amoral_ponder t1_j2unw74 wrote on January 4, 2023 at 1:44 AM

Reply to comment by kyralfie in Dell UltraSharp U3224KB 32-inch 6K monitor is official with a built-in 4K webcam and Thunderbolt 4 port. by RenegadeUK

It's more pleasant to your eyes in your imagination or if you're sitting 2 inches away from the screen.

kyralfie t1_j2w0vno wrote on January 4, 2023 at 9:34 AM

Nah, I have an 80cm deep desk and I used the 5K and multiple 4K ones at the same distance. It's just better. I understand it's not everyone's priority but that's completely alright. To each their own. I myself sold that 16:9 5K in favor of a taller 3:2 4K screen. It was a definite downgrade in quality but it's free real estate. :-)

iindigo t1_j2x9g2c wrote on January 4, 2023 at 4:22 PM

Yeah, I’ve got one desk set up with an iMac Pro (27” 5120x2880) alongside a 27” 2560x1440 monitor and the difference between the two is quite visible at normal sitting distance. It’s by far the most visible with a screen full of text, with letterforms being notably less defined and more blobby on the lower DPI monitor, whereas the iMac’s screen looks almost like paper that emits light.

I share your distaste for 16:9 though, I’d love for there to be HiDPI screens at 16:10 (my personal favorite), 3:2, 5:4, etc that allow running your UI at a perfect 2x, but I don’t see that happening for a few more years at least. Hopefully the trend laptops have seen toward 16:10 and other tall aspect ratios spreads to desktop monitors sooner than later.

amoral_ponder t1_j2xzrdh wrote on January 4, 2023 at 7:04 PM

>2560x1440 monitor

vs 4K is not 4K vs 5K.

iindigo t1_j2y14c4 wrote on January 4, 2023 at 7:12 PM

The density difference is still visible, just not as visible, plus as noted in other comments 4K 27”-32” screens require fractional UI scaling which is problematic under some circumstances. 5k 27” or 6k 32” can run usably with integer scaling, e.g 2x instead of 1.5x.