Caporegime
That's what I'd buy too if I wanted a single monitor setup.
4k Monitors: For non gaming, worth it or not?
- Thread starter Porker
- Start date
That's what I'd buy too if I wanted a single monitor setup.
You can fit the same information at a given size at any resolution. Going higher in resolution does not let you display 'more' information. Only the same information at a higher resolution.
The person has now gotten the idea that 27" is 'too small' for 4k. So yes, there's clearly people who dont know what they're talking about here and giving bad advice.
And you absolutely said that a TN display is 'ok' for photo work. I'm trying to make sure this guy gets the advice he needs. That's it. I'm not worried about coming off as 'arrogant' if he gets what he needs.
Caporegime
Absolute nonsense.
You can display more text legibly on a higher res display than a lower res display. By having more resolution you can make text smaller and still be able to see it clearly.
The difference in working with two word documents side by side on a 1080P display versus a 1440P display is night and day. Even when the monitors are the same size.
Caporegime
Indeed, most people will have to have to resort to scaling at that res.
Caporegime
A TN display is workable for photo work, just IPS is better. It depends on your needs. Would I want to use a TN panel to edit photos? No. If it's what I had available then could I? Absolutely. Now if you're a pro doing colour critical work then what you say is true. If you're an amateur editing pics of your kids then IPS isn't critical, just preferred.
27" is too small for 4K. At native res everything would be tiny so you're left resorting to scaling which is frustrating at best.
Soldato
I suggest you stop digging now. Either you don't understand what resolution actually means or you're trolling.
Higher resolution => more pixels => more information
This is not up for debate - it's just true.
Last edited:
Caporegime
How dare you debate his facts 
Soldato
I have a 24" Dell 4k IPS screen in portrait mode for non-gaming use and it's amazing. I'm writing this post on it. I set scaling to 175% and that's it. I have another 4k monitor for gaming.
For my use case the point of 4K on this monitor is not the amount of information that I can display but simply that the information I do display looks nicer.
If you have a laser printer, print some text at 300 dpi and the same text at 600 dpi. Which looks nicer? It's the same going from HD to 4k.
For my use case the point of 4K on this monitor is not the amount of information that I can display but simply that the information I do display looks nicer.
If you have a laser printer, print some text at 300 dpi and the same text at 600 dpi. Which looks nicer? It's the same going from HD to 4k.
Caporegime
Whilst that is completely true the only downside is windows scaling is flakey still with older apps appearing tiny. I normally prefer to just have the highest res that doesn't need scaling.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Love that comic, so true.
Soldato
I love how passionate people can be when they're wrong.
Anyway, I currently use a dell up3216q for professional photography work. Yes, that's professional as in its my job. It's 4K at 32 inches. For practical usage this is the minimum screen size I would recommend for 4K. As others have mentioned Windows scaling is rubbish. I just about get by with native text size in progs like Lightroom and photoshop, but for web pages I use chrome set to 125% which works well.
Anyway, I currently use a dell up3216q for professional photography work. Yes, that's professional as in its my job. It's 4K at 32 inches. For practical usage this is the minimum screen size I would recommend for 4K. As others have mentioned Windows scaling is rubbish. I just about get by with native text size in progs like Lightroom and photoshop, but for web pages I use chrome set to 125% which works well.
Thanks for all the replies.
They have been very helpful in helping me understand the trade-offs and resolution vs size!
I'm going to go for a 32" 4k IPS panel. I think the £600 budget will get blown, I think the nearest seems to be the BenQ which I can find at £690. It seems to have positive reviews.
Ideally I'd like to stay with a dell, given that this 24" 7 year old one has been excellent and I still like it. But the 32" 4k Dell seems to be £990, I'm not sure the extra £300 is justifiable.
They have been very helpful in helping me understand the trade-offs and resolution vs size!
I'm going to go for a 32" 4k IPS panel. I think the £600 budget will get blown, I think the nearest seems to be the BenQ which I can find at £690. It seems to have positive reviews.
Ideally I'd like to stay with a dell, given that this 24" 7 year old one has been excellent and I still like it. But the 32" 4k Dell seems to be £990, I'm not sure the extra £300 is justifiable.
Associate
To my mind 4K is a better fit for work purposes than it is for gaming. I feel 1440P is the sweet spot for gaming on PC; at a desk at least anyways.
Just to circle back ... and thanks again for the words of wisdom and advice
I bought the 32" BenQ 3201PT 4k IPS monitor.
I'm very happy with it, the colours are better than my outgoing old Dell IPS and I like the larger screen size. It took some getting used to on the desk though, I do find you have to 'look around' a lot more. My pictures do seem to have come more alive.
My current graphics card only outputs 4k at 30Hz so its a bit painful, plus its juddery, which I guess is CPU and GPU bottleneck. I'm using at 1440p @ 60Hz at the moment with no trouble.
i7 and 1080 build arrives next week!!
I bought the 32" BenQ 3201PT 4k IPS monitor.
I'm very happy with it, the colours are better than my outgoing old Dell IPS and I like the larger screen size. It took some getting used to on the desk though, I do find you have to 'look around' a lot more. My pictures do seem to have come more alive.
My current graphics card only outputs 4k at 30Hz so its a bit painful, plus its juddery, which I guess is CPU and GPU bottleneck. I'm using at 1440p @ 60Hz at the moment with no trouble.
i7 and 1080 build arrives next week!!
Insanely ironic given your next comment:
Except 'information' is such a loosely used term here.
You dont get more 'screen real estate' on a 4k monitor compared to a same-sized 1080p monitor. Both will display the EXACT same level of 'information'. One will just do it at a much higher fidelity. The only way 'information' could be increased by 4k is if you're detailing graphics work in professional sense.
People here seriously dont seem to understand resolution whatsoever and it's freakin embarrassing. It's at the point that I'd honestly recommend any potential consumers avoid this site completely due to the incredible level of ignorance the users here display with such laughable confidence.
Soldato
2 pixels encode twice as much information as 1 pixel.
2000 pixels encode twice as much information as 1000 pixels.
Do you actually disagree with this? I don't know what definition you're using for "information" - but I'd suggest you revise it.
Let's take it to the extreme:
Imagine you have a 27" monitor with only 1 pixel. Does that display the same amount of information as a 27" monitor with 2560×1440 pixels?
Last edited: