitor to work like Retina, its resolution must be downgraded to 1920 × 1080 HiDPI. In this case, one visible pixel will also consist of four physical ones, but with a PPI of 81. Because of this, the interface will become large, and the useful area of ​​the monitor will be even less than in a 21-inch iMac 4K. Auch.

Enabling HiDPI resolution on a regular 4K monitor will make the interface much larger than in the iMac 5K
If the PPI is less than 110 points, then the macOS interface will look large

Why is the interface muddy

When the image on the monitor is too small, then the natural desire is to set the resolution lower in order to adjust the PPI value and increase the image.

For our 27 monitor, the ideal would be visible resolution 2560x1440 with a PPI of 109. But when you lower the resolution from 3840x2160 to 2560x1440, each visible pixel will take up 150% of the physical one. To get out of the situation, the video system will paint the neighboring pixels in the shade of the main one. This is how we get dirty.

Scaling other than 100 and 200% will always blur the image

Some monitors upscale the image better, some worse, but a fractional ratio picture will not look as clear as a picture in the monitor's native or HiDPI resolution.

Which monitor to choose

When choosing an external monitor for Mac, focus on pixel density. To do this, use the PPI calculator, into which you need to drive in the diagonal and resolution of the desired screen.

If the PPI is greater than 110 for non-Retin and 220 for Retin, the image will be too small. If less - more. To make things easier for you, I have compiled a PPI summary table for popular diagonals and resolutions.

A cheat sheet for choosing the correct resolution and diagonal. I marked with a green dot good options

Optimal in terms of price-quality ratio will be a monitor with a diagonal of 25-27 inches and a resolution of 2560 × 1440. Each manufacturer has such options, and the price starts at $ 350. The scale of the interface on such a monitor will look like Apple intended.

The 2017 MacBook Pro has an excellent Retina display. Despite its advantages, this screen may not be suitable for some applications. For example, for video editing or programming, the display will be small. In addition, many are accustomed to working with multiple monitors at the same time. In this regard, we have compiled a few guidelines for choosing displays for the MacBook Pro 2017.
Good monitors in three price segments:

- A budget option
LG 24UD58-B 23.8 ”4K Monitor - 21 600 rubles
This option is well suited for office use. The disadvantages of the display include limited adjustment of the stand - only tilt adjustment is available. The body of the model is made of glossy plastic, and on the front surface, except for the LG logo, there is nothing else.

- Medium budget model
Dell P2415Q 24 ”4K Monitor - 31,790 rubles
Dell's display is a more premium option. It has better color rendering and an adjustable stand.

- Deluxe version
Dell UP2715K 27 ”5K Monitor - 130,000 rubles
If 24 inches is not enough for you, then you can pay attention to the 27 '' version from the same Dell. The advantage will be not only the increased size, but also the display resolution that has grown to 5K. The price is, of course, high, but the workmanship is at the highest level.

After purchasing a monitor, you need to purchase a cable to connect to your MacBook Pro. Don't dwell on the HDMI connector as its functionality is limited to 30 frames per second. Better fit DisplayPort cable that supports higher FPS.
In addition, there are several options with USB-C connectivity:

-Expensive option
LG UltraFine 4K - 63 490 rubles
A pretty good monitor, which is even sold in the official Apple store. This display is better compatible with Macbook Pro 2017. Among the advantages of the device, it is worth highlighting the IPS technology, as well as built-in speakers.

- Very expensive option
LG UltraFine 5K - 95,990 rubles
The model almost exactly repeats the previous monitor, all the difference ends at the screen resolution.

So, to summarize, we note the fact that if you buy a monitor over 24 inches, you should look at models with 5K resolution. Still, 4K is not enough for large displays. Mark Edwards made a comparison chart comparing several models for screen resolution and retina compatibility in the 2017 Macbook Pro. Check it out below.