10 ms·

Still only 1920x1080. Come on, give us decent resolution screens already!

yoyohello13 4y ago
Honestly, the difference between 1080p and 1440p on a 14in screen is barely perceptible to me. I'd rather have the extra battery life.
- doix 4y ago
  I run my 1440p screen at 1080p because my portable monitor is 1080p and I don't want to try and setup different scaling on different screens in X or move to Wayland. I'm happy enough.
  - gibspaulding 4y ago
    Not sure why you're getting down voted. This seems like a valid point. I'd also note that if you are connected to a larger 1440p external display, 1080p on the smaller one keeps the dpi closer so you don't have to use different scaling settings.
  - 0x457 4y ago
    I've tried it. Don't do it.
  - aliqot 4y ago
    I run 4 different screens with different resolutions in X with no problem, no setup. Is there a specific error you run into?
    - doix 4y ago
      It's not the resolutions, different resolutions is fine. It's the scaling. 1440p at 14" requires scaling because everything is too small (for me, anyway). But the portable monitor doesn't need scaling. I couldn't get it to work nicely without running two different X servers (one for each display). I am pretty sure it's a limitation in X, the dpi setting is global, not per output. Wayland seems to have solved this, but it has other problems for me (forced vsync being the major one). So I just live in a lower resolution. I don't really care, like some of the other posters in the thread, the lower resolution annoys me less than a 60hz refresh rate (laptop monitor is 144hz). Luckily X can handle different refresh rates for different outputs.
- 3np 4y ago
  Try Chinese in smaller font sizes...
  - xbar 4y ago
    Thank you for a lesson in empathy. I would be satisfied with a taller 1920x1200 display but maybe you still wouldn't be.
- barbariangrunge 4y ago
  I find it highly noticeable in a 13 inch screen
- haspok 4y ago
  But this is not a 14" screen... > Display 15.6″ 1920×1080 FHD, Matte Finish, 144 Hz
coder543 4y ago
It is a 144Hz display, which makes it significantly more interesting than an average 1080p display. 60Hz just feels so stuttery these days. But, I agree that a higher resolution would be nice, and if I'm being completely honest... I would want OLED. Tons of affordable OLED laptops have come to market over the past year.
- jesuscript 4y ago
  Why does 144hz matter to you if you aren't playing games? This is not a gaming machine. You absolutely will not notice the difference for non-gaming tasks between 60hz to 80hz/100hz/120hz/144hz/244hz.
  - AnthonBerg 4y ago
    Trust me, there are people who notice the difference. After having tried a good 120Hz display for work I now go out of my way to not need to work on 60Hz displays. It’s more tactile, responsive and immediate. Smoother. Helps focus.
  - coder543 4y ago
    > You absolutely will not notice the difference If you make absolutes like that, then everything I could respond with is automatically “wrong”, so that’s not a great conversation opener. My smartphone is not a gaming monitor either, but 120Hz is hugely noticeable. My windows desktop is using a 144Hz monitor. I had a 120Hz MacBook Pro for awhile. I’m familiar with how I experience high refresh rate on different types of devices. You may not care, and that’s fine, but what’s the point of asking why I care and then telling me in no certain terms that I won’t? And how do you know if I would be gaming on this or not? Valve has put immense effort into making Linux viable for gaming. If you’re instead trying to say the monitor’s response times suck, how do you know that already?
  - nullandvoid 4y ago
    I absolutely do notice when my laptop screen defaults back to 60hz, instead of 144hz after some interactions.
  - 4y ago
0xCMP 4y ago
Agreed. 1080 is probably a good proportion, but I'd prefer 4k resolution at 200% than native 1080.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Interestingly, it looks like System76 has 4k options for their Intel machines. Hopefully that's a sign of things to come on their Ryzen line?
- mmis1000 4y ago
  I am a CJK user, and I can definitely say 4K at 200% is much more better than standard 1080p. Standard 1080p only looks good for English alphabets. Complex Chinese characters like `國` looks blurry(or even s**tty) on that resolution. Reading chinese charaters on a hidpi monitor is really a much better experience.
vehemenz 4y ago
Or at least 1920x1200. It's amazing how much 16:10 helps on a small screen.

Honestly, the difference between 1080p and 1440p on a 14in screen is barely perceptible to me. I'd rather have the extra battery life.

doix 4y ago
I run my 1440p screen at 1080p because my portable monitor is 1080p and I don't want to try and setup different scaling on different screens in X or move to Wayland. I'm happy enough.
- gibspaulding 4y ago
  Not sure why you're getting down voted. This seems like a valid point. I'd also note that if you are connected to a larger 1440p external display, 1080p on the smaller one keeps the dpi closer so you don't have to use different scaling settings.
- 0x457 4y ago
  I've tried it. Don't do it.
- aliqot 4y ago
  I run 4 different screens with different resolutions in X with no problem, no setup. Is there a specific error you run into?
  - doix 4y ago
    It's not the resolutions, different resolutions is fine. It's the scaling. 1440p at 14" requires scaling because everything is too small (for me, anyway). But the portable monitor doesn't need scaling. I couldn't get it to work nicely without running two different X servers (one for each display). I am pretty sure it's a limitation in X, the dpi setting is global, not per output. Wayland seems to have solved this, but it has other problems for me (forced vsync being the major one). So I just live in a lower resolution. I don't really care, like some of the other posters in the thread, the lower resolution annoys me less than a 60hz refresh rate (laptop monitor is 144hz). Luckily X can handle different refresh rates for different outputs.
3np 4y ago
Try Chinese in smaller font sizes...
- xbar 4y ago
  Thank you for a lesson in empathy. I would be satisfied with a taller 1920x1200 display but maybe you still wouldn't be.
barbariangrunge 4y ago
I find it highly noticeable in a 13 inch screen
haspok 4y ago
But this is not a 14" screen... > Display 15.6″ 1920×1080 FHD, Matte Finish, 144 Hz

coder543 4y ago

It is a 144Hz display, which makes it significantly more interesting than an average 1080p display. 60Hz just feels so stuttery these days. But, I agree that a higher resolution would be nice, and if I'm being completely honest... I would want OLED. Tons of affordable OLED laptops have come to market over the past year.

jesuscript 4y ago
Why does 144hz matter to you if you aren't playing games? This is not a gaming machine. You absolutely will not notice the difference for non-gaming tasks between 60hz to 80hz/100hz/120hz/144hz/244hz.
- AnthonBerg 4y ago
  Trust me, there are people who notice the difference. After having tried a good 120Hz display for work I now go out of my way to not need to work on 60Hz displays. It’s more tactile, responsive and immediate. Smoother. Helps focus.
- coder543 4y ago
  > You absolutely will not notice the difference If you make absolutes like that, then everything I could respond with is automatically “wrong”, so that’s not a great conversation opener. My smartphone is not a gaming monitor either, but 120Hz is hugely noticeable. My windows desktop is using a 144Hz monitor. I had a 120Hz MacBook Pro for awhile. I’m familiar with how I experience high refresh rate on different types of devices. You may not care, and that’s fine, but what’s the point of asking why I care and then telling me in no certain terms that I won’t? And how do you know if I would be gaming on this or not? Valve has put immense effort into making Linux viable for gaming. If you’re instead trying to say the monitor’s response times suck, how do you know that already?
- nullandvoid 4y ago
  I absolutely do notice when my laptop screen defaults back to 60hz, instead of 144hz after some interactions.
- 4y ago

0xCMP 4y ago

Agreed. 1080 is probably a good proportion, but I'd prefer 4k resolution at 200% than native 1080.

smoldesu 4y ago
Interestingly, it looks like System76 has 4k options for their Intel machines. Hopefully that's a sign of things to come on their Ryzen line?
mmis1000 4y ago
I am a CJK user, and I can definitely say 4K at 200% is much more better than standard 1080p. Standard 1080p only looks good for English alphabets. Complex Chinese characters like `國` looks blurry(or even s**tty) on that resolution. Reading chinese charaters on a hidpi monitor is really a much better experience.

vehemenz 4y ago

Or at least 1920x1200. It's amazing how much 16:10 helps on a small screen.