5 ms·

That's why I said "DPI increase". 27" at 1440p is 108.79 PPI. I'm sitting in front of a 4k 27" and the 160ppi is almost indistinguishable to my macbook at 227

That's why I said "DPI increase". 27" at 1440p is 108.79 PPI. I'm sitting in front of a 4k 27" and the 160ppi is almost indistinguishable to my macbook at 227 due to the different viewing distance. And I always had the impression most 4k displays were 27".

BoorishBears 5y ago
Well to compare devices used at similar distances... my XDR blows away my previous 27" 4k monitors and various 5k ultrawides. I don't even use HDR, the density is just that good for looking at text all day. It takes on this milky quality that I haven't seen on any other monitor before this. The complete lack of appreciable IPS glow or uniformity issues is also better than you might expect for text. Especially with dark backgrounds which will now present one impressively uniform block of color, improving contrast.
mistersquid 5y ago
> 27" at 1440p is 108.79 PPI. > most 4k displays were 27". This is in the direction of lower PPI/DPI, which is worse. That is: 4K @ 24" > 4K @ 27" The OP chose a higher PPI/DPI than what is available for most 4K monitors. Also, as others have noted, the Apple Studio Display is 5K, so more UI is visible than on a 4K monitor.
D13Fd 5y ago
I use a 30" 4K monitor, and I still don't notice the DPI difference between it and my MacBook Pro or iPad. Personally I would much rather that they made the display 4K and 120hz instead of 5k and 60hz. At that size, I don't see a big difference between 4K and 5k, but the 60hz vs. 120hz jump is very noticeable.
- copperx 5y ago
  I'm of a different opinion. 120 Hz is nice to have, but it is not a quality of life improvement. The DPI increase of a 220+ DPI monitor is a game changer. Text on a screen becomes readable at 220+ DPI, and that's when I don't feel the need to print PDFs in order to read them at a high resolution (the cheapest $50 laser printer can achieve 600 DPI without a sweat).
  - D13Fd 5y ago
    To each their own I guess. I really don’t ever notice the DPI difference.
cehrlich 5y ago
Same. I gave up Apple ever releasing an affordable standalone display last year and bought a 4k 27". I can't tell the difference between it and the 5k 27" panel on the iMac. It also has multiple inputs, and USB-A outputs. Obviously there are people who need the higher PPI, but if you look at text all day I'd recommend giving 4k a try before spending 3-4x as much on a 5k. You can run the 4k display at 5k, the same way that you can run a MacBook Air at 2880x1800 even though it's really 2560x1600. Modern scaling algorithms are very good.
copperx 5y ago
Indistinguishable? The difference between 160 DPI and 220 is MASSIVE. 160 DPI makes me nauseous from the blur. I say this with all due respect, but have you checked your vision lately?

BoorishBears 5y ago

Well to compare devices used at similar distances... my XDR blows away my previous 27" 4k monitors and various 5k ultrawides. I don't even use HDR, the density is just that good for looking at text all day. It takes on this milky quality that I haven't seen on any other monitor before this. The complete lack of appreciable IPS glow or uniformity issues is also better than you might expect for text. Especially with dark backgrounds which will now present one impressively uniform block of color, improving contrast.

mistersquid 5y ago

> 27" at 1440p is 108.79 PPI. > most 4k displays were 27". This is in the direction of lower PPI/DPI, which is worse. That is: 4K @ 24" > 4K @ 27" The OP chose a higher PPI/DPI than what is available for most 4K monitors. Also, as others have noted, the Apple Studio Display is 5K, so more UI is visible than on a 4K monitor.

D13Fd 5y ago

I use a 30" 4K monitor, and I still don't notice the DPI difference between it and my MacBook Pro or iPad. Personally I would much rather that they made the display 4K and 120hz instead of 5k and 60hz. At that size, I don't see a big difference between 4K and 5k, but the 60hz vs. 120hz jump is very noticeable.

copperx 5y ago
I'm of a different opinion. 120 Hz is nice to have, but it is not a quality of life improvement. The DPI increase of a 220+ DPI monitor is a game changer. Text on a screen becomes readable at 220+ DPI, and that's when I don't feel the need to print PDFs in order to read them at a high resolution (the cheapest $50 laser printer can achieve 600 DPI without a sweat).
- D13Fd 5y ago
  To each their own I guess. I really don’t ever notice the DPI difference.

cehrlich 5y ago

Same. I gave up Apple ever releasing an affordable standalone display last year and bought a 4k 27". I can't tell the difference between it and the 5k 27" panel on the iMac. It also has multiple inputs, and USB-A outputs. Obviously there are people who need the higher PPI, but if you look at text all day I'd recommend giving 4k a try before spending 3-4x as much on a 5k. You can run the 4k display at 5k, the same way that you can run a MacBook Air at 2880x1800 even though it's really 2560x1600. Modern scaling algorithms are very good.

copperx 5y ago

Indistinguishable? The difference between 160 DPI and 220 is MASSIVE. 160 DPI makes me nauseous from the blur. I say this with all due respect, but have you checked your vision lately?