Hardware Bargains - Open Thine Wallet

Status
Not open for further replies.
K3NS31 said:
Exactly this. I have a Dell 1440 IPS at 27" and it's awesome.
27" is too big a screen size for 1080p, but too small for 4k
(We have 27" 4k monitors at work - horrible! Tiny font. Then you turn it up and you lose the point of having high res as your screen usage is now equivalent to 1080p)

We also had those LG Ultrawides for a while - nice for gaming, rubbish for work. As you said, you lose too much vertical screen real-estate.

My rule of thumb is:
23 - 25" = 1080p
above 25", to about 30" = 2K
Above 30" = 4K
Click to expand...

What's the cheapest decent 27" 1440 IPS?

At desktop viewing distances can you still see screen pixels?

On my Dell 24" 1920 x 1200 you can see the pixels and I want to go to 27" but not see pixels aka have a retina type display, as our apple brothers aptly call it.
 
airborne said:
What's the cheapest decent 27" 1440 IPS?

At desktop viewing distances can you still see screen pixels?

On my Dell 24" 1920 x 1200 you can see the pixels and I want to go to 27" but not see pixels aka have a retina type display, as our apple brothers aptly call it.
Click to expand...
I'd say no, but if you're seeing pixels on a 24" @ 1920 x 1200 then your eyes are probably way more sensitive than mine.
That said, I never could find a "cheapest decent 27" 1440 IPS?"
Ended up biting the bullet and getting this, which still costs about the same as I paid 2 years later:

Takealot.com: Online Shopping | SA's leading online store

South Africa's leading online store. Fast, reliable delivery to your door. Many ways to pay. Shop anything you can imagine: TVs, laptops, cellphones, kitchen appliances, toys, books, beauty & more. Shop the mobile app anytime, anywhere.
www.takealot.com www.takealot.com

Which is a professional monitor (factory calibrated and everything), so you really shouldn't be seeing pixels.
May be a bit slow for gaming if you're into that. Otherwise it's amazing.
 
What about this Dell 27" IPS?

Check this out on takealot: Dell SE2719H 27" Full HD Monitor

Takealot.com: Online Shopping | SA's leading online store

South Africa's leading online store. Fast, reliable delivery to your door. Many ways to pay. Shop anything you can imagine: TVs, laptops, cellphones, kitchen appliances, toys, books, beauty & more. Shop the mobile app anytime, anywhere.
www.takealot.com www.takealot.com
 
adielk said:
What about this Dell 27" IPS?

Check this out on takealot: Dell SE2719H 27" Full HD Monitor

Takealot.com: Online Shopping | SA's leading online store

South Africa's leading online store. Fast, reliable delivery to your door. Many ways to pay. Shop anything you can imagine: TVs, laptops, cellphones, kitchen appliances, toys, books, beauty & more. Shop the mobile app anytime, anywhere.
www.takealot.com www.takealot.com
Click to expand...
It says TFT display in description.

Also let's create a separate monitor discussion thread. This is for thread is getting derailed.
 
Sl8er said:
See size comparison below:

Imagine a slightly wider 20" 16:9 monitor:

View attachment 846737
Click to expand...

Even 10 years ago, 19" was tiny.
K3NS31 said:
Exactly this. I have a Dell 1440 IPS at 27" and it's awesome.
27" is too big a screen size for 1080p, but too small for 4k
(We have 27" 4k monitors at work - horrible! Tiny font. Then you turn it up and you lose the point of having high res as your screen usage is now equivalent to 1080p)

We also had those LG Ultrawides for a while - nice for gaming, rubbish for work. As you said, you lose too much vertical screen real-estate.

My rule of thumb is:
23 - 25" = 1080p
above 25", to about 30" = 2K
Above 30" = 4K
Click to expand...

Yes, 4K at 27" is a bit small, but at 125% or 150% scaling the extra sharpness is very noticeable. I use it at 100% scaling, and while it would be better at a larger size, it's still great in my opinion.
For productivity, I wouldn't choose a 1440p 27" over 4K 27".
 
Barbarian Conan said:
Even 10 years ago, 19" was tiny.


Yes, 4K at 27" is a bit small, but at 125% or 150% scaling the extra sharpness is very noticeable. I use it at 100% scaling, and while it would be better at a larger size, it's still great in my opinion.
For productivity, I wouldn't choose a 1440p 27" over 4K 27".
Click to expand...
Really? I found them annoying. It felt like the 27" panel was waaay too small for that resolution.
And I hate scaling up - you're just losing screen real-estate. Eventually you're not fitting in much more than on a 2k anyway.
I should probably add that I always use 2 monitors; so giving up 2k of screen isn't such a problem cos I have a 1080p monitor next to it. So I still have "3k" to work on.
In fact, rather buy a nice 24" and a nice 2k monitor than a too small 4K would be my take away from my experiences.
Or even 2x nice 24".
 
Imo pixel pitch should be 0.29-0.3mm. So 24.5" is ideal for 1080p but no smaller than 24". That would make 33-34" for 1440p. Don't know if you get 48" but 4k has so much real estate in any case that you can afford to upscale. But 4k is a waste imo.
 
Swa said:
Imo pixel pitch should be 0.29-0.3mm. So 24.5" is ideal for 1080p but no smaller than 24". That would make 33-34" for 1440p. Don't know if you get 48" but 4k has so much real estate in any case that you can afford to upscale. But 4k is a waste imo.
Click to expand...
hm, back in the CRT days we wouldn't take anything above 0.27mm pixel pitch if looking for good image quality. 0.28 at a push. (I think the best monitor I owned back then was 0.25) Not sure if those numbers translate direcly to LCD panels tho. But my size guide compared to yours would suggest that they do.
 
K3NS31 said:
hm, back in the CRT days we wouldn't take anything above 0.27mm pixel pitch if looking for good image quality. 0.28 at a push. (I think the best monitor I owned back then was 0.25) Not sure if those numbers translate direcly to LCD panels tho. But my size guide compared to yours would suggest that they do.
Click to expand...
May just be my personal preference but if you're sitting the correct distance from your monitor you don't need anything less than 0.3mm and I actually quite regularly have to discern between single pixels so anything less becomes a pita. If you're just playing games it doesn't really matter but if you do any kind of graphics work you can't go smaller than 0.29.
 
Any reason memory prices are going down?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X