Hacker News Reader

Comment by jeroenhd | Hacker News Reader

Apple seems to lack the connectivity options competing chips offer, as seen with the limit on external screens on some M1 models and these USB options. It's easy to underestimate the amount of work that external connectors need the chip to do in order to work optimally.

It makes sense, of course, as the M1 evolved from a mobile chip with at most one port (USB C if you're lucky) and not a lot of host traffic. I hope Apple fixes these issues soon, or at least acknowledges them. More likely than not Apple will just ignore the problem and tell their customers to buy Thunderbolt devices instead.

View on HN

> as seen with the limit on external screens on some M1 models (…) I hope Apple fixes these issues soon

It’s only the base M1 used in the low-end devices that has limited support for external screens. A MBPro with M1 Max can drive 3x6k (DP1.4) plus 1x4k(HDMI2.0). That seems like more than enough for a laptop. Sounds to me like these issues have already been fixed.

How can you call a 2000$ mb pro or a 1700 imac low end devices?

What are you talking about ? Both the 13" MBPro as well as the iMac start at $1299.

The $2k MBPro with M1 Pro can drive 2 external 6k monitors, which seems reasonable. If you're the kind of user who needs 4 external displays, you're probably going to want the M1 Max anyway.

Sorry i used conversion from prices in euros, the base m1 imac is around 1630$ converted here. That's not by any mean cheap or entry level pricing and no it's not ok even for the 2k MBpro to only support 2 monitors at maximum. The kind of user who needs 3 displays doesn't need an m1 max anyway. I'm that user.

Sorry again, it supports up to 3 wich is actually fine for a laptop. The 13 inch mbpro only supports 1. That's not fine. That's not entry level.

Mac Mini is under $1000 and it’s the same chip.

Mac Mini is capped at two external displays. The 13-inch Air and Pro are capped at one external display since it has a built in display.

The 14- and 16-inch Pros support 3+ displays and the built in.

Like you said, my M1 Mac mini “officially” supports two monitors plugged in directly.

It’s nice that DisplayLink connections let an M1 machine have unlimited displays, and that the performance of their driver under Big Sur and above has been fantastic (for me) for the past half year driving 2 extra displays. (Four total, 1 is vertical)

I sometimes add an iPad in Sidecar mode, but that needs to connect before DisplayLink or it will error out, likely since the mini is flabbergasted at the number of monitors it sees attached at that moment. Since my DisplayLink connections are both on the same ThinkPad dock (1 built-in, 1 USB), I just toggle the dock off, connect the iPad with Sidecar, and turn it back on. After a moment everything is working as expected.

BetterTouchTool has a newish feature to capture your current window layout across all open apps and displays and lets you assign a shortcut to put everything back where you intended. I use it after first boot if needed, and keep one for ‘4 monitors’ and one for ‘5 monitors’ (when using Sidecar with iPad)

On-topic: Thankfully the Apple Silicon USB ports are more than fast enough for DisplayLink adapters, which (in my experience) are often using an early version of USB 3.0 aka USB 3.1 Gen 1 aka USB 3.2 Gen 1.

They still don't support DP MST, so you have to use multiple TB ports or use a monitor that supports TB daisy-chaining.

Or a dock. Not disputing the DP MST, just noting there are docks that can drive 2 x 6K.

CalDigit's new dock takes a single TB4 cable to drive, and can do:

    - 2x TB4
    - 1x DP 1.4
    - supporting
    - 2x 5K60 OR
    - 1x 8K60 OR
    - 1x 4K144 OR
    - 1x 1440p240

According to https://dancharblog.wordpress.com/2021/02/05/usb4-tb4-docks/

Or, as CalDigit puts it (see final paragraph):

Single 8K or Dual 6K Monitors

Users on Windows can connect a single monitor up to 8K resolution, and users on macOS can connect up to a single 6K 60Hz monitor.

When connecting dual monitors Windows users can connect up to dual 4K 60Hz monitors, and macOS users on M1 Pro or M1 Max computers can connect up to dual 6K 60Hz monitors. Users on original M1 computers cannot connect dual monitors as original M1 computers do not support dual displays.

A daisy chaining monitor is essentially an in-built dock in most cases.

I work on Displays at Microsoft :)

How does it do 2x 5K60?

The only true 5K monitors I know of are the LG 5k and the Apple Studio Display which are both TB or USB-C monitors, not DP. 5K60 takes ~25gb/sec, multiply times two and the single TB cable as input can’t handle 50gb/sec.

Display stream compression. You can only do it with the ASD as the LG doesn't support DSC.

Ah! Didn’t realize the ASD supported DSC. Ty!

Apple doesn't make low-end devices.

Isn't the Mac M1 mini $699?

Did you just compare the $700 Mini to a $140 ECS Liva or some $200 HP or Asus Chromebox?

Did you just compare a $200 HP or Asus Chromebox to a $0 free 15 year old Dell tower from your local Freegeek?

We can do this all day.

Do you think a 15 year old Dell is going to match the performance of any new machine? "Old" is not the same thing as "low end".

> Do you think a 15 year old Dell is going to match the performance of any new machine?

Well, yes? We aren't that much faster since 2010 if you had true top end then and true low end now.

But since talking Macs and Chromebooks, let pull up those:

- Geekbench MacBook Pro 2010 15": 2.66GHz Intel Core i7 (i7-620M): 457 single, 972 multi

- https://www.ebay.com/itm/304426589491?hash=item46e13d1d33:g:...

And a currently shipping Chromebook, when sorting price low to high:

- HP 4BS38UA HP Chromebook 14 IPS HD (1366x768) Intel Celeron N3350: 288 single, 523 multi

- https://www.amazon.com/HP-Chromebook-1366x768-Bluetooth-14-c...

In this case, the 2010 Mac smokes the Chromebook. To be fair, that model became available in 2018.

So, something current?

Acer Chromebooks w/ Intel Celeron N4020 have pretty bad benchmarks (~320-460 single, ~320-500 multi) but the CPU itself rates better:

- Celeron N4020 benchmark: 427 single, 750 multi

That's in currently shipping gear, like this HP introduced fall 2021:

https://www.amazon.com/HP-Chromebook-Micro-Edge-Portable-14a...

Given these scores are comparing 2010 laptops with 2021 laptops, and the 2010 laptop wins (and can be bought at around the same price!), certainly if comparing a 15 year old workstation with cheapest available machine today, yes, the 15 year old Dell will exceed the performance of at least some new machines.

Note:

- Xeon in Mac Pro in 2010 rated 611 single, 6280 multi

By comparison, in 2008 Mac Pro workstation:

- Intel Xeon E5462 2800 MHz (8 cores) rated 420 single and 2540 multi

Dell workstations at that time supported 5400 series Xeons.

And the M1 Mac Mini gets... guess what? 1744 single core and 7732 multi core.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?q=m1+Mac+mini

The Air gets 1744 and 7711.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q...

So no, by your own ranting the M1 mini is not a low-end desktop easily matched by free 15-year-old hardware.

> by your own ranting the M1 mini is not a low-end desktop

Sharing research is ranting? Anyway, post I replied to asked:

> "Do you think a 15 year old Dell is going to match the performance of any new machine?"

Interesting proposition!

So I responded to "any new machine" using the earlier Chromebooks as the baseline.

What's the power draw on your fifteen year old Dell? What's the thermal displacement? What generation of NVMe drives does it support?

ECS Liva has 4GB RAM and 32GB of storage with Windows 10.

It is going to be extremely limited in what it can do.

In that case the iPad at $329 becomes a legitimate competitor and it includes a screen.

The current version of the Liva has a bit more generous specs, at up to 8 GB of RAM and up to 128 GB of internal storage. A Raspberry Pi (if you can find one) or one of the Rockchip SBCs could also be a low-end desktop. I think the point is made, though, that when I mention the true low end of desktop machines the Mac Mini is not even part of the same conversation.

https://www.ecs.com.tw/en/Product/LIVA/LIVA_Q3_Plus/specific...

I pretty sure you’re the only one making that comparison.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=apple-ma...

Does a low end desktop trounce the previous generation Macbook Pro?

If you think either of those computers holds a candle to an M1 Mac mini I don’t know what to tell you.

I don't think you have to hold a candle to the M1 Mac mini to qualify as a low end desktop.

Of course not, because the M1 Mac Mini is not a low end desktop. That's the whole point multiple people have missed here, and I'm glad you're not one of them.

> the M1 Mac Mini is not a low end desktop

It's literally Apple's entry-level desktop machine.

The fact that there are even lower-end options doesn't mean that that it isn't a low-end machine. It is a very large spectrum, from a Raspberry Pi on one end to dual-cpu 2x64-core Threadrippers with gigabytes of RAM on the other. The Mac Mini is certainly on the lower end of this spectrum.

Let's pretend we're Slashdot for a second and use a car analogy. The least expensive part of Alfa Romeo's line or Ferrari's line is not a low-end car. Even Porsche with the Cayenne, much lower-tier than the rest of their stable, is not selling a low-end vehicle.

There's a very large spectrum, yes. Apple's least expensive system is maybe near the bottom of middle tier with no options but can be ordered in a configuration pushing $2000. Their most expensive machines are near the top of the middle tier or the bottom of the top tier. I think you meant to mention terabytes of RAM for the high end rather than gigabytes. I think of things like the Talos II as top-end workstations - something that starts around $9k and can easily be configured to close in on $40k for a single desktop workstation.

None of this suggests that because Apple doesn't sell a less expensive machine that they cater a product to the low end. They actually, truth be told, sell a less expensive machine that the Mini, because the Air includes a screen, keyboard, pointing device, and battery in its price. If you compare an M1 Air to the low end of laptops and other mid-tier laptops, you'll see it's closer to mid-tier than low-end in pretty much every way.

https://secure.raptorcs.com/content/TL2WK2/purchase.html

I very specifically do not think they do. I asked if the parent post, by implying the Mac Mini is an entry level desktop, intended to compare them. Context is fundamental to reading threaded discussions.

I’m not following what you are saying if my interpretation was wrong then, and this comment didn’t really clear it up for me. But I guess we can just agree to disagree?

I think you might be agreeing. They are saying that the M1 Mac Mini is far more powerful than these low end devices, hence "Apple doesn't make low end devices".

Exactly. Thanks for reading along.

The fact that I can't connect more than one monitor to my M1-based iMac is a fucking travesty.

May I ask why? I assume you were aware of this limitation, as Apple was pretty clear in the specs about it, that it only supports one external monitor.

If you pull the trigger on a purchase without reading the specs, then it's pretty much on you, no?

It didn’t become widely known until after the M1s had shipped - I was caught unexpected after someone at work couldn’t connect two to theirs.

Pretty much this. At the moment, I am trying to sort this out for my parents who bought a MacBook Air to replace a 12" MacBook and want to know if it is still possible to use a pair of 23" 1080p HP displays with it.

They don't care about resolution so much, nor does my brother who tested this setup with his 2017 MacBook - bad keyboard and all.

(On that front, last I heard, there was a hidden preference for non-HiDPI displays which has been completely removed, causing some issues.)

So far as I can tell, it is possible to run more than 1 display on the M1 - but it requires using a version of the DisplayLink driver with some extra [hardware][1], which is not exactly straightforward and I question how well this works in practice.

Sonnett is not the only one doing this, but it's the first one I found.

[1]: https://www.sonnettech.com/product/m1-mac-dual-displayport-a...

At least one person at work is using something like that to drive two displays from the M1, so I suspect it can be made to work well enough.

I have two external monitors on my M1 Air. The "main" one is connected via hdmi and runs at 120Hz, and another one is connected via DisplayLink compatible adapter which is connected via usb to the same usb hub as the first monitor. That hub is then connected with two usb type-c connectors+cables to the laptop. It works quite fine. There is a small caveat though. The monitor connected with DisplayLink has a very small input lag, but for light work it works just fine. I would not tolerate it for a main monitor (some people would I guess), but it defintely is much better than not having a monitor.

You mentioned input lag - how noticeable is this effect and is it something you can "hide" by increasing the tracking speed or other settings?

While it might be down to the mediocre Logitech gear he's using, one complaint I have gotten on occasion is how the cursor does not always keep up with his mouse inputs.

The effect to me is noticeable. If I gave it to my SO or some average user I dont' think it would be noticeable. But at the same time, we're all here, so we're not average users. However, on that monitor I have terminal or documentation so for me it works quite fine. Increasing the tracking speed or mouse refresh rates won't help in this case.

I will say though that the system is rock solid for me. I've read complaints about monitors not waking up or similar, but I've never experienced anything like it.

Also the mouse does keep up. The 60Hz refresh rate will keep up with it. There is just a small amount of lag, but that's that. Better than not having additional monitor in my case.

Good to know. He's currently using both screens via DisplayPort with USB-C going from the HP hub back to the computer - might need to consider other options to see if they will work better.

What adaptors/dongles are you using? I could really use a solution that keeps at least one monitor 120hz

The hub is a Ugreen branded one with two USB type C connectors which you can plug directly to your laptop. It also has 2 HDMI, 1 USB type A connectors, USB type C power input, and SD+micro SD card reader. I don't advise plugging this hub directly to your laptop because it heats up and that heats up the laptop's battery which I'm sure doesn't like it. I just keep it on two short USB type C cables so the heat doesn't transfer to the laptop. I've been using it for two years like this.

The DisplayLink compatible adapter is then connected to that hub via USB type A cable. It is made by Startech and has two DisplayPort connectors as outputs. I only use one out of those.

Yes it was? It's literally on the tech specs page and was widely reported:

> Video Support

> Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display at millions of colors and:

> One external display with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz

https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/

> It didn’t become widely known until after the M1s had shipped

This is nonsense.

For every product Apple sells they list the technical specs on the website at the same time it is on sale.

And it clearly states for the iMac that it supports a single display.

I get what you are saying, but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022, so it’s very unlikely they would glance at that in the specs.

Hell my 2016 MBPro can push at least 4 external monitors. Maybe more I honestly don’t know, it’s not like I ever needed that information.

It’s like a more extreme version of buying a phone and finding out it doesn’t come with a charger. Sure, it’s probably somewhere on the box, but who wouldn’t be surprised?

>but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in 2021/2022

And yet Apple has shipped just that. Apple is notorious for removing features that have been standard for years so they can sell you the "solution" at an extra cost (a.k.a the Apple tax), so, if you just impulsively buy the latest 'shiny' without reeding the spec sheet, then sorry, but that's 100% on you.

It's the basics of leveraging market segmentation, a tactic which Apple is perfect at. They determined that whoever buys a MacBook Air probably has no need for more than one external monitor, so they removed that feature that was a given on Intel based systems to save cost, and assumed that people who run multi monitor setups are more likely to be businesses and professionals who can pony up the extra cash for a more expensive M1 Pro/Max model. It's how Apple, and others, squeezes more money out of their customer base, and now with their own silicon, they can now charge you extra for what was standard on basic Intel chips 8 years ago. Enjoy ;)

I also don't like this practice, which is why I don't own any Apple HW, but I can't blame Apple here when it's their customer base at fault for buying their products without reading the spec sheet where Apple was transparent about the limitations of the basic M1 chip.

I guess we just aren’t going to agree here. While yes, you are correct people should check that stuff in general, again I can’t blame people for not doing so. It’s just such a basic thing we’ve assumed computers can do for - as you pointed out - roughly a decade.

> but most people don’t question if a computer can support 2 external monitors in

But we are talking about the iMac here i.e. it already is an external monitor.

Is there much of a market for 3 displays ?

As a video editor most definitely. And yes there are more professional machines but frankly their low to mid-tier models have a ton of firepower and work great for me these days. I used to drop $2500-$3000 on my Macs to edit but I can do great with $1350-$1800 now, especially since I don't need After Effects/Motion much

But the comment says "M1-based iMac". The M1 iMac was released 6 months after M1 was first released with the Mac Mini, Macbook Air/Pro. I can understand if you bought the original M1 Air/Pro and were surprised it doesn't support more than 1 external display since it was indeed surprising behavior. But 6 months after the release of the chip is plenty of time to be informed on what you're buying.

> Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display at millions of colors and: One external display with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20201110215047/https://www.apple...

Literally stated on the tech specs day of launch. Yes, Apple historically under promises[0] and over delivers, but in this case they stated exactly what it supported.

[0] Apple has never claimed support for more than 3x monitors to my knowledge on a laptop, but using an Intel MBP I was able to drive nine, all GPU backed without using Displaylink.

I've got to ask: What on earth did you need 9 monitors for!?

Was just testing what was possible, didn’t actually use it in normal daily use.

Presumably because similarly priced Intel Macs could connect to 2 or 3 displays with it's pathetically underpowered iGPU?

Not really, every single Mac Mini I can think of in the past decade has been able too support more than one display. Honestly, it's the kind of thing I just assume an expensive machine (yes $700 is expensive) would support.

Yeah I don’t get how so many people are going “you should’ve read the specs!”

Who confirms features that virtually everyone computer has had for a decade?

I'm an absolute fiend for screen real estate, and I'm not excusing this. It's a reason I didn't jump onto the M1 bandwagon myself when the first models came out.

But I don't see it as nearly reaching the level of being a "fucking travesty", in an era of affordable giant 4K monitors.

At any rate, I'm certainly glad newer models fix this.

The core reason is that I want both an extra screen AND to be able to draw on my Cintiq drawing screen. On an iMac, I can't. It's stupid.

Why can't you? I am typing this from an M1-MPB with two monitors. I just have 1 through thunderbolt and 1 through the hdmi.

You clearly have an M1 Pro or M1 Max MPB since you have an HDMI port. The base M1 models support the built-in display and 1 external display except the M1 Mini that's allowed 1 monitor over HDMI and 1 external display over TB. The Pro, Max and Ultra M1 models allow more displays.

I have a "MacBook Pro (13-inch, M1, 2020)" and I clearly can't have 2 external monitors. I tried everything.

That model has built-in support for a single external display in addition to the built-in display. If you want a second external display, you have to use third-party DisplayLink technology, which may be good enough depending upon your use case, but is inferior to built-in support.

Parent poster could also connect additional displays:

- via Sidecar on an iPad - via Airplay on a display of their choosing

Just mentioning workarounds, not excusing things.

I had a m1 mbp and have used three external monitors from day one. Used a startech 3x4k hub for that. It uses display link - which is sw-based rendering. Worked like a charm for dev work. You likely couldnt tell that from directly connected monitors unless you wanted to push rapidly changing content (like scrolling through logs at 60 screen-heights per second) - then compression would be indeed visible. For work, videos and occasional session of gzdoom it was a-ok.

Are you able to push 120hz on both external monitors? I’m guessing not. Looked at 2 startech DP dongles and all permutations seem to tap out at 60hz. Really hoping I’m wrong, would love a 120hz solution if possible.

No, 60Hz max with the startech.

Damn. That's a bummer. I want a 3rd screen but I am pretty spoiled by 120hz now. It's so easy on the eyes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com