5 ms·

...though you’d be foolish to buy a 24-inch 4K display, we can only hope that Intel and Samsung’s ambitions can push down prices on larger displays. Unle

...though you’d be foolish to buy a 24-inch 4K display, we can only hope that Intel and Samsung’s ambitions can push down prices on larger displays. Unless you're a Mac user, in which case you'd be foolish to buy anything else. Reposting from my comment last year: At 28", a 3840 x 2160 panel has a PPI of 157, which sits right between Retina and non-Retina densities. This means that on a Mac, you’ll have to use it one of two ways: Either at 1x, where the higher PPI means everything will be much smaller than it is on a normal monitor, or at 2x, where the lower PPI means everything will be much bigger than normal. ... The best 4K monitor for Macs will be a 24”, which will have a PPI of 184, just about right for something sitting a bit further back from the viewer than a 220 PPI Retina Macbook Pro display.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
wmf 12y ago
As a diehard Mac user, I still wouldn't want a 24" retina monitor because it has a lot less space than a 34" superwide non-retina.
wbond 12y ago
I run a Dell 31.5" 4k and find it a perfect fit with the rMBP running at the (effective) 1920x1200 resolution. The Dell runs around 140ppi and the effective ppi of the rMBP is around 140 also. I find it to be an excellent combination. The quality of the Dell is outstanding. A co-worker got two of the Dell 28" 4Ks and they were too small for 1:1 and just a waste for 1920x1080. Anything in between was jagged. The 30Hz was pretty terrible also. Maybe two 24" displays would be ok, but I'd rather have the extra pixel real-estate in a single display instead of smoother font and graphic rendering.
- borplk 12y ago
  Can you please mention the full model number of the 31.5" dell that you are talking about? Or a link?
fuzzythinker 12y ago
What I'm still waiting for is a 1x (~110-120 ppi) 3k (2880 to 3k horizontal pixels) monitor so I can do true dual windowing. I'm currently using a 2560x1440, and horizontal space is a little tight. I don't want to use a 4k monitor as a retina display since I want to just see more pixels w/o multiple monitors. And 4k monitor w/o retina (38"+) is too big for normal viewing. So the ideal size is 2880 to 3k horizontal pixels in 27" to 30". The only option seems to be the Auria eq278c[1] and eq308c[2], both resolutions are 2880x1620. But since it came out less than 1-2 months, there isn't any reviews for it yet. Its cheaper eq $400 eq276wn claims to be 2880x1620, but reviews says it's actually a 2650x1600, so I'm not going to plunge $750-$1k until there's a good reliable review for it. The other alternative is the new LG 3440 x 1440 [3], but it's not as ideal as 2880x1620 since it requires a bit more head tilting since it's much wider and harder to do 2 vertical windows editing at 1440 vertical pixels. 1. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KG5LWM4 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KG5LWM4 - eq278c, 27"@2880x1620 = 122ppi, $750 2. http://www.amazon.com/AURIA-EQ308C-30-2880-1620/dp/B00KG5LSBE http://www.amazon.com/AURIA-EQ308C-30-2880-1620/dp/B00KG5LSB... - eq308c, 30"@2880x1620 = 110ppi, $1055 3. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JR6GCZA http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JR6GCZA - LG 34UM95, 34"@3440x1440 = 110ppi, $999
erikcharlebois 12y ago
Second this. I picked up a Dell 2414Q (on sale in Canada for $750 CAD) a few weeks ago and it's perfect as a 2x retina 24" external Macbook Pro monitor. Support on Windows and in games is spotty though. In particular, Windows doesn't seem to have a way to do exact pixel doubling.
- m_mueller 12y ago
  Windows basically moves this responsibility to the developer. Apple's approach for this matter has been proven much more pragmatic - at worst you'll see a few assets pixelated but at the correct size, and to ensure retina compatibility, developers only need to define their assets twice.
dlevine 12y ago
Can't you run a 28" 4K panel at 2560x1440 using a HiDPI mode? I run my 13" rMBP at 1440X900, which still looks pretty good. It actually looks pretty good at 1680x1050, except that everything is too small for comfortable work. Sure, it wouldn't be "full retina" resolution, but it would look a lot sharper than a regular 27" 1440p display. The only real constraint could be the video chip's ability to render at 2X that resolution and then downscale.
qwerta 12y ago
I guess as KDE user I was foolish to buy 3x30" :-). Setting font size works just fine...
- ebiester 12y ago
  Any trouble with window border sizes? I guess you can probably find 30 setting that help with that... Are there any themes that help with that?
  - qwerta 12y ago
    Most themes allow to set window border size.
alexeisadeski3 12y ago
Retina means one thing when using a display 12" from you face and another thing entirely when using a display 24" from your face.
snorrah 12y ago
24" is the perfect size for me. It's a drop-in replacement for a 1080p display, so literally a 'retina' upgrade. Now to wait until all my core windows apps are either 4k native, or scaling compatible.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

wmf 12y ago

As a diehard Mac user, I still wouldn't want a 24" retina monitor because it has a lot less space than a 34" superwide non-retina.

wbond 12y ago

I run a Dell 31.5" 4k and find it a perfect fit with the rMBP running at the (effective) 1920x1200 resolution. The Dell runs around 140ppi and the effective ppi of the rMBP is around 140 also. I find it to be an excellent combination. The quality of the Dell is outstanding. A co-worker got two of the Dell 28" 4Ks and they were too small for 1:1 and just a waste for 1920x1080. Anything in between was jagged. The 30Hz was pretty terrible also. Maybe two 24" displays would be ok, but I'd rather have the extra pixel real-estate in a single display instead of smoother font and graphic rendering.

borplk 12y ago
Can you please mention the full model number of the 31.5" dell that you are talking about? Or a link?

fuzzythinker 12y ago

What I'm still waiting for is a 1x (~110-120 ppi) 3k (2880 to 3k horizontal pixels) monitor so I can do true dual windowing. I'm currently using a 2560x1440, and horizontal space is a little tight. I don't want to use a 4k monitor as a retina display since I want to just see more pixels w/o multiple monitors. And 4k monitor w/o retina (38"+) is too big for normal viewing. So the ideal size is 2880 to 3k horizontal pixels in 27" to 30". The only option seems to be the Auria eq278c[1] and eq308c[2], both resolutions are 2880x1620. But since it came out less than 1-2 months, there isn't any reviews for it yet. Its cheaper eq $400 eq276wn claims to be 2880x1620, but reviews says it's actually a 2650x1600, so I'm not going to plunge $750-$1k until there's a good reliable review for it. The other alternative is the new LG 3440 x 1440 [3], but it's not as ideal as 2880x1620 since it requires a bit more head tilting since it's much wider and harder to do 2 vertical windows editing at 1440 vertical pixels. 1. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KG5LWM4 http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KG5LWM4 - eq278c, 27"@2880x1620 = 122ppi, $750 2. http://www.amazon.com/AURIA-EQ308C-30-2880-1620/dp/B00KG5LSBE http://www.amazon.com/AURIA-EQ308C-30-2880-1620/dp/B00KG5LSB... - eq308c, 30"@2880x1620 = 110ppi, $1055 3. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JR6GCZA http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00JR6GCZA - LG 34UM95, 34"@3440x1440 = 110ppi, $999

erikcharlebois 12y ago

Second this. I picked up a Dell 2414Q (on sale in Canada for $750 CAD) a few weeks ago and it's perfect as a 2x retina 24" external Macbook Pro monitor. Support on Windows and in games is spotty though. In particular, Windows doesn't seem to have a way to do exact pixel doubling.

m_mueller 12y ago
Windows basically moves this responsibility to the developer. Apple's approach for this matter has been proven much more pragmatic - at worst you'll see a few assets pixelated but at the correct size, and to ensure retina compatibility, developers only need to define their assets twice.

dlevine 12y ago

Can't you run a 28" 4K panel at 2560x1440 using a HiDPI mode? I run my 13" rMBP at 1440X900, which still looks pretty good. It actually looks pretty good at 1680x1050, except that everything is too small for comfortable work. Sure, it wouldn't be "full retina" resolution, but it would look a lot sharper than a regular 27" 1440p display. The only real constraint could be the video chip's ability to render at 2X that resolution and then downscale.

qwerta 12y ago

I guess as KDE user I was foolish to buy 3x30" :-). Setting font size works just fine...

ebiester 12y ago
Any trouble with window border sizes? I guess you can probably find 30 setting that help with that... Are there any themes that help with that?
- qwerta 12y ago
  Most themes allow to set window border size.

alexeisadeski3 12y ago

Retina means one thing when using a display 12" from you face and another thing entirely when using a display 24" from your face.

snorrah 12y ago

24" is the perfect size for me. It's a drop-in replacement for a 1080p display, so literally a 'retina' upgrade. Now to wait until all my core windows apps are either 4k native, or scaling compatible.