#Mid 2012 macbook pro specs thunderbolt mac#

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 is the least expensive option in terms of cabling.

Third best is HDMI if the display has that as an input - go direct.

This costs the most for the hardware, but you get a docking station that fits your exact needs and one cable connection. This costs more, but not all modern displays support Thunderbolt in.

Second best is to connect to a Thunderbolt dock.

This cable costs second most of the 4 options.

#Mid 2012 macbook pro specs thunderbolt mac#

The best way to connect any Thunderbolt 2 Mac to a display is Thunderbolt since that gets you video and hub (USB / ethernet) functionality.

However, this port is limited to resolution of 1920x1200, which is not enough to support an ultra wide monitor. The 2012 MacBook Pro Retina models have a HDMI port. With this in mind, using your mini display port (thunderbolt port) would be a better choice. USB type A to type C adapter do exist, but the speeds would still be limited to 5 Gbps. You do not have a USB type C port, but you do have USB type A ports with speeds unto 5 Gbps. The problem with using a USB port is the speed of data transmission. 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. In this last case, this cannot be corrected by software.ДЄs for the best way to connect, this depends on the monitor. If there's no resolution that fits in both your Mac and your monitor's limits, these limits have no common space.

This will for example allow to define 2560x1080 in 50Hz, which will remain under the 165 MHz limit. 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. Most of the times, a good monitor can handle this lower frequency.

You can define 2560x1080 at 50Hz for example, which is a resolution that fits in the standard limitation of 165 MHz for the bandwidth. With SwitchResX, you could define new resolutions that fit inside the monitors and the MacвЂ™s limits, but that are not natively claimed by the monitor. One of the limitations of most Macs before 2014 when using a DisplayPort output is a resolution bandwidth of 165 MHz. In this case, there's no other predefined resolution claimed by the monitor that fits inside the Mac's limits. If 2560x1080 at 60Hz doesnвЂ™t fit the MacвЂ™s capabilities, then the Mac will only activate 1920x1080 at 60Hz. Your Mac does or doesnвЂ™t activate each of these resolutions depending on its own capabilities.ДЇor example, the monitor will send 1920x1080 at 60Hz as well as 2560x1080 at 60Hz as its wanted resolutions. The monitor communicate with the Mac and sends it a list of predefined resolutions it wants to get. 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. This question is valid for getting wide screen resolutions on older Macs. 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'. Once modifications are complete, SIP can be turned back on. This product requires System Integrity Protect (SIP) to be turned off in order for SwitchResX to modify macOS. One such tool for making modifications is SwitchResX. Ironically, a bounty was offered for this question and no answer was accepted.Д«asically, 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. (I assume the OP already did this before posted the question, but I may have come to a different conclusion.)ДЄctually, a similar question was asked over 6 years ago. So, the best I can offer is an answer based on internet searching. 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.