Retina Display For PC
- Thread starter Fogold
- Start date
Whenever Apple release the new Cinema displays?
What this guy said. Though i forget what sort of PPI they class their "Retina" BS as.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 2,180
- Location
- Edinburgh
To get "retina" display means you cannot discern the pixels on the screen.
At the standard distance for a PC user you have to significantly increase the pixel count to achieve this e.g. the MacBook pro with 2880x1800 (220 ppi) screen is "retina" only when user with 20/20 vision is 15.6" or more from the display. If your vision is better than 20/20 you'd have to sit further away
For 1920x1080 - you'd have to sit at 2.5 feet from a 20" display, 3.8feet from a 30" display.
Start demanding higher pixel counts and the manufacturers will eventually give it to you. If everyone keeps buying 1080 displays that's all you'll get without spending big bucks.
Quite apart from the useability issue, this is one reason why I'd never buy a large 1080p screen for PC work - even a 1440p is not really good enough imo.
At the standard distance for a PC user you have to significantly increase the pixel count to achieve this e.g. the MacBook pro with 2880x1800 (220 ppi) screen is "retina" only when user with 20/20 vision is 15.6" or more from the display. If your vision is better than 20/20 you'd have to sit further away
For 1920x1080 - you'd have to sit at 2.5 feet from a 20" display, 3.8feet from a 30" display.
Start demanding higher pixel counts and the manufacturers will eventually give it to you. If everyone keeps buying 1080 displays that's all you'll get without spending big bucks.
Quite apart from the useability issue, this is one reason why I'd never buy a large 1080p screen for PC work - even a 1440p is not really good enough imo.
Last edited:
What screen res and size would you recommend?
You would have to get a 20" 1080p monitor to get the same pixel density as a 27" 2560x1440
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 2,180
- Location
- Edinburgh
There's no perfect choice at sensible money, to be honest.
If I was buying right now, probably 120hz 27" 1440p. It's more cost effective than another high quality 24" 1920x1200 monitor like I use now and having a higher vertical resolution is much more useful in general computing tasks
If I was buying right now, probably 120hz 27" 1440p. It's more cost effective than another high quality 24" 1920x1200 monitor like I use now and having a higher vertical resolution is much more useful in general computing tasks
This is what i'm waiting for. I'm holding off getting a 1080p 120hz screen because i really want the resolution bump.
And where would you get such a monitor? I'm in the market for one but can't find anywhere that I can get one with a guarantee at 120hz.
we have 4k monitors now, but unfortunately they are 30 -50 grand, but the problem with some of these is they are simply making bigger screens, rather than higher pixel density, i was looking at one earlier and it was 56" with 4k res so around 8 million pixels, but my dell 30" has just over 4 million pixels at almost half the size.
just looking at another now by eizo 36.4" with 8.8 million pixels now that would be a nice upgrade, unfortunately no mention of price
just looking at another now by eizo 36.4" with 8.8 million pixels now that would be a nice upgrade, unfortunately no mention of price
Last edited:
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Intel-Higher-Resolution-Displays-Coming,15329.html
I'm hoping for quad HD 24" to be out within a few years time.
I'm hoping for quad HD 24" to be out within a few years time.
"retina" is a marketing term from Apple, it actually doesn't really mean anything, and has been undermined by how readily they were willing to water it down by reducing the PPI of "retina" displays with the excuse "it's all about the viewing distance".
It is of course about viewing distance, but it's not what they were originally getting at when they were talking about "retina" originally.
I am however very much looking forward to mainstream displays coming out that have a high enough PPI to make individual pixels invisible.
It is of course about viewing distance, but it's not what they were originally getting at when they were talking about "retina" originally.
I am however very much looking forward to mainstream displays coming out that have a high enough PPI to make individual pixels invisible.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,185
Sooner the better. I own an iPad and rMBP which make other displays look so poor in comparison and it's frustrating because I really, really want something bigger. It's such a huge improvement. Maybe next year we'll get 'retina' iMacs and Thunderbolt Displays.
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 2,180
- Location
- Edinburgh
http://111.120hz.net/forum.php is about the only place - you can source the Catleap monitor on eBay and overclock it yourself too but none of the mainstream suppliers do it that I've found
One does not exist sadly. But as said you can overclock a hilariously shocking looking catleap screens. It's a massive lottery though as the quality of the monitor alone is fairly poor.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 4,185
Sooner than that for iMacs apparently. Check mac rumours.
They may be updating the iMacs but that doesn't mean retina displays, they'd just to be too expensive in that size for now. If I'm wrong excellent.
I know everyone's supposed to be entitled to their own opinion, but hilariously shocking looking? That's some serious hyperbole, or you must have lived quite the sheltered life.
It looks cheaper and tackier when you see and touch it than the Hazro IMO, which is pretty bad.. The quality is really hit and miss, warranty and returns as well are reported hit and miss also, depending on where you get it. It's just a average IPS monitor that you can overclock without guarantee.