3

What is the best way to connect a mid 2012 macbook pro to a new ultra wide external monitor? I know most of the monitors suggest using USB C but that doesn't exist in my macbook pro so trying to figure out the best option (that doesn't require ordering a new laptop)

4
  • 2
    There really is not enough information to properly answer this question. It would be helpful if you could include enough information to determine the exact 2012 model. For example, is this a Retina model? What is the video card? Can you find your Mac in this list? Sep 22, 2020 at 18:27
  • In addition to the information mentioned in David Anderson's comment, you should also include the make/model info for the external monitor as well. The lack of this information, and asking for "best way" as it can be opinionated, is probably why your question was down-voted. Sep 25, 2020 at 13:56
  • What is the resolution of the external display? What video outport ports does it have?
    – pkamb
    Sep 25, 2020 at 15:57
  • I assumed the OP does not yet have an ultra wide monitor. However, I can see where a user could assume otherwise. Sep 25, 2020 at 16:32

6 Answers 6

2

I'm assuming you're asking about the UltraWide LG monitor range, since this is their registered mark.

The best way would be to use the Mini Display Port (also known as Thunderbolt) on your Mac and Display Port on your monitor (with the correct cable), but you will not be able to use more than 2560 by 1600 (In case you have 15" 2012 MacBook Pro with retina display). Via HDMI, your MacBook is able to output only 1920 by 1080.

Such a compatible monitor should be LG 29WK600-W.

1

When I first read this question, I assumed the OP was hoping for an answer from a user who actually had a 2012 MacBook Pro connected to a ultra wide monitor. Unfortunately, I do not. So, the best I can offer is an answer based on internet searching. (I assume the OP already did this before posted the question, but I may have come to a different conclusion.)

Actually, a similar question was asked over 6 years ago. Ironically, a bounty was offered for this question and no answer was accepted.

Basically, you should be able to get a monitor with an ultra wide resolution of 2560x1080 (WFHD) to work with any 2012 MacBook Pro, but this probably will require modifying macOS. One such tool for making modifications is SwitchResX. This product requires System Integrity Protect (SIP) to be turned off in order for SwitchResX to modify macOS. Once modifications are complete, SIP can be turned back on. Below is an excerpt from the answer to the SwitchResX webpage FAQ: "I can't get my wide screen monitor to show its native resolution on my Mac".

This question is valid for getting wide screen resolutions on older Macs....

Your Mac has limits in the resolutions it can send to the monitor and the monitor has limits in the resolutions it can show from the Mac. The monitor communicate with the Mac and sends it a list of predefined resolutions it wants to get. Your Mac does or doesn’t activate each of these resolutions depending on its own capabilities.

For example, the monitor will send 1920x1080 at 60Hz as well as 2560x1080 at 60Hz as its wanted resolutions. If 2560x1080 at 60Hz doesn’t fit the Mac’s capabilities, then the Mac will only activate 1920x1080 at 60Hz.

In this case, there's no other predefined resolution claimed by the monitor that fits inside the Mac's limits.... One of the limitations of most Macs before 2014 when using a DisplayPort output is a resolution bandwidth of 165 MHz.

With SwitchResX, you could define new resolutions that fit inside the monitors and the Mac’s limits, but that are not natively claimed by the monitor....

You can define 2560x1080 at 50Hz for example, which is a resolution that fits in the standard limitation of 165 MHz for the bandwidth. Most of the times, a good monitor can handle this lower frequency. SwitchResX will help the Mac and the monitor into finding a resolution that matches their capabilities and is better than the only 1920x1080 resolution that you now have....

This will for example allow to define 2560x1080 in 50Hz, which will remain under the 165 MHz limit.... If there's no resolution that fits in both your Mac and your monitor's limits, these limits have no common space. In this last case, this cannot be corrected by software.

As for the best way to connect, this depends on the monitor. If purchasing a new monitor, apparently, a display port on the monitor probably would offer the most compatibility with the mini display port (thunderbolt port) on your Mac.

The problem with using a USB port is the speed of data transmission. You do not have a USB type C port, but you do have USB type A ports with speeds unto 5 Gbps. USB type A to type C adapter do exist, but the speeds would still be limited to 5 Gbps. With this in mind, using your mini display port (thunderbolt port) would be a better choice.

The 2012 MacBook Pro Retina models have a HDMI port. However, this port is limited to resolution of 1920x1200, which is not enough to support an ultra wide monitor.

1
  • The best way to connect any Thunderbolt 2 Mac to a display is Thunderbolt since that gets you video and hub (USB / ethernet) functionality. This cable costs second most of the 4 options.
  • Second best is to connect to a Thunderbolt dock. This costs more, but not all modern displays support Thunderbolt in. This costs the most for the hardware, but you get a docking station that fits your exact needs and one cable connection. Convenient and capable.
  • Third best is HDMI if the display has that as an input - go direct. This is the least expensive option in terms of cabling.
  • Fourth best is an adapter - use the Thunderbolt port as it also drives adapters to DisplayPort and HDMI - the video quality is superb here, just less functionality. This can cost far less than a dock, second cheapest.

One note - Apple's Thunderbolt 3 to Thunderbolt 2 adapter is bi-directional - you can connect newer thunderbolt 3 devices to older Thunderbolt 2 Macs and there's no real downside as the speed of 2 (and thunderbolt 1) is faster than any USB 3.1 network / display / hub can saturate alone. USB-C connector and Thunderbolt 3 adapters are physically the same - just as Thunderbolt 2 shares the same pin and hardware connector as Mini DisplayPort.

Some great docks are made by Dell and HP (value and support) as well as Belkin, OWC and Elgato - those brand's 2 and 3 docks have been stellar values and top performers, great support for years.

You should have good success with any of these options in terms of driving all the pixels of your ultra wide display as fast as your Mac GPU can push the data. I've tested the first option between 2014 MacBook Pro and the LG 5K display - works great - full resolution, so any limiting on resolution is not the cables. My 2013 Mac Pro also routinely work with the newest displays and cables described above. No drivers are needed - all of this works out of the box.

None of the 4 options is visually worse than any of the others, so I called them all best - but ranked them to help you and others out budget and buy.

3
  • Great answer. I forgot about Apple's Thunderbolt 3 (USB-C) to Thunderbolt 2 Adapter. I thought Thunderbolt 2 came to MacBook Pro models starting in 2013. If the 2012 MacBook Pro models only have the original Thunderbolt, would this be slower and make any difference? Sep 28, 2020 at 4:03
  • @DavidAnderson thanks! Yours is great as well. I’m going to have to hit the graveyard for a 2012 MBP. I have a 15 2011 that needs a repair, won’t show anything on the screen. I believe Original Thunderbolt works fine, too and for video, still won’t saturate the bus. 10 Gbit / 20 Gbit / 30 Gbit are all still faster than the embedded DP/HDMI signals. Original ran those gorgeous matte 30” Cinema displays over dual link DVI just fine. I haven’t tested it, though
    – bmike
    Sep 28, 2020 at 4:22
  • @DavidAnderson, RE: "Thunderbolt 2 came to MacBook Pro models starting in 2013" -- There started in Late 2013, the Early 2013 where only up to 10 Gbp on the MacBook Pro. Sep 28, 2020 at 14:57
0

A mid-2012 MacBook Pro has one Thunderbolt port aka Mini DisplayPort: https://support.apple.com/kb/sp649?locale=en_US

I've never tried doing anything graphic intensive.

1
  • @DavidAnderson I didn't realized "ultra wide" has a formal definition, but should have from the context. I still use a 17" on my Linux pc, so my ViewSonic always strikes me as ultra wide. I am sorry I made that mistake about the USB adapter. I've read the Thunderbolt might not have the bandwidth for an ultra wide that is a Retina, but I don't know monitors very well.
    – rppkgai
    Sep 25, 2020 at 5:18
0

I have both, working at the 2560x1080 default resolution. I use a MiniDP male splitter to HDMI, but I only use one of the two outputs, obviously. It was a random trial and test just because I had the adapter already.

Alternatively, I think the native and most proper option I'd be using a miniDP to DVI Dual Link adapter, in order to increase the bandwidth, then a DVI Dual Link to HDMI. I havn't tried it, but theoretically it would be doing the same as the connection I have. I have not tried docks yet.

I have tested just one cable, a SatelliteSale Uni Directional Mini DisplayPort to HDMI Cable Male to Male unsuccessfully. A bunch of adapters unsuccessfully. Apps like SwitchRes and others unsucessfully (for these the problem is the aspect ratio)...

You're welcome.

-1

Actually, I don't know your Ultra wide external monitor model, but I guess it should support one of Type-c or HDMI Audio/Video inputting port, fortunately, both of them have cable/adapter support:

  • Thunderbolt to HDMI: enter image description here

  • Thunderbolt to Type-c: enter image description here

It is dependent on your External monitor support, Type-c and HDMI, both support inputting audio and video.

⚠️ Caution: Do not use an adapter, adapters reduce your video/audio quality, Use direct cable instead.

5
  • I need to get one of those Thunderbolt / mini DP to Thunderbolt 3 cables to test. What part number have you used and which direction have you tested?
    – bmike
    Sep 28, 2020 at 1:01
  • @bmike, Actually, I used both of them, and both works for me.
    – AmerllicA
    Sep 28, 2020 at 6:11
  • Can you edit manufacturer and part numbers? I would like to buy these
    – bmike
    Sep 28, 2020 at 13:01
  • Dear @bmike, I'm pro StackOverflow users, I just have the same issue and want to help, sorry, but I have no time to do that. but I'm a really open mind to edit. you can Search and edit whole my answer. Also, I think the correct answer is mine and I expect the bounty to be mine.
    – AmerllicA
    Sep 28, 2020 at 13:16
  • I wouldn’t edit in some random part based on searching for connectors, personally. I try to list items I test rather than google, but anyone else can propose and edit. Good luck - let’s see if the person issuing the bounty even chooses to award it.
    – bmike
    Sep 28, 2020 at 13:19

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .