Benefits of resolutions beyond 1080p

This is a genuine question, so please don't do me like Vlad the Impaler. What is your opinion about the benefits of upgrading to displays beyond 1080p?

I have never watched a film or a video at 1080p and thought it needed to look better. When it comes to software, I feel like I would want a proportionally larger monitor to keep the same DPI PPI, otherwise older software might be a pain to use, and that maintained software UI won't necessarily benefit. However, that line of thinking is probably a niche concern of mine? I don't play first person shooters, so maybe that's another thing I don't get. I have read some people saying that text looks better, which I could buy I suppose?

I wouldn't say the same for 800x600, but maybe if I were a boomer I would have made that post, too. Is this something I would get over if I start using a modern display?

e: thanks to everyone for great responses! Based on the popular sentiment, I'm thinking I would take to 1440p just fine, presuming I get a screen ratio, DPI PPI, and screen size that suit my preferences. I am really relieved that I'm not super weird for being completely fine with my ancient monitors. :)

Fallenwout ,

Since you are convinced about the higher resolution, you really are going to enjoy it.

But let me urge you to also buy a higher refresh rate. The same discussion applies here.

Even if the human eye can't count the pixels or the frames, you WILL perceived it as more relaxing on the eye.

eestileib ,

I was a skeptic; "I can't see all the pixels unless I'm as close to the screen as the screen is wide, why bother?"

Then I went over to my friend's place and watched some stuff on his 4K OLED. Holy shit. So I can't see all the pixels, but turns out that only perceiving 2.5-3x the data is still a big improvement.

I'm still not gonna pay for one until they get a lot cheaper.

andrade ,

There's more to take into account other than just resolution, like

  • color space coverage (100% sRGB is quite affordable nowadays, I wouldn't go less than this; on the other hand, >95% DCI-P3 or AdobeRGB still on the expensive side in comparison and not as widespread),
  • screen type,
  • brightness, and
  • refresh rate.

And resolution itself should be paired with monitor size for it to be meaningful. For example:

  • 24 inch monitor at 1080p = 92 PPI
  • 24 inch monitor at 2160p = 184 PPI
  • 32 inch monitor at 2160p = 138 PPI
  • 46 inch monitor at 2160p = 96 PPI

In Windows and Linux anything around 92 to 98 PPI gives you easily readable text at 100% scaling. This is a good baseline. There are PPI calculators online: https://dpi.lv/

The 24 inch screen at 2160p (which is 4K) has twice the pixel density of the 24 inch screen at 1080p. That means if you would set your display resolution scaling in the OS to 200% you'd get the same font size as <24 inch, 1080p, 100% scaling>. However, because the density is much higher, everything looks much clearer.

The benefits are larger when reading text, IMO. You still notice an improvement with movies, of course. Mobile phones and tablets, even the cheaper ones, usually have significantly higher pixel density than computer monitors which is one reason they look better.

Of the three examples above, the 24 inch monitor at 4K will look better than the other three monitors because it has higher PPI. (Assuming all else is equal like screen type, color coverage, brightness, etc.)

I feel like I would want a proportionally larger monitor to keep the same DPI

Let's say you want a new monitor. I suggest looking at the PPI and not just the resolution or monitor size in isolation. These two units should be paired.

For example, a 32 inch monitor at 4K has 138 PPI. The font will be tiny at 100% scaling but that's expected. In this case it so happens that 1.5 x 92 PPI = 138 PPI. So by going to the OS display settings and increasing scaling to 150% you get the same font size as <24 inch, 1080p, 100% scaling> but everything looks clearer.

The 46 inch monitor above is 4K but because the screen is so large this comes out at only 96 PPI. So in terms of quality it would be quite close to the 24 inch monitor at 1080p.

PPI is one of the most important characteristics but don't disregard the rest. Try at least full sRGB coverage. And for panel type IPS is a good choice if you can afford it. (I'm afraid of OLED because of burn-in issues and I can't afford to replace monitors like they're socks. And mini-led is very expensive.)

About the refresh rate, I don't game and for movies it's kind of useless. But I do notice a difference moving the mouse and scrolling pages on the browser. (My external monitors are 60 hz and my laptop is >100 hz.)

On a side note, Apple laptop screens tend to look nice because they have high PPI and good color coverage (among other things) whereas PC/Linux laptops for the most part have low spec screens. This doesn't have to be the case, of course. My work laptop (I'm using Linux) has >200 PPI with near 100% DCI-P3 and fonts look great on it.

087008001234 OP ,

Eeerp. Yep, I meant PPI not DPI. Thanks for the write-up about text scaling, though, I will note that when I end up upgrading. The PPI calc also looks interesting.

andrade ,

They're usually used interchangeably.

For what I understand, PPI is pixels per inch in a digital image, and DPI are dots per inch on a printed image. So we can use PPI or DPI for the same image depending on whether its on our computer screen (PPI) or printed on a sheet of paper (DPI).

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • technology@lemmy.ml
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •