4 ms·

> 27 inch 2K or 43 inch 4K are the sweet spots. 27" 2K is gross. Compared to 4K, it looks so pixelated that I feel like I'm back in the 90s. 27" 4K at native r

> 27 inch 2K or 43 inch 4K are the sweet spots. 27" 2K is gross. Compared to 4K, it looks so pixelated that I feel like I'm back in the 90s. 27" 4K at native resolution is far too small for me to read, but it looks great at 150% scaling, or even 200% for some things.

nickjj 6y ago
> 27" 4K at native resolution is far too small for me to read, but it looks great at 150% scaling, or even 200% for some things. The problem is once you start scaling up you're losing real estate. 4k at 200% scaling gives you same real estate as 1080p. Sure the picture will look better but you're not gaining any improvements in being able to open and see more things at once. That and some apps can't handle scaling properly. Personally I find 25" 1440p at native scaling to be a good balance of real estate, sharpness and ease of reading anything comfortably (even low contrast status bars). With that set up you can open 4x 80 char side by side code windows in Vim, VSCode, etc.. You can also grab a really good 25" 1440p IPS panel monitor for around $300. I wrote a huge guide on picking monitors for developers at https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-for-software-development https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-fo....
- sidpatil 6y ago
  > The problem is once you start scaling up you're losing real estate. Sure the picture will look better but you're not gaining any improvements in being able to open and see more things at once. Depending on what you're doing, that might be exactly what you want. I use my 27" 4k display to read PDFs zoomed in to fit two pages side-by-side onscreen. That way, the clarity of the rendering is good enough to be an alternative to print.
- hashhar 6y ago
  Nice coincidence running into you here. I did come across your blog while researching! Thanks for that. I agree 100% about the real estate issue. Physically larger monitors with equivalent real-estate don't make much sense for me personally. I wish there were more 27" screens available since 25" looks too small to me and 32" requires some neck movement which I don't like.
mirthflat83 6y ago
27” 2k is acceptable, 27” 5k at 200% scaling is great. 27” 4k with 150% scaling ok.
- hashhar 6y ago
  Sadly fractional scaling is imperfect and looks blurry to me (on both MacOS and Windows, GNOME doesn't support fractional scaling (last I checked)). I would love a 5K 27" screen at a reasonable price. :(
  - vetinari 6y ago
    > GNOME doesn't support fractional scaling (last I checked) It does, but is hidden behind dconf key; except maybe Ubuntu 20.10. It works nice for Wayland applications, but X11 ones are blurred (as in upscaled from @1X). X11 includes Chrome and all the Electron apps, so I it would not be a popular choice... hence it is hidden by default. If you want to try it, it is `gsettings set org.gnome.mutter experimental-features "['scale-monitor-framebuffer']"`
  - mirthflat83 6y ago
    I use macOS. 2880p on 4k 27” is a poor man’s 5k :(. It’s slightly blurry but I think it looks better than 1440p on a 1440p 27”
eertami 6y ago
>27" 2K is gross. Compared to 4K, it looks so pixelated that I feel like I'm back in the 90s. I don't know, that sounds a little embellished at first read. Either you sit way closer than ergonomic norms or you have irregular vision. Should you be able to notice a difference? Yeah that's plausible. To see pixelation at 1440p doesn't sound right however. Claiming it is like the 90s borders on absurd.

nickjj 6y ago

> 27" 4K at native resolution is far too small for me to read, but it looks great at 150% scaling, or even 200% for some things. The problem is once you start scaling up you're losing real estate. 4k at 200% scaling gives you same real estate as 1080p. Sure the picture will look better but you're not gaining any improvements in being able to open and see more things at once. That and some apps can't handle scaling properly. Personally I find 25" 1440p at native scaling to be a good balance of real estate, sharpness and ease of reading anything comfortably (even low contrast status bars). With that set up you can open 4x 80 char side by side code windows in Vim, VSCode, etc.. You can also grab a really good 25" 1440p IPS panel monitor for around $300. I wrote a huge guide on picking monitors for developers at https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-for-software-development https://nickjanetakis.com/blog/how-to-pick-a-good-monitor-fo....

sidpatil 6y ago
> The problem is once you start scaling up you're losing real estate. Sure the picture will look better but you're not gaining any improvements in being able to open and see more things at once. Depending on what you're doing, that might be exactly what you want. I use my 27" 4k display to read PDFs zoomed in to fit two pages side-by-side onscreen. That way, the clarity of the rendering is good enough to be an alternative to print.
hashhar 6y ago
Nice coincidence running into you here. I did come across your blog while researching! Thanks for that. I agree 100% about the real estate issue. Physically larger monitors with equivalent real-estate don't make much sense for me personally. I wish there were more 27" screens available since 25" looks too small to me and 32" requires some neck movement which I don't like.

mirthflat83 6y ago

27” 2k is acceptable, 27” 5k at 200% scaling is great. 27” 4k with 150% scaling ok.

hashhar 6y ago
Sadly fractional scaling is imperfect and looks blurry to me (on both MacOS and Windows, GNOME doesn't support fractional scaling (last I checked)). I would love a 5K 27" screen at a reasonable price. :(
- vetinari 6y ago
  > GNOME doesn't support fractional scaling (last I checked) It does, but is hidden behind dconf key; except maybe Ubuntu 20.10. It works nice for Wayland applications, but X11 ones are blurred (as in upscaled from @1X). X11 includes Chrome and all the Electron apps, so I it would not be a popular choice... hence it is hidden by default. If you want to try it, it is `gsettings set org.gnome.mutter experimental-features "['scale-monitor-framebuffer']"`
- mirthflat83 6y ago
  I use macOS. 2880p on 4k 27” is a poor man’s 5k :(. It’s slightly blurry but I think it looks better than 1440p on a 1440p 27”

eertami 6y ago

>27" 2K is gross. Compared to 4K, it looks so pixelated that I feel like I'm back in the 90s. I don't know, that sounds a little embellished at first read. Either you sit way closer than ergonomic norms or you have irregular vision. Should you be able to notice a difference? Yeah that's plausible. To see pixelation at 1440p doesn't sound right however. Claiming it is like the 90s borders on absurd.