Noticeable pixels at 1440p 27-inch

[durrburger]

I got a new 27inch 1440p monitor a few days ago after using a 40inch 4k Samsung TV as a monitor for a while, as TV was amazing but had bad ghosting due to response times. The monitor model is 276E8FJAB, and while I'm loving the colors, response and a slightly higher refresh rate, I can definitely notice pixels especially in comparison to the TV that has the same PPI. Now I was looking for definitive answers on this before making the purchase and the general idea was that at appropriate viewing distance, the displays should look roughly the same because they have almost the same PPI (110 for the TV and 108 for the monitor), but there is a clear difference.

 

On the TV I can barely notice pixels even when viewing from up close, with desktop icons and texts (Word especially), all crystal clear on the TV while small jaggies/pixels are visible on the monitor. It's also pretty noticeable in games with most being far sharper and more detailed at 4k on a much larger screen.

 

I'm also not 100% sure that something isn't slightly off with the scaling as I'm switcing the HDMI cable back and fourth, so is the difference supposed to be noticeable or could something else be the case? I reinstalled the drivers with DDU so there should be nothing wrong on that end I hope. Many third party apps are WAY more blurry on the monitor, which I guess falls under dpi scaling but I don't know how to counter it as they look the same regardless of what I set Windows scaling to.

[Letgomyleghoe]

What monitor?

[Ashiella]

Don't use scaling on windows, just keep it at 100%.
It could be how far youre sitting from the two, I have a 27" 1440p monitor, and looking at my friends 40" 4k tv, there was hardly a difference if any.

It could also be something like low contrast modulation in the monitor, LTT did talk about it in a video as well so you can get a more precise definition an example of what I mean.

 

[durrburger]

8 minutes ago, scuff gang said:

What monitor?

It's 276E8FJAB, I listed it above. The weird thing that it was marketed as a 60hz display but it also has a 75hz option that seems to run with no issues, at least none that I see.

[durrburger]

15 minutes ago, Ashiella said:

Don't use scaling on windows, just keep it at 100%.
It could be how far youre sitting from the two, I have a 27" 1440p monitor, and looking at my friends 40" 4k tv, there was hardly a difference if any.

It could also be something like low contrast modulation in the monitor, LTT did talk about it in a video as well so you can get a more precise definition an example of what I mean.

 

Damn first time I'm hearing about this ever, there's no end to the display bullshit you gotta watch out for and can't find any relevant information on. But there doesn't seem to be a way to determine this without a microscope and another monitor? The worst part is that I have nothing to compare it to, all stores in my area suck and have no 1440p displays out, and I don't know anyone who has one.

 

Unfortunately I can't set scaling to 100% as it's too tiny unless I stick my face into the screen. I also didn't find any settings in the OSD menu that might help with this, there's sharpness which looks terribly blurry at 0 and too sharp at 100 so I left it at 50 where it was.

Edited February 21, 2020 by durrburger

[Doobeedoo]

Urm, scaling at 100% definitely. I prefer 1440p at 24" myself. And that's on 27" so anything other than it will look bad. 

[SolarNova]

14 hours ago, durrburger said:

I got a new 27inch 1440p monitor a few days ago after using a 40inch 4k Samsung TV as a monitor for a while, as TV was amazing but had bad ghosting due to response times. The monitor model is 276E8FJAB, and while I'm loving the colors, response and a slightly higher refresh rate, I can definitely notice pixels especially in comparison to the TV that has the same PPI. Now I was looking for definitive answers on this before making the purchase and the general idea was that at appropriate viewing distance, the displays should look roughly the same because they have almost the same PPI (110 for the TV and 108 for the monitor), but there is a clear difference.

 

On the TV I can barely notice pixels even when viewing from up close, with desktop icons and texts (Word especially), all crystal clear on the TV while small jaggies/pixels are visible on the monitor. It's also pretty noticeable in games with most being far sharper and more detailed at 4k on a much larger screen.

 

I'm also not 100% sure that something isn't slightly off with the scaling as I'm switcing the HDMI cable back and fourth, so is the difference supposed to be noticeable or could something else be the case? I reinstalled the drivers with DDU so there should be nothing wrong on that end I hope. Many third party apps are WAY more blurry on the monitor, which I guess falls under dpi scaling but I don't know how to counter it as they look the same regardless of what I set Windows scaling to.

You may not noticing pixels, but rather the rendering resolution.

 

if the PPi is the same, and the subpixel layout is the same, then the only difference is the rendering resolution, and that makes a much bigger impact on the image than PPI does.

 

Rendering resolution is a very overlooked fact when comparing monitors, often overlooked for the sake of PPi comparisons. However if u were to run a monitor, for example a 1080p display, and instead render at 4k, ull notice an improvement in the image quality. The display hasnt magically gained PPI, its just being used to its fullest extent.

 

When rendering at the native resolution, it doesnt mean ur rendering 1:1 with every pixel on the screen. Games in particular have what is called LOD settings. Objects not immediately in the foreground are rendered below native resolutions, in fact many foreground objects are also not rendered at native resolutions, neither are many textures made at such high resolutions. This is all for performance sake, so ur not actually using the full resolution and PPi of the display in many scenarios.

 

It can also be caused by software ofc, scaling and other methods of interpolation could be causing issues.

[durrburger]

1 hour ago, SolarNova said:

You may not noticing pixels, but rather the rendering resolution.

 

if the PPi is the same, and the subpixel layout is the same, then the only difference is the rendering resolution, and that makes a much bigger impact on the image than PPI does.

 

Rendering resolution is a very overlooked fact when comparing monitors, often overlooked for the sake of PPi comparisons. However if u were to run a monitor, for example a 1080p display, and instead render at 4k, ull notice an improvement in the image quality. The display hasnt magically gained PPI, its just being used to its fullest extent.

 

When rendering at the native resolution, it doesnt mean ur rendering 1:1 with every pixel on the screen. Games in particular have what is called LOD settings. Objects not immediately in the foreground are rendered below native resolutions, in fact many foreground objects are also not rendered at native resolutions, neither are many textures made at such high resolutions. This is all for performance sake, so ur not actually using the full resolution and PPi of the display in many scenarios.

 

It can also be caused by software ofc, scaling and other methods of interpolation could be causing issues.

What do you mean by rendering resolution in this case? Both displays are using their native resolution without any downsampling, I'm not sure what else to do to confirm resoution aside from that. Here is an example from PoE I made for a reddit thread on the same issue:

 

https://imgur.com/a/iRnkGbS

 

All games I've tried look noticeably worse than they do on the TV, especially in terms of aliasing.

[SolarNova]

23 minutes ago, durrburger said:

What do you mean by rendering resolution in this case? Both displays are using their native resolution without any downsampling, I'm not sure what else to do to confirm resoution aside from that. Here is an example from PoE I made for a reddit thread on the same issue:

 

https://imgur.com/a/iRnkGbS

 

All games I've tried look noticeably worse than they do on the TV, especially in terms of aliasing.

Something is wrong there. Thats not a Scaling, PPI or resolution issue.

 

Check the monitor settings, see if anything looks ...'odd' or if anything is enabled that u think shouldn't be. I cant imagine what would cause that kind of image artifacting.

 

You mentioned HDMI ..have u tried DP ?

[Kid.Lazer]

As SolarNova mentioned, something is definitely wrong there, although I unfortunately can't say what exactly. It looks just like an analog VGA connection that hasn't been auto-image'd. Try different cables, and if you can't make any improvements, an RMA might be in your future.

[jones177]

 

6 hours ago, SolarNova said:

You may not noticing pixels, but rather the rendering resolution.

 

if the PPi is the same, and the subpixel layout is the same, then the only difference is the rendering resolution, and that makes a much bigger impact on the image than PPI does.

 

Rendering resolution is a very overlooked fact when comparing monitors, often overlooked for the sake of PPi comparisons. However if u were to run a monitor, for example a 1080p display, and instead render at 4k, ull notice an improvement in the image quality. The display hasnt magically gained PPI, its just being used to its fullest extent.

 

When rendering at the native resolution, it doesnt mean ur rendering 1:1 with every pixel on the screen. Games in particular have what is called LOD settings. Objects not immediately in the foreground are rendered below native resolutions, in fact many foreground objects are also not rendered at native resolutions, neither are many textures made at such high resolutions. This is all for performance sake, so ur not actually using the full resolution and PPi of the display in many scenarios.

 

It can also be caused by software ofc, scaling and other methods of interpolation could be causing issues.

I have a question.

 

If I set a game to 1080p full screen on my 4k monitor the screenshot will be at 1080p.

If I set a game to 1080p full screen on my 4k OLED TV the screenshot will be at 4k.

 

What are differences in these technologies? 

 

[SolarNova]

2 hours ago, jones177 said:

 

I have a question.

 

If I set a game to 1080p full screen on my 4k monitor the screenshot will be at 1080p.

If I set a game to 1080p full screen on my 4k OLED TV the screenshot will be at 4k.

 

What are differences in these technologies? 

 

If u set a games rendering resolution to 1080p .. the screenshot will be 1080p regardless of the display.

 

 

[jones177]

4 hours ago, SolarNova said:

If u set a games rendering resolution to 1080p .. the screenshot will be 1080p regardless of the display.

 

 

My bad for testing one game.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider must upscale automatically.

When I tested other games like RDR 2 and Control they behaved as you described.

 

 

[durrburger]

17 hours ago, SolarNova said:

Something is wrong there. Thats not a Scaling, PPI or resolution issue.

 

Check the monitor settings, see if anything looks ...'odd' or if anything is enabled that u think shouldn't be. I cant imagine what would cause that kind of image artifacting.

 

You mentioned HDMI ..have u tried DP ?

 

I can't find anything in the settings that might affect this but that previous picture might have been more to do with the game as I haven't seen that "duplicated" effect since. However the pixel density seems lower in general, here is another example from desktop icons, monitor is on the displayport now:

 

https://imgur.com/a/rl2XrWc

 

TV is sharper and more defined regardless of the viewing distance and I have pretty good eyes so I'm noticing a decline on the monitor as soon as I switch. I'm basically trying to figure out is this comparison normal and to be expected between 2160 - 40 / 1440p - 27, or should they look the same consdering the same ppi, or could actually that 2* ppi difference be enough for such a difference.

 

If anyone has a 1440/27 monitor I'd be grateful for a similar zoomed in picture for comparison.

 

 

[durrburger]

17 hours ago, Kid.Lazer said:

As SolarNova mentioned, something is definitely wrong there, although I unfortunately can't say what exactly. It looks just like an analog VGA connection that hasn't been auto-image'd. Try different cables, and if you can't make any improvements, an RMA might be in your future.

I posted another set of examples with a DP on the monitor now, first picture was partly a game issue. Customer service is pretty bad in my area and it would likely be a month+ long process, but I might be able to RMA, I'm just trying to figure out is this pixel density normal for a 1440p display as I've never had one before.

 

I started using TVs as monitors a few years ago and the jump from 1080p 40 to 2160p 40 was huge. Now this monitor has great colors, viewing angles, a bit better refresh rate etc, it's just a downgrade from the TV in terms of clarity, and I was under the impression that ppi would mean that they are basically the same.

[jones177]

 

6 hours ago, durrburger said:

 

I can't find anything in the settings that might affect this but that previous picture might have been more to do with the game as I haven't seen that "duplicated" effect since. However the pixel density seems lower in general, here is another example from desktop icons, monitor is on the displayport now:

 

https://imgur.com/a/rl2XrWc

 

TV is sharper and more defined regardless of the viewing distance and I have pretty good eyes so I'm noticing a decline on the monitor as soon as I switch. I'm basically trying to figure out is this comparison normal and to be expected between 2160 - 40 / 1440p - 27, or should they look the same consdering the same ppi, or could actually that 2* ppi difference be enough for such a difference.

 

If anyone has a 1440/27 monitor I'd be grateful for a similar zoomed in picture for comparison.

 

 

The text and other Windows features looked bad on my 32" 1440p and  34" 3440 X 1440 21:9 monitors.  They look great on my 32" 4k monitor and 38" 3840 X 1600p 21:9 monitor.

 

As far as I am concerned 1440p is low res.

 

I view my 55" OLD TV that I use as a monitor double the distance away than what I use the 32" 4k and 38" 21:9 so the text and windows features look fine to me.  

[bmichaels556]

On 2/20/2020 at 7:43 PM, durrburger said:

I got a new 27inch 1440p monitor a few days ago after using a 40inch 4k Samsung TV as a monitor for a while, as TV was amazing but had bad ghosting due to response times. The monitor model is 276E8FJAB, and while I'm loving the colors, response and a slightly higher refresh rate, I can definitely notice pixels especially in comparison to the TV that has the same PPI. Now I was looking for definitive answers on this before making the purchase and the general idea was that at appropriate viewing distance, the displays should look roughly the same because they have almost the same PPI (110 for the TV and 108 for the monitor), but there is a clear difference.

 

On the TV I can barely notice pixels even when viewing from up close, with desktop icons and texts (Word especially), all crystal clear on the TV while small jaggies/pixels are visible on the monitor. It's also pretty noticeable in games with most being far sharper and more detailed at 4k on a much larger screen.

 

I'm also not 100% sure that something isn't slightly off with the scaling as I'm switcing the HDMI cable back and fourth, so is the difference supposed to be noticeable or could something else be the case? I reinstalled the drivers with DDU so there should be nothing wrong on that end I hope. Many third party apps are WAY more blurry on the monitor, which I guess falls under dpi scaling but I don't know how to counter it as they look the same regardless of what I set Windows scaling to.

Do many variables like contrast ratio like others have said. And panel quality can be MASSIVE. I remember I had this old Gateway laptop from 2008 that overheated to hell. But that's besides the point. It was a 15.4" display at (I believe) 1280 x 800? Would that work out to a 16:10 aspect ratio? I think so.

 

Point being, it was absolutely gorgeous to look at. One of the laptops I eventually replaced it with, was clearly a much worse panel and you could visibly see the little breaks between pixels despite it being a 14" screen at 1080p, that's more than double the PPI! So these are things to keep in mind for sure. It's why I'm generally skeptical to just buy any kind of TV or monitor without good reviews of it, or seeing it in person. Because resolution and PPI just ain't all that matters..

 

[durrburger]

31 minutes ago, bmichaels556 said:

Do many variables like contrast ratio like others have said. And panel quality can be MASSIVE. I remember I had this old Gateway laptop from 2008 that overheated to hell. But that's besides the point. It was a 15.4" display at (I believe) 1280 x 800? Would that work out to a 16:10 aspect ratio? I think so.

 

Point being, it was absolutely gorgeous to look at. One of the laptops I eventually replaced it with, was clearly a much worse panel and you could visibly see the little breaks between pixels despite it being a 14" screen at 1080p, that's more than double the PPI! So these are things to keep in mind for sure. It's why I'm generally skeptical to just buy any kind of TV or monitor without good reviews of it, or seeing it in person. Because resolution and PPI just ain't all that matters..

 

Yeah that's the dark side of display peddling. Half of the specs and characteristics you can't dig out unless rtings does a in-depth review, because huge amount of people don't care about anything and just grab the shiniest screen. Hell, many stores around me don't even have the refresh rates of monitors and TVs on display.

[durrburger]

4 hours ago, jones177 said:

 

The text and other Windows features looked bad on my 32" 1440p and  34" 3440 X 1440 21:9 monitors.  They look great on my 32" 4k monitor and 38" 3840 X 1600p 21:9 monitor.

 

As far as I am concerned 1440p is low res.

 

I view my 55" OLD TV that I use as a monitor double the distance away than what I use the 32" 4k and 38" 21:9 so the text and windows features look fine to me.  

I'm inclined to agree at this point, the "problem" is getting used to 4k.

 

Personally I don't care much about refresh rates higher than 60, as I don't play any competitive games ever, but I can't even look at 1080p screens at this point anymore after using 4k for a year. You just don't realize how much detail and clarity you're not getting at lower resolutions unless you've seen it first, both for games and text in general.