3 ms·
- 27" or higher. - 4K or higher. - 1440p effective resolution or higher. - 120 hz or higher. - ~160 dpi or higher. Note that some people here are going to r
by runjake 2y ago
- 27" or higher.
- 4K or higher.
- 1440p effective resolution or higher.
- 120 hz or higher.
- ~160 dpi or higher. Note that some people here are going to rage about non-integer scaling and they're right. But I'm older with less than 20/20 vision and an Apple Silicon device, so it looks sharp enough to me and I don't have any performance issues under any circumstances.
If you want a more stringent look at monitor's, check out Niki Tonsky's posts: https://tonsky.me/blog/monitors/ https://tonsky.me/blog/monitors/
- Mashimo 2y agoWhat is "effective resolution" and what is the difference between that and the other resolution requirement?
- runjake 2y agoSo, I might have my terminology wrong, but here's what I mean: I currently have a 27" 4K monitor connected to my Mac. It's 4K, so my actual resolution is 3840x2160. However, in my System Settings, I have my effective resolution set to 2560x1440. macOS automatically scales the interface to make text and elements more readable. A 4K monitor (3840x2160) scaled to 150% would appear as 2560x1440 with a dot pitch of about 163.18 PPI, resulting in a pretty sharp image. PPI is "pixels-per-inch" AKA "pixel density". The higher the PPI, the sharper the image. If I had a 1440p monitor set to 1440p resolution, my PPI would be about 108 PPI, which is much less sharp than 163 PPI. Caveat: All the stuff I said before about non-integer scaling. This is handy tool to explore PPI and monitor sizes: https://www.sven.de/dpi/ https://www.sven.de/dpi/