27" 1400p (2560x1440) vs 29" wide (2560x1080) - Any opinions on these formats?

[NeilF]

So need to replace my trusty old 24" 1920x1200 IPS monitor, with the limitations of my KVM supporting upto 2560x1600@60hz.

So could go either:-
- 27" 2560x1440 which means a bigger monitor with a bit more sharpness, but still usable without scaling
- 29"(ish) 2560x1080 which means about the same pixel scale I currently have, but uber width

Any thoughts/experience of the two formats?

 

[hornetstinger]

I considered 29"UW but vertically not high enough it's smaller than 24" wide-screen. Need to step up to 32" UW but that means the much higher reslz models which my pc can't cope with.

Also 29" UW is low ppi.

Went for for 27" 1440 144hz va freesync. There's also 32" 1440 bit pixels a bit bigger and got a couple of dead pixels in mine they're pretty small so don't notice them but on the 32" they'll be bigger so maybe stick out a bit.

Plus 29" UW didn't have 144hz. Nor have wide freesync range

 

[NeilF]

Yeh coming from 1980x1200 I fear the reduced depth of a 2560x1080 might do my head in...

 

[hornetstinger]

I had 24" 1200 before my 27" 1440 so 24" 1080 or 29" UW 1080 would be a downgrade in ppi and viewing screen size.

As 16:10 is a bit taller than 16:9 so for office apps the extra height (and Res) is more useful than slightly higher framerate and standard movie 16:9 ratio. I noticed the drop from 1200 to 1080p 24" in the ppi. It's quite big.

 

[tamzzy]

1080 ultrawide is a big no-no.

 

[BongoHunter]

I had to make this exact decision yesterday!

I ruled out anything above 1440p as I've only got a 1070 GTX

I went for Samsung C27HG70 27" 2560x1440, the huge increase in pixel count over a 1080 screen was the main reason I went for it over a 1080p model as I do a lot of programming with 2 windows side by side, and hopefully a taller screen will result in less scrolling up and down all the files I'm working on!

 

[NeilF]

I noticed the drop from 1200 to 1080p 24" in the ppi. It's quite big.

So more dpi (lower pixel scale) on the 27" 2560x1440 (compared to your 24" 1920x1200) you found beneficial? ie: It improved sharpness without making things painfully smaller?

And the move from 16:10 -> 16:9 was OK? I assume given the extra vertical resolution it was sort of not an issue?

 

[hornetstinger]

Yeah higher ppi helped I don't need to use aa as much. Have to use 25% increase in window though text a bit small, but my eyesight isn't great.

No problem going from 16:10 to 16:9 remember it's bigger screen

Use screen size calculator to show actual difference that helped, I was going to get UW 29" until realised about 1" less in height

 

[EsaT]

Only upgrade from good old proper monitor resolution 1920x1200 is 2560x1440.
Though of course 2560x1600 would be still better.
Ultra low screens are downgrades wasting lot more desk space for less image size per marketing number and no room for anything on screen without scrolling down/up.

 

[NeilF]

Though of course 2560x1600 would be still better.

I wish