21:9

Notice how they all end in zero? Easier to chop the LCD panels into even parts.

Anything other than natural numbers seems out of place.

they could have made 2520:1080 which is actually 21:9. but they didn't. so they should at least put 21:9 in quotes.

2560 is the same width as 1440p 16:9 monitors.

This actually would be way better for marketing to dumb people, but dumb people have cool labels like QUAD HD to rely on. 16:9 21:9 yourmom:9 are easy to imagine relative to each other for people who actually pay attention to aspect ratio.

under rated as fuck

No. This is the real world not marketing. 4+3:3 tells people more than some unsimplified fraction like 21:9. Keep using macbooks faggot.

I fucking hate display ratio as a measure. We could just use pixels. Oh and 1080p - why the stupid 'p'? Computer displays were progressive scan decades before LCD TVs existed.

HD720 yeah it's just 1mega pixels

1080P FULL HD - 2MP

1440p - 3.5MP

ULTRA WIDE 32:9 - 7MP

4k? No just say 8megapix FFS

fucking marketers

16gb
64 cores
120ghz
what's meme about these numbers? How else would they write them?

Your little scheme ignores aspect ratio and megapixel is defacto a 4:3 CMOS measurement. Not to mention megapixel is a terrible measure of CMOS size anyway as it doesn't account for density or the image quality limits of lenses.

It is, but to fit in with 16:9 and 16:10, they choose 21:9.
There are 21:9 monitors that aren't even 21:9 too.

Yeah it ignores aspect but you can add that info in. Jow Forums regular argues that 16:10 is better for productivity than 16:9 right. Not much use if the 16:10 monitor is 1280*800 and the 16:9 is 4k now is it.

Giving actual resolutions ( the literal dimensions) and MPix counts is better than saying marketing terms like wqhd, 8k and uxga

>comparability with the widespread 16:9 is bad

p for progressive, i for interlaced

He's just a mad poorfag. Ignore him

17,179,869,184 bytes
13,600,000,000 transistors
120,000,000,000 cycles per second
8,294,400 pixels

Why such low vertical resolution? It baffles me that 16:9 became standard for computers and not 16:10.

Did you even read what I wrote? When exactly did PC monitors have interlacing? Why the fuck is it called 1080p at all, especially in this decade. Do you say 4kp?

>When exactly did PC monitors have interlacing?
My Commodore monitor supports interlacing.

Fin fact Sony marketers advertised their 1080p TV's as having 6 million pixels because they counted the red green and blue and added them up.

Bet that looked slick paired with a Amiga 1000 back in 1985

So does my M1438.
Don't even need a multiscan display though, every computer display, even modern ones can display native intolerance modes or non standard modes like 240p.

You do realise that when I said when exactly did PC monitors have interlacing I meant back before most of /g was born. So it's pretty stupid to name a resolution on literally every LCD screen made after 2003 as progressive scan and then ditch the 'p' for 4k

>HD720 yeah it's just 1mega pixels
It's not, 1MP is 931,840, not 921,600 you mouthbreather.
There's a reason we use progressive and interlaced definitions. You're too **** to understand it.

Ultrawide is 21:9, anything bigger than that is super ultrawide
Why are you spewing out shit?

Wow, cool elementary school math skills.
Now rack that pea brain of you some more to figure out why they might call it 21:9 and not 7:3. Hint: it's not because "bigger number cool"

They still do. So no idea what you're getting at.
Ratio makes much more sense than pixel count, specially when both are inaccurate as shit anyways.

>>What is rounding
Reason to use progressive vs interlaced on marketing material jargon? Yeah nah bro there aint

Oh really? Show me where I can buy a 1080i TV then or a 4ki monitor. One that doesn't support progressive scan

2520x1080 would be 21:9. But addressing 2560 columns is probably not more difficult.

Yes but 7:3, 8:5 and 16:9 are harder to compare than 21:9, 16:10 and 16:9

This, basically. 21:9 is bigger than 18:9.

Normies get mad that their movies have black bars

You are absolutely not retarded. I'm in favour of listing the resolution (the actual fucking dimensions) and rounding the pixel count and scrapping terms like FHD , wuxga and 4k because they are marketing terms that

You're the one spewi g bullshit marketing terms."super ultrawide" Jesus Christ. How about you list the resolution so everyone can know exactly wtf that is. My God how do you not see that. You know we're lucky idiots like you don't call >60hz screens ultrasmooth , super ultrasmooth, mega ultrasmooth+

4:3 master race reporting in

Attached: IMG_20190919_142613.jpg (3056x2292, 817K)