27 inch monitors are the maximum comfortable size for desk use

You can use any resolution as long as your UI scales well

About that, why does text and such become microscopic when you switch to high resolution?

Because if your text is made up of pixels, and you shrink said pixels, you shrink the text.

1080p looks like shit at 27"

I have 1080p at 24" and I can barely stand it

>It's almost like different people have different preferences.
Not on my Jow Forums they don't

>funko
Why.

1440p 144hz 27in is the sweet spot and where the benefits stop being as relevant after.

24in for competitive shooters.

Why use a smaller monitor for gaming?

I'm actually looking for a 32" 4K since I got a carrying case for christmas. Anything under $400 worth giving a try? I think LG and Samsung may have had something available at Best Buy which means an easy return if I decide I don't like it.

4k @ 65'' is the sweet spot

You can watch the whole panorama while you're gaming.

It is not like the screen being 3 inches bigger would change that.

Depending on how far you sit from your screen, 24in generally provides the most complete fov without moving your head.

Why? Just connect a 5m HDMI cable to it.

My 4k, 65in TV is also 200hz. You can stop acting like you aren't impressed now.

>4k@27"
>asking for a migraine

32" / 4k / Master Race (IPS or VA)

Anything less is just sad.

been 24" 1080p to 27" 1080p and 1440p and 4k.

not switched to 32" 1440p and couldn't be happier

now*

i need to get a vesa adapter though and benq fucking charges 30€ for it on the EX3203R

>in this corner i protect my virginity

1080p is a blurry mess at 27"
1440p is optimal.

Are you asking me out?

No I Have Anxiety

i wish the 27/4k meme would fuck off and manufacturers properly went in on high framerate 1440p.

>in 5 years time VR will have better resolution than desktop
4cuck tears will be sweet.

Actually, even my 27" monitor is too big for me. I've never been able to really enjoy it.
It's a shame smaller screens all use bottom of the barrel technology and any sort of high-end market starts at 27".
Nowadays you even have to pray that upcoming panel you've set your hopes on won't be ruined by being an ultrawide, curved or >27".

>be autistic about font rendering
>buy 24" 4k P2415q monitor for muh sharp text
>still no perfect sharpness
I guess I'm back to my 1920x1200 24" and my bitmap fonts.

hehe, my tv in my old house was only 27 (4:3). Living room was on the small side so that size was all you needed. New house; 65" samsung; bigger room, sit further back. Can't really see moving past 65". Content looks/displays perfect on it and it fits the room without dominating it. Lots of people now you walk into there living rooms all you see is a couch and a big massive set. With the viewing distance up close and personal. Way to go; destroy your eyesight then when your old enjoy the massive bills from the eye doctors when you need shit done to your eyes.

I bought an 82" this year, 65" is like a little baby television.

So many faggots in this thread not using an integer multiple of ~90-100ppi.
> hur dur my fractionally divisible scaling is the sweet spot
fuck off

Acceptable unscaled resolutions are:
1080p @ 22" - 24"
1440p @ 30" - 32"
2160p @ 38" - 42"

Acceptable high-PPI (scaled) resolutions include:
1080p @

Because everything that has a fixed pixel size will take up less of the available pixels and considering high resolution displays typically have high DPIS that translates to microscopic text on your display

1080p looks fine on a 27" unless you literally glue your eyes against the screen

I use a main 4K 32" monitor and a 27" 1080p monitor in portrait at the side

Attached: 1543444636470.jpg (254x198, 8K)

p looks fine on a 27"
>81.59 PPI
>>>>>>>>> "looks fine"

Attached: 1545567166872.jpg (509x371, 118K)

what the actual fuck, dude

I use 1080p on 12" and 15" notebooks without scaling and I'd rather prefer 1440p on my 24" PC screen, and I'm about to buy in 2019 a 4k 27" screen, not even considering scaling it as 27" would be just a huge af screen for me.

~90-100dpi has been the 'standard' for a long ass time and heaps of shit still assumes that, so if you go something like 4K @ 27" you're going to be running something like 1.75x scaling and any fine detail like text will look like shit to people with accurate vision. Honestly every time i see one of these threads with people buying meme 4K @ random resolutions i wonder if those people are just using vector-based GUIs on chromebooks or something, since normal PCs look like absolute ass in such setups.

nah, i just have genuinely good eyesight and i'm a faggot who needs as much work space as possible on the same area and if i don't i get anxious about it, whatever people would call it

not him, but I have a 4K 27" monitor without any scaling

buy glasses, schmuck (i have)

If you're not scaling then you arent getting high-DPI and there is literally no point to squishing your text so small. You're making your eyes work harder just so your monitor takes up less space on the desk? Seems stupid.

here
No, just so I can have more space for more apps and stuff on my screen while having multiple screens on the desktop at the same time

I can understand that, i love screen real estate too (perhaps not as much as you) although i cant stand the blury linear filter look scaling gives text and images. For TV/movies its fine, but for desktop it's ugly as sin and ill sacrifice some desktop realestate for it.
Another reason i'm less anal about realestate is modern DEs are good enough with window management that i can utilize one big screen better than i use to use 2 or 3 standard size screens (eg i upgraded from 2x 24" and had even used a third 4K for a while.)

>text text text

Editing photographs (and looking at photographs) on a high ppi display is much better than on ancient 24" 1080p dinosaur monitors.

But yes, Windows 10 font rendering is absolute dogshit and black text aren't actually black, but rather consists of green, brown, purple, grey, orange etc. And this same text looks much better on 24" 1080p montior which I also have connected on my computor

Attached: 2018-12-30 18_01_43.png (619x615, 27K)

Here

I mean, on 4k 27" it would be enough for me to use it at 100% scaling, just as I use 1080p on 12" notebook so realistically I wouldn't use any sort of system scaling

I never said high PPI is bad. I agree its great. But what do you think happens when you're using 1.25x scaling to get your high DPI and a pleasant UI size? Some text can be rendered scaled well (not all) but what do you imagine happens to photographs? They are up-scaled (poorly).

Also, you're referring to "cleartype" which is window's brand of subpixel rendering, which is the generic name for widespread feature. Not sure why you're singling windows out .

>computor
t.isaac arthur

Yes, thank you. Microsoft's up-scaling method is fucking retarded. Sure, upscale text and UI elements but leave the fucking pictures alone!!!

Some programs are high-DPI aware and display the images in their actual size (capture one pro, photoshop etc) but Chrome and FireFox are NOT. Which means that all images will be enlarged (so a 1000px image becomes 2000px for example, totally fucking everything, making the image blurry as fuck etc).

Would be great if you could tell the computor to not mess with the images when using scaling. I'm pretty sure MacOS does this aswell (judging from screenshots posted here on Jow Forums where the thumbnails in the thread are fuckhuge and blurry beacause of scaling)

>My 4k, 65in TV is also 200hz. You can stop acting like you aren't impressed now.
Interpolated 200Hz do not count.

>more pixels in a screen
>"innovation"
good goy, why don't you buy an OLED monitor while you're at it?