Big monitors the future?

Rofflay

Rofflay

Rofflay

Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2006
Posts
5,750
Location
N Ireland
Curious if i am the only person miffed at this. Basically with the trend of MSAA going away in 90% of games your now left with a large bunch of displays at the mercy of pixels per inch. I am using a 24" and to be honest ive recently had to move my desk out from the wall, And leave half the stand hanging off the edge just to get it back some, It is about arms length and it hurts my eyes when things are mostly out of my inner eye focus area. So my question is what kind of laughable trend is a 38 inch or 40 inch monitor or even a 27 inch?

Not only is it about size and how my eye reacts to the distance but there is a shocking difference in games when you jump up in PPI. Even 4K does not have the needed PPI at these sizes because without AA and sitting back you still see pixelated grass and trees etc. But by moving back you are cheating yourself of image quality? Because when you sit back with a larger screen you need a bigger more expensive panel which loses definition the more you sit back. So the more you increase the size, The more you lose PPI and the more you move back to counter this the more detail is lost.

This is something i find incredibly stupid and counter productive as smaller screens are superior in all ways, And would like to see something with 4k in a 24 inch again or a 34 inch with 3840x1600 75hz. What the hell do you do when a game has no real AA? 109 PPI is actually quite disgusting in all honesty if we had to really take a subjective look at it up close. But as i said before if you move away you will lose some detail.
 
I'm quite a pixel-peeper and although I found the desktop a bit soft on a 42 inch 1080p from 1-2 foot away - games looked absolutely fantastic to me

much preferred over my sharper but smaller Dell 24 inch 1200p monitor :)

size really adds far more IMO than anything you loose with a loss in sharpness
 
Another big panel size fan here. Was using 1080p 42" HDTV at 1m distance before, but wanted 144Hz FreeSync, so had to move to 32" 1080p at 70cm distance (~an arm's length). Now it feels cramped, as every head movement changes the "view" more radically.

In other words, I'm indeed excited that monitors are getting bigger in size. I'm actually a little worried about the resolution going higher. So I hope that by the time I'm getting a new monitor, they are still making 1080p in the 40" range, or the UI scaling has improved to such lengths that 4k is usable without squinting my eyes.
 
I moved to 40inch 4k monitor two years ago, and just recently a 43 inch Uhd TV. Love it.

Though I do have a relatively deep desk.

Won't go back to smaller unless forced to for some reason.

Though don't think I'd go any bigger either.
 
eyetrip said:
I moved to 40inch 4k monitor two years ago, and just recently a 43 inch Uhd TV. Love it.

Though I do have a relatively deep desk.

Won't go back to smaller unless forced to for some reason.

Though don't think I'd go any bigger either.
Click to expand...

+1

I have a 40" 4k and it gives me the best level of detail and visual impact for games. Witcher 3 on max details in 4k on a 40" display is breathtaking
 
I will probably be happy with a 32 - 4K Oled HDR with perfect motion handling and g-sync is a must!
Have a 27 Acer TN g-sync 144hz right now and it's frikking awesome. But a little larger and HDR and with perfect motion handling is what I really want/dreaming of!
 
Im using the Hygena sun glossy desk it cost me £100 or so it is not the desk it is a standard size it is simply reality. I do not understand how you can use a 32 inch at 70cm. And you stated "Now it feels cramped, as every head movement changes the "view" more radically" you do realize you are doing it wrong right if it changes the view with head movement? You are so close you are trying to simulate VR or something? This is the exact opposite of what i want because it gimps you online. You cant scan a screen and react if you move so close that things now are in your peripheral vision. Heck it sounds like some people now want it so close even things move out of the peripheral zone? Or have it understood it wrong because it sounds like this is what some people in here want.



A 40inch on a desk is NOT achieveable most desks top out at 3ft and you simply cannot take in a 40 inch or 32 inch screen at those ranges no way in hell. I cant even do it with a 24 inch at arms length. And if im rendering things outside of my central vision zone im cheating myself also. Think about it, Driving pixels that not only blur without ULMB, They probably blur without ultra high refresh rates and now your going to render those and put them out into your perhipheral which is another waste. So your in my mind wasting pixels twice if that makes sense. Sorry just cannot get my head around it and hope the thread does not seem like a dig or rude at those who perfer this as each to thier own. But you must be killing yourself in shooters surely it would make sense to move back and maybe even move back with an Ultrawide over a 40 inch?
 
I'm gaming on a 27" 144hz gsync acer predator monitor at 1080p and find it amazing for gaming! I couldn't go down to 24" now, I don't think I would like much bigger than 27" though as it may be a tad too big for my desk, could maybe get away with 32" but for me 27" is gaming heaven :)
 
@Rofflay:

I HAVE to get relatively close so that I don't have to squint my eyes to read the text on the screen.

But let me iterate a little more about the head movement:
When I was using the 42" from 1m distance, and I changed my sitting position, the head movement (as in strafe!) that followed had little impact on the "view". After going for the 32" at 70cm, the same amount of head movement (caused by the same sitting position change) gave a noticeable difference.

Practical example inside the spoiler:
Watching a 24" 1080p screen from a 24" (61cm) distance is visually identical to watching a 32" 1080p screen from a 32" (81cm) distance. And they are both visually identical to watching a 1 mile diagonal 1080p screen from a 1 mile distance (assuming clear weather, etc.). But if you strafe your head 2 feet to the left with the 24" setup, it will have a definite difference in your view. Whereas even a 10 feet strafe with the 1 mile setup will have a negligible difference to your view.
"This is the exact opposite of what i want because it gimps you online."
Well, nice to know. On the other hand, I personally don't find a problem with things being in my peripheral vision. I prefer seeing fewer objects with more detail in the focus zone, as opposed to seeing more objects with lesser detail. In which case you'll just have to move farther away, and I'll have to move closer. Or you'll buy a smaller screen and I'll buy a bigger screen. Manufacturers will simply make more of those that give them the better profit.

"most desks top out at 3ft"?
This is an enthusiast forum, we all have things we tend to go overboard with, and sometimes that brings compromises in other areas. So we can't always settle for "most" or "average". :D Just go buy a bigger desk, and/or stay in the 24" range. Or get a wall mount, and move the desk farther away from the wall.

Anyway, all your needs sound like they are very focused on competitive FPS gaming. I understand your frustration, but please remember that that's only one genre. Practically NONE of the other genres have the same problem with peripheral vision (or it at least has a drastically lesser impact).

So indeed, while the bigger size (which is purely optional, I might add) seems to bring compromises to YOU, please bear in mind that that's not a universal issue for others. Manufacturers follow where the money is. Once the "threshold" for the average optimal monitor size is reached, the sales will eventually guide manufacturers back to smaller sizes. After which I'll have to either start eyeing the TVs again, or pay a premium for a niche monitor size. Unless 40" actually becomes the optimum size, that is.
 
55" UAKS8000 here... love it. Movies, youtube, Netflix, Xbox1, Foxtel and Stan... BF1 and Doom on PC (all through Denon AV amp) look amazing!

I dont think ill ever go any smaller...
 
Size matters, especialy with higher resolutions. My monitor's size has stayed the same (27"), but the resolution has increased (1080p->1440p). And honestly, I do find the 1440p harder to use. Since my monitors are large to begin with, I don't use them at close range (and couldn't if I wanted to due to the lack of space for a proper PC desk). The higher resolution, while providing higher clarity, does mean that everything is smaller a tad, making text and such harder to read. Thus on websites (like these here forums), I've zoomed in a bit to make it scale like it would as if it were 1080p.

It's mainly an issue with UI and scaling, but larger monitors do help with those things. Thus my next monitor will be a 4k screen, but I'll be damned if it's under 32". If 1440p is this fiddly, then 4k would possibly be unusable on smaller screens. And resolution really matter less the smaller the screen is anyway. No point in the likes of 1440p/4k smartphone screens.
 
Happy with my 27 inch 1440p screen to be honest.

But still have half an eye on a 34 inch ultra wide. Can't justify the outlay at the moment though.

My monitor is around 3 years old now. Kinda hope it dies on me so i have an excuse to buy a new one :p

I'd stick with 1440 though as gpu costs get silly to run 4k.
 
Yea while sitting back for games is great Mahius i had to delve into Chrome settings and set minimum font size to 15 myself because its now as far back as i can get but do not scale it up just use font sizes to keep the crispness. It sucks that its scaling of text and ui doing this everything else i find is enhanced so much with a smaller screen but thier backwards in supporting high PPI. And a big test soon will be For Honor it again has no MSAA like Overwatch surprise there so this is where PPI counts.

SMAA is crap, TAA is crap, FXAA is worse again they all blur the image or do a poor job compared to MSAA PPI is the only true way to enhance the entire image and do anti-aliasing properly and from what i seen 4K 60fps required a 1080 in For Honor and Overwatch. So this leaves most people with an ugly consolized experience unless they have a 1080 and a 4K monitor with good ppi. I would not want to play For Honor on a 27 inch monitor unless it was 4K because it would be ugly and the only way to fix it would be 4X DSR with 0% smoothness but thats not feasable at 1440p is it? This is why im hugging my 1080p 120hz because 4x is 4K and its a lovely image with no aliasing.

If i stepped to anything else it might have more true PPI but it would also be a more jaggy image :(
 
I like big screens, but I wouldn't have anything over a 24" as a pc monitor given how close you tend to sit from them, if it's a multimedia setup to use from the sofa then yeah bigger the better, but only console gaming I would use a bigger screen for if I'm on say the sofa anyways.

The way I have set up mine and the missus consoles in our room is an almost double bed width entertainment unit at the end of the bed that has 2 separate shelfs so we have 'his and hers' Xbox one with setups with the top able to support my 22" monitor and her 24" tv side by side without touching or going over the edges, I found this setup up better than we having our screens either side of the bed as it's directly in front of us now. The only downside is sometimes laying in bed playing can be a little awkward as while the screens are good sizes for the range, can sometimes find it diffult to see certain games proper like halo 5 for example, watching movies is just fine or playing car games, would only change to a 24" my side otherwise wouldn't touch the setups unless it was got moved against the back wall about 5 feet from the bed at which point wound need to be 50" plus as 32" was too small.

The only time I would actually purposely go bigger than 24" for a desk setup is if I really wanted a 4K or a 3D screen.
 
I have just moved from 24" 1080p to 27" 1440p. The difference is very nice. I wouldn't like to go much bigger, it seems pretty sweet to me at a 2ft distance.
 
I like having best of both worlds - if I had to choose it would be 27-28" 1440p every time but I like having a 30-40" monitor, pref. ultrawide alongside it.
 
I'd be interested to see any photos of set-ups with people with 40" monitors/TV's. Even at about 1m away I'm sure I'd be moving my head all over the place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom