Question and Debate what happned to 24" 144hz or more at 1440p ?

[Sil3ntDragon]

I'm wondering what happened to that specific line-up of monitors?
I do not seem to be able to find any for sale in my country any more. nor in any close by countries.
I'm living in the EU.

is 24" just not profitable any more ?
it does not matter if it is IPS or TN even thou I do prefer IPS.

basically it seems if you want a monitor today you are forced to go 27" unless you can accept 1080p at 24"
does anybody know or think they have an idea of what happened to make this situation. ?

[jaslion]

24 inches became that weird middle child of small enough that 1080p is fine ish but not big enough that 1440p is a massive difference. So yeah kinda got replaced with 27 inch screens.

[Sil3ntDragon]

well I do feel a big enough difference to justify it so that point is arguable. but I guess on some level your explanation have good merit.

Basically I just feel left behind.

27 inches is just to big a screen for me and my needs and my two current 24" is 1080@60 and 1440p but 75hz I would had loved to have one at 144hz or more.
but when I was in the market for screens I looked at them and saw what I would call unreasonable high prices which I was expecting to come down over time but what happened instead was just a disappearance of those screens.

and now I see the 27" market having those same unreasonable high prices on 1440p and high refresh rate.
 

[dizmo]

The people have spoken, and most of them don't want one.

[Sil3ntDragon]

8 hours ago, dizmo said:

The people have spoken, and most of them don't want one.

Or the manufacturers just doesn't want to bother with supplying that many models and the people are just forced up in 27".

[xg32]

if there's a market for 24inch 1440p, it's very niche, the pixels are kinda big for 24inch 1080p but budget buyers don't mind. TN buyers care more about refresh rate.

[dizmo]

6 hours ago, Sil3ntDragon said:

Or the manufacturers just doesn't want to bother with supplying that many models and the people are just forced up in 27".

If there was money to be made, they'd be making it. That's how companies operate. 

[Sil3ntDragon]

4 hours ago, xg32 said:

if there's a market for 24inch 1440p, it's very niche, the pixels are kinda big for 24inch 1080p but budget buyers don't mind. TN buyers care more about refresh rate.

I got a 1440p 24"
I'm just confused why they stopped making them as it is considerable better than my 1080p just one or two years ago I could had bought a 24" 1440p 165hz ips with no issues if I was willing to put up the money for it. It was just too expensive so I opted for waiting for the price to come down to a reasonable level as screen technology usually does.

now however I cannot find it anywhere. 

especially as I see no reason to downgrade to a 27" 1440p as it is just the same screen quality as a 24" 1080p... why use more computer power on a display that is no more pretty to look at than what you have.

 

[Doobeedoo]

I also like 24" and I like 1440p on it, yet there's not a single such monitor that is also IPS and 144Hz when I was looking for it way back.

1080p on 24" is still low so 1440p is very good for it. But yeah..

[xg32]

3 hours ago, Sil3ntDragon said:

I got a 1440p 24"
I'm just confused why they stopped making them as it is considerable better than my 1080p just one or two years ago I could had bought a 24" 1440p 165hz ips with no issues if I was willing to put up the money for it. It was just too expensive so I opted for waiting for the price to come down to a reasonable level as screen technology usually does.

now however I cannot find it anywhere. 

especially as I see no reason to downgrade to a 27" 1440p as it is just the same screen quality as a 24" 1080p... why use more computer power on a display that is no more pretty to look at than what you have.

 

yeah, monitors used to be smaller before 2010 or so because of manufacturing restrictions, chances are if they made 24inch panels they'll have to charge 27inch prices, while you and i would probably buy the 24inch panels, the mass majority of the sales would go to 27inch.

 

It's much similar to 32inch 4k for awhile, but if it's a bigger screen they can charge more for it (lol) 

[Sil3ntDragon]

On 4/18/2021 at 10:15 PM, xg32 said:

yeah, monitors used to be smaller before 2010 or so because of manufacturing restrictions, chances are if they made 24inch panels they'll have to charge 27inch prices, while you and i would probably buy the 24inch panels, the mass majority of the sales would go to 27inch.

 

It's much similar to 32inch 4k for awhile, but if it's a bigger screen they can charge more for it (lol) 

as early as 2 years ago I could find 1440p 165hz IPS 24" screens. Just 1 year ago I bought a 1440p 24" 75hz ips screen as that was what my budget allowed me to..
it is a very very recent development contrary to what your initial statement makes it seem. 

Granted the prices of those 24" 2 years ago was too much for me to consider. but disappointed that we didn't see technology develop as we usually did where prices go down and at some point commoners like me can afford screens like that. but instead what it seems is that when the price on them got too close for me to actually consider them they just stopped producing them.

And all the reviewers are suddenly focusing on 27" 1440p 144hz and above when it really doesn't make sense as a 27" 1440p is about the same ppi as a 24" 1080p screen meaning you could just as well had bought a 24" 1080p 144hz and had the same picture quality. bigger screen doesn't mean better thou I do understand why some people think that way. because of how the Television market focused so much on the Bigger screen is better commercials.

[Mihle]

It's because people in general just kept buying 27" 1440p 144hz monitors and not many bought 24" 1440p 144hz. So then companies stopped making the 24" 1440p 144hz ones. If plenty of people had still bought it, they would have continued to make them.

[Sil3ntDragon]

48 minutes ago, Mihle said:

It's because people in general just kept buying 27" 1440p 144hz monitors and not many bought 24" 1440p 144hz. So then companies stopped making the 24" 1440p 144hz ones. If plenty of people had still bought it, they would have continued to make them.

probably but if they wanted more people to buy their screens maybe they should had found a way to reduce the price to normal levels so that more people would had been interested in buying them. Everyone I know is mostly interested in 24" when it comes to computers but they are not willing to pay more than maximum 300$ and are usually trying to see if they could find screens all the way down at 150$ to 200$ so people like them and me are just not going to spend 600$ + for a screen. which is the price point I last saw a 24" 1440p 144hz at.

[Mihle]

3 hours ago, Sil3ntDragon said:

probably but if they wanted more people to buy their screens maybe they should had found a way to reduce the price to normal levels so that more people would had been interested in buying them. Everyone I know is mostly interested in 24" when it comes to computers but they are not willing to pay more than maximum 300$ and are usually trying to see if they could find screens all the way down at 150$ to 200$ so people like them and me are just not going to spend 600$ + for a screen. which is the price point I last saw a 24" 1440p 144hz at.

Monitors cost to produce, and the less that by one, the higher is the price. If monitors like that should be close to that, they would have to sell at least the same amount of monitors as they sell 27" 1440p 144hz ones, but they dont. I do not have any sources on monitors production cost or whatever, but that is my guess.

Most people I have heard before that wants 144hz 24", are OK with 1080p, so probably go for that to save money.

 

When I got a new monitor I was sort of in the same boat just different market segment, I wanted 32" 4k 144hz originally, but that doesn't really exist, at least when I checked, all monitors was either 27" OR 60/75hz.

[Sil3ntDragon]

On 4/20/2021 at 11:50 AM, Mihle said:

Monitors cost to produce, and the less that by one, the higher is the price. If monitors like that should be close to that, they would have to sell at least the same amount of monitors as they sell 27" 1440p 144hz ones, but they dont. I do not have any sources on monitors production cost or whatever, but that is my guess.

Most people I have heard before that wants 144hz 24", are OK with 1080p, so probably go for that to save money.

 

When I got a new monitor I was sort of in the same boat just different market segment, I wanted 32" 4k 144hz originally, but that doesn't really exist, at least when I checked, all monitors was either 27" OR 60/75hz.

well it is true they cost to produce and the material also cost etc. However usually technology becomes more cheap over time. so something that is in a high end product today usually trickles down to a low end product 3-5-10 years from now.
this is one of those cases I would argument that this didn't happen they existed in a high end product a few years ago to 3-4 years ago.
but when they where about to come in to the midrange to low range they just didn't produce them any more.

all the value of the materials in all electronics are usually not that expensive. so it is the process by which they are being made that can make a product expensive to make.
my argument here is that 24" 1440p 144hz. should if it follows the normal technological trend become cheaper to produce the longer the technology is known. so it should had been on the limit to becoming cheap enough to produce for the average joe.

 

the reason most people that wants 144hz or above are okay with 1080p is because the price of 1440p was ridiculously high for most of the time it existed.

[DSD27]

On 4/18/2021 at 4:27 PM, Sil3ntDragon said:

I got a 1440p 24"
I'm just confused why they stopped making them as it is considerable better than my 1080p just one or two years ago I could had bought a 24" 1440p 165hz ips with no issues if I was willing to put up the money for it. It was just too expensive so I opted for waiting for the price to come down to a reasonable level as screen technology usually does.

now however I cannot find it anywhere. 

especially as I see no reason to downgrade to a 27" 1440p as it is just the same screen quality as a 24" 1080p... why use more computer power on a display that is no more pretty to look at than what you have.

 

That is not true. 24" 1080p is the same picture quality of 32" 1440p. 27" 1440p has higher PPI.

 

But I agree with you, I have both 23.8" and 27" 1440p, the 23.8" looks so good I actually prefer it for everything other than movies and single player games. I almost regret the "upgrade" I made.

[Sil3ntDragon]

On 5/18/2021 at 12:56 AM, DSD27 said:

That is not true. 24" 1080p is the same picture quality of 32" 1440p. 27" 1440p has higher PPI.

 

But I agree with you, I have both 23.8" and 27" 1440p, the 23.8" looks so good I actually prefer it for everything other than movies and single player games. I almost regret the "upgrade" I made.

while it is true the difference between a 24" and 27" is only a measurable on paper difference you would not physically be able to see the dot pitch difference of 0.0435mm at the regular sitting distance of an arms length to a 24" or a little more to a 27".
there is no point in indistinguishable differences that only really exist if you zoom in with a microscope.
In general, the smallest objects the human eye can see without the aid of technology are no smaller than 0.1 millimeters way bigger than the dot pitch difference there is between a 24" 1080p and a 27" 1440p.

[DSD27]

4 hours ago, Sil3ntDragon said:

while it is true the difference between a 24" and 27" is only a measurable on paper difference you would not physically be able to see the dot pitch difference of 0.0435mm at the regular sitting distance of an arms length to a 24" or a little more to a 27".
there is no point in indistinguishable differences that only really exist if you zoom in with a microscope.
In general, the smallest objects the human eye can see without the aid of technology are no smaller than 0.1 millimeters way bigger than the dot pitch difference there is between a 24" 1080p and a 27" 1440p.

The improvement in detail from 24" 1080p to 27" 1440p is quite noticeable. You also see more of the game, just like you have a lot more space to work on the desktop. It's also more immersive. Imo 27" 1440p makes a bigger impact on the user experience than high refresh rates over 75Hz.

But of course a 24" is going to be even sharper and look better. I have both 23.8" 1440p and 27" 1440p, both are a world apart from 24" 1080p, after you get 1440p there's no going back. I really like 24" 1440p, but I think 27" makes a bigger difference because it increases both PPI and size.

[Tech87]

I found a few. I'm sure there are others out there as well.

 

Acer XB241YU

AOC AG241QG

AOC AG241QX

Dell S2417DG

 

 

[Tadgh_]

On 5/17/2021 at 11:56 PM, DSD27 said:

That is not true. 24" 1080p is the same picture quality of 32" 1440p. 27" 1440p has higher PPI.

 

But I agree with you, I have both 23.8" and 27" 1440p, the 23.8" looks so good I actually prefer it for everything other than movies and single player games. I almost regret the "upgrade" I made.

 

On 4/18/2021 at 12:39 AM, Sil3ntDragon said:

well I do feel a big enough difference to justify it so that point is arguable. but I guess on some level your explanation have good merit.

Basically I just feel left behind.

27 inches is just to big a screen for me and my needs and my two current 24" is 1080@60 and 1440p but 75hz I would had loved to have one at 144hz or more.
but when I was in the market for screens I looked at them and saw what I would call unreasonable high prices which I was expecting to come down over time but what happened instead was just a disappearance of those screens.

and now I see the 27" market having those same unreasonable high prices on 1440p and high refresh rate.
 

 

It's funny, I've owned a range of displays at different resolutions (21", 24", 27", 32", 40") and I've just had to go back to using a 21" for my second monitor...

It's kind of great. It's super friendly because it doesn't fill your entire field of vision, and it take up less space on your desk. Plus the extra pixel density is nice. I have to wonder about the eyesight of all of these people claiming the difference between 108 and 123PPI is imperceptible.

Sitting here comparing the screens I have lying around, I find that there's a tangible difference between my 105PPI and 110PPI panels. Not massive, but it's there.

[DSD27]

7 hours ago, Tadgh_ said:

Sitting here comparing the screens I have lying around, I find that there's a tangible difference between my 105PPI and 110PPI panels. Not massive, but it's there.

Good. The difference in PPI between 24" 1080p and 27" 1440p is bigger than that.

24" 1080p = 92 PPI

27" 1440p = 108.79 PPI

33% increase

So definitely noticeable, not just on paper like you said.