Optimal 4K - 6K Display Options for My New Job?

[SillyKitty]

New employer is sending me an M1 MacBook Pro (13in.), and I'm trying to figure out the optimal ultrawide display to come as close as possible replicating a triple monitor setup. Due to M1 limitations and IT restrictions with 3rd party drivers, I won't be able to go triple monitor with common workarounds (DisplayLink, eGPU, etc). I can only proceed with one display.
 

My job requires 12hrs/day of multi-tasking between data analysis, slack, Asana, and gmail. Having 1ms GTG response time isn't necessary, and having perfect color accuracy for video/illustration editing is also not necessary. Will obviously not be gaming, so 120hz+ is not necessary, but appreciated by my eyeballs if a viable option exists.

 

Here are some options that I've been able to find, but perhaps there are some that I may have missed? Maximum budget is $2k.

• LG 49WL95C-WE
• LG CX 48 (From Linus' YT video, but worried about the 2160 pixel height)
• Samsung LC49RG90SSNXZA (thinking of dropping from list because the stand takes up too much desk real estate + flickering issues with iOS)

TYIA

[Stahlmann]

The LG CX or C1 48" will give you as much screen space as 4 1080p monitors. Idk how window snapping works in iOS but there are tools available for windows that enable snapping to edges, effectively making 4 monitors out of this screen. But static imagery 12hrs+ a day will be practically a worst-case scenario for an OLED display in terms of burn-in.

 

The Samsung CRG9 would have been a suggestion, but i didn't know a about flickering issues with iOS. Plus the issue mention down below.

 

The LG49WL95C seems like a great option, but will only be around the same as 2 1440p monitors in the end.

[leclod]

This is maybe unrelevant,

I use a 65" Oled as my pc monitor (TV and PS4).

Ok, burn In is an issue. I had to cancel out all the reddish Icons because red is the weakest link in Oled.

I did lower brightness to 0 on a 0 to 100 scale. 0 is alright, higher is too bright. Lowering brightness helps with Burn In.

I feel 65" isn't too big, I tried 55" before (I'm not working on it though). And the price difference isn't big, around here you often get the 65" for 1.5 the price of the 48"

 

 

[Stahlmann]

23 hours ago, leclod said:

This is maybe unrelevant,

I use a 65" Oled as my pc monitor (TV and PS4).

Ok, burn In is an issue. I had to cancel out all the reddish Icons because red is the weakest link in Oled.

I did lower brightness to 0 on a 0 to 100 scale. 0 is alright, higher is too bright. Lowering brightness helps with Burn In.

I feel 65" isn't too big, I tried 55" before (I'm not working on it though). And the price difference isn't big, around here you often get the 65" for 1.5 the price of the 48"

The 48" versions are already borderline desktop useable and are too big for most desks. I have a 55" OLED aswell but i use it as a TV, not on a desk. And this TV is already huge. You're also getting to a size where pixel density suffers a lot: With 67 ppi the sharpness will be even worse than a 24" 1080p monitor.

 

Sorry, but a 65" TV simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever as a desk PC monitor.

[leclod]

9 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

The 48" versions are already borderline desktop useable and are too big for most desks. I have a 55" OLED aswell but i use it as a TV, not on a desk. And this TV is already huge. You're also getting to a size where pixel density suffers a lot: With 67 ppi the sharpness will be even worse than a 24" 1080p monitor.

 

Sorry, but a 65" TV simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever as a desk PC monitor.

I tend to disagree but I'm not sure. It's possible I would also prefer a 27" or so, for common pc tasks (it's been a while).

The thing is, I use my only monitor also for Gaming, TV and PS4 from a sofa 3m away.

About pixel density also I'd tend to disagree, it seems alright to me. There have probably existed useable 32" FullHD monitors. But again I'm not sure...

On one side though, I certainly enjoy that "bigness"

[Stahlmann]

2 hours ago, leclod said:

I tend to disagree but I'm not sure. It's possible I would also prefer a 27" or so, for common pc tasks (it's been a while).

The thing is, I use my only monitor also for Gaming, TV and PS4 from a sofa 3m away.

I said it doesn't make sense on a desktop basis. Sitting 3m away from your screen is not "desktop". It's a couch gaming setup, hardly fit for any kind of work.

 

2 hours ago, leclod said:

About pixel density also I'd tend to disagree, it seems alright to me. There have probably existed useable 32" FullHD monitors. But again I'm not sure...

On one side though, I certainly enjoy that "bigness"

For a TV where you sit away from it's fine. But the pixel density is too low for desktop use where you sit a lot closer to the display than 3m. And a 32" 1080p monitor is "useable" but the image will be quite blurry making it a lot harder on the eyes to work with. Also you don't really get any more space to work with when you use a low resolution on a big screen.

 

I never said that a 65" TV doesn't have any use. They obviously do in a living room or couch gaming setup. But for useage on your desk in front of you as a workstation? That's simply not what the display is made for.

[leclod]

15 hours ago, Stahlmann said:

I said it doesn't make sense on a desktop basis. Sitting 3m away from your screen is not "desktop". It's a couch gaming setup, hardly fit for any kind of work.

 

 

"It's possible I would also prefer a 27" or so, for common pc tasks (it's been a while).

The thing is, I use my only monitor also for Gaming, TV and PS4 from a sofa 3m away."

 

I still think it's understandable that I do both. 3m and 0.6m depending on task