4 ms·
Eh, it's about the same as a 4K display at 33".
by Marsymars 9mo ago
Eh, it's about the same as a 4K display at 33".
- masklinn 9mo agoWhich is a poor pixel density.
- LtdJorge 9mo agoIf compared to a smartphone, maybe.
- masklinn 9mo agoCompared to a smartphone it's not just poor it's complete dreck. Smarphones are in the 400s.
- swiftcoder 9mo agoDo you hold your 32" monitor the same distance from your face as you hold your smartphone?
- LtdJorge 9mo agoExactly, that’s the point
- masklinn 9mo agoThat’s not a point it’s nonsense thought termination. There’s a gulf between 130 dpi and 460 dpi, and in that gulf there are densities which stop being poor at monitor viewing distances. That smartphone densities are excessive for that purpose does not make middling standard densities good.
- LtdJorge 9mo agoI have an LG OLED C3 as a monitor, 42". I may be able to distinguish separate pixels if looking at a '.' or something like that (a stuck pixel happened for a few weeks, which I could notice on a white background). But the density is definitely enough for text for the distance required for such a screen size. At least when using grayscale AA, because OLED subpixel...
- masklinn 9mo agoI fail to see how that is relevant as I neither introduced nor advocated for smartphone pixel density?
- swiftcoder 9mo agoThen what was the intent of your comment? There's no point to making a 400dpi 32" display (even if that were remotely physically possible).
- masklinn 9mo ago> Then what was the intent of your comment? Pointing out to the other guy that their reply made no sense? > There's no point to making a 400dpi 32" display Thank you captain obvious. You do know that there are densities between 130 and 400+ though, right?
- adrian_b 9mo agoNo, it is a poor pixel density when compared with a printed book, which should be the standard for judging any kind of display used for text. At the sizes of 27" or 32", which are comfortable for working with a computer, 5k is the minimum resolution that is not too bad when compared with a book or with the acuity of typical human vision. For a bigger monitor, a 4k resolution is perfectly fine for watching movies or for playing games, but it is not acceptable for working with text.
- bsimpson 9mo ago4k@27" is borderline too coarse. 5k@27" is preferred.
- plorkyeran 9mo ago4k at 33" is awful too. 5k text is visibly better than 4k at 27".
- Marsymars 9mo agoI mean, sure, but you're basically saying "anything other than the absolute top-end displays are absolutely awful". 133 PPI is going to be higher pixel density than >99% of desktop monitors that people are actually using. e.g. The Steam hardware survey only goes down to 0.23% usage, and doesn't have any >4K resolution listed.
- plorkyeran 9mo agoIt’s a $3000 monitor, so yeah, other top end monitors are what I’m going to compare it to.
- Marsymars 9mo agoYou said 4K@33" is "awful". That's not $3k territory, that's what you get for $300.