Why 27" or 28" 4K, instead of 40" 4K?

[WhiteSkyMage]

Hey guys,

 

I have been looking at resolution/size ratio between monitors and apparently a 27" 1440p monitor would have a very close pixel density (108 PPI) as 4K 40" monitor (110 PPI). Also to spot a difference between the 2 on a 27" monitor, you need to be looking at closer than 21inches/53cm.

 

So why do Acer and Asus or other companies even bother making a 4K monitor at 27" inch? Why not stick to only Quad HD at this size? Are they expecting people to sit that close to their monitors? I would understand if that was for work stations, but who would notice a difference in gaming? If you are sitting at 60cm+ then you would have wasted your money for this 4K monitor without even spotting a difference... 

 

I know you would say - why don't I just buy a TV and shush - well it doesn't work that way. You can't compare a gaming monitor with high refresh rate with all those techs from Nvidia and AMD to a TV which...is a TV and that's that. So there should be 40" monitors and yes I know of that Philips one which is 4K 40" and looks awesome but doesn't have the gaming features I am looking for - low response time at least...NO

 

What do you think? Isn't this just a WASTE of money and resources or do those monitors actually have a place on the market as Asus and other companies think... Or is it SPACE your problem...trust me - you can make some.

[Swndlr]

40" is a TV

24" - 30" is a reasonable desktop monitor size

Most 4K is used for precise editing and content creation

[Enderman]

some people just want 4k on regular monitor sizes despite it not really being an improvement over 1440p

most people who say its way better are usually experiencing placebo, unless they sit 10" away from the monitor

 

this is why more and more companies are making 32" and 40" 4k monitors

 

4k tvs are a bit different since they have a little bit more latency and only HDMI, so its really only good to have a 4k tv if it has HDMI 2.0 and you have an nvidia GTX900 GPU

[babadoctor]

cannot comprehend

wall of text

[MegaDave91]

So why do Acer and Asus or other companies even bother making a 4K monitor at 27" inch? Why not stick to only Quad HD at this size? 

163 PPI vs 108 PPI is very noticeable. 

[79wjd]

Because the pixel density of 1080p@24" sucks. 

[WhiteSkyMage]

163 PPI vs 108 PPI is very noticeable. 

At 53cm/21inches away.

 

Don't tell me you are that close...you will be blind soon...

[WhiteSkyMage]

Do you really want a forty inch monitor right in your face? You're going to have to look around to see everything. 

 

Why waste money then on a higher resolution when there will be no difference...or is it just to challenge the GPU?

 

How far are you from your monitor anyways?

[MegaDave91]

At 53cm/21inches away.

 

Don't tell me you are that close...you will be blind soon...

I use a 25" 1440p as my main monitor now, but I did and still do sit ~2 - 2.5ft away.

[WhiteSkyMage]

I use a 25" 1440p as my main monitor now, but I did and still do sit ~2 - 2.5ft away.

 

You will only see a difference between FHD (1080p) and (1440p) then. But 4K and 1440p will look exactly the same...go closer...1.5ft or 1 then u will notice it...

[WhiteSkyMage]

Because the pixel density of 1080p@24" sucks. 

Not if you are sitting 3 feet away...then it won't suck. Get a 1440p if you are at like 2ft...but you will have to be ready to ruin your eyes to see the 4K...

 

 

 

Guys...look at this...carefully...

http://isthisretina.com/

 

I would understand if Oculus Rift is a 4K. Really that would make sense. You are looking at it from so close and you will see the difference even between 4K and 6K. Then I would agree.. but that's...gaming monitors should be bigger to satisfy the 4K resolution or it is meaningless...it's simply a waste. For production, it's perfectly fine. You are looking for the best accuracy there and color reproduction and stuff...yes 4K 27" for work, but not gaming and general use. Useless..

[Hikaru12]

Get a 39" Korean Wasabi Mango or Crossover and don't look back. The pixel density is perfect as you can't make out individual pixels but it's big enough to not require text scaling. Big monitors are the way to go for 4k in my opinion.

[MegaDave91]

You will only see a difference between FHD (1080p) and (1440p) then. But 4K and 1440p will look exactly the same...go closer...1.5ft or 1 then u will notice it...

I disagree. Aliasing in games @ 1440p can be mitigated with AA but 4K is still sharper. 

[WhiteSkyMage]

I disagree. Aliasing in games @ 1440p can be mitigated with AA but 4K is still sharper.

You still have to use AA in 4K. Jaggies are always there. In fact in 1440p with AA will look better with AA than 4K with no AA.

[Tarzan]

That is why I am planning to buy the BenQ BL3200PT, a 32 inches 1440p monitor. It has the same pixel density as a 1080p 24 inches monitor, which is perfect for me

[VZX]

You just mentioned the very reason I shy away from 4k displays, despite their cheaper price and are offering more pixels for workspace.

 

I wouldn't want to do DPI scaling. Other than having mixed result in Win7, it defeats the purpose of having extra pixels.

[Lockless]

some people just want 4k on regular monitor sizes despite it not really being an improvement over 1440p

most people who say its way better are usually experiencing placebo, unless they sit 10" away from the monitor

 

this is why more and more companies are making 32" and 40" 4k monitors

 

4k tvs are a bit different since they have a little bit more latency and only HDMI, so its really only good to have a 4k tv if it has HDMI 2.0 and you have an nvidia GTX900 GPU

I think the Wasabi Mango UHD420 (If they called it the UHD420 Blaze It edition, it would sell hotter than what it is now) monitor/TV (mostly TV... strange it supports freesync for some reason) would like to have a word with that.

[Enderman]

I think the Wasabi Mango UHD420 (If they called it the UHD420 Blaze It edition, it would sell hotter than what it is now) monitor/TV (mostly TV... strange it supports freesync for some reason) would like to have a word with that.

thats a monitor not tv

http://www.amazon.com/WASABI-MANGO-UHD420-Real-HDMI/dp/B00YA5IZS0

[Lockless]

thats a monitor not tv

http://www.amazon.com/WASABI-MANGO-UHD420-Real-HDMI/dp/B00YA5IZS0

Oh well...

[MegaDave91]

You still have to use AA in 4K. Jaggies are always there. In fact in 1440p with AA will look better with AA than 4K with no AA.

Again, I disagree. AA causes blurriness. I have monitors with both native resolutions.

[WhiteSkyMage]

thats a monitor not tv

http://www.amazon.com/WASABI-MANGO-UHD420-Real-HDMI/dp/B00YA5IZS0

Man that monitor looks great! Shame it doesn't have G-Sync though. However, I don't have the space right now on my desk to get it, only for that new 27inch 1440p one from Asus...but I doubt it will be perfect one at 165Hz... It will probably have some manufacturing issues, let's hope not to though. I would really love to see UHD420 monitors but for gaming.

[Enderman]

Man that monitor looks great! Shame it doesn't have G-Sync though. However, I don't have the space right now on my desk to get it, only for that new 27inch 1440p one from Asus...but I doubt it will be perfect one at 165Hz... It will probably have some manufacturing issues, let's hope not to though. I would really love to see UHD420 monitors but for gaming.

I prefer to stick to well-known brands such as samsung, sony, etc...

Seems like they have far less dead pixel returns than those asian budget brands

[WhiteSkyMage]

I prefer to stick to well-known brands such as samsung, sony, etc...

Seems like they have far less dead pixel returns than those asian budget brands

But they would never release such a monitor - 40 inch monitors you can only find from Philips...damn no one else actually cares to make one. Asus and Acer would do a great job...but they are just as lazy...no...I'd say, not willing to.

[Enderman]

But they would never release such a monitor - 40 inch monitors you can only find from Philips...damn no one else actually cares to make one. Asus and Acer would do a great job...but they are just as lazy...no...I'd say, not willing to.

this ones pretty good

[WhiteSkyMage]

this ones pretty good

Yeah indeed. But I will still be looking towards Asus and Acer for a gaming monitor... Though I might take this some day.