4K או 2K?

[Black_Citadel]

מחפש מסך לעבודה, האמת תכננתי על 30-35״ על 4K - אבל אני חושש שהטקסט יהיה קטן מדי לקריאה. בזמנו היה לי iMac 5k 27" (שעושה scaling לחצי מהרזולוציה - 2560 על משהו, וזה עדיין היה לי קטן מדי). אני עובד המון על טקסטים ואתרים, וראיתי את הסרטון הזה:

 

 

אחת התגובות שם מעניינית:

 

ציטוט

 

32" (31.5-inch) 8K (7680 x 4320p Ultra HD 2) is 279.73 PPI

 

43" (42.5-inch) 4K (3840 x 2160p Ultra HD) is 103.67 PPI Pixels Per Inch

32" 4K is 139.87 PPI

27" (27.0-inch) 4K is 163.18 PPI

24" (23.8-inch) 4K is 185.10 PPI

17" (17.3-inch) 4K is 254.67 PPI

15" (15.6-inch) 4K is 282.40 PPI

 

 

32" 2K / 2.5K / 3K (2560 x 1440p Quad HD) is 93.24 PPI

27" QHD is 108.79 PPI

25" QHD is 117.50 PPI

24" QHD is 123.40 PPI

 

 

27" 2K (1920 x 1080p Full HD) is 81.59 PPI

25" FHD is 88.12 PPI

24" FHD is 92.56 PPI

23" (23.0-inch) FHD is 95.78 PPI

22" (21.5-inch) FHD is 102.46 PPI

17" FHD is 127.34 PPI

15" FHD is 141.20 PPI

14" (14.0-inch) FHD is 157.35 PPI

13" (13.3-inch) FHD is 165.63 PPI

12" (12.5-inch) FHD is 176.23 PPI

 

 

 

20" (19.5-inch) (1600 x 900 HD+) is 94.14 PPI

17" HD+ is 106.11 PPI

 

19" (18.5-inch) (1366 x 768 HD) is 84.70 PPI

17" HD is 90.58 PPI

15" HD is 100.45 PPI

14" HD is 111.94 PPI

13" HD is 117.83 PPI

12" HD is 125.37 PPI

 

Regardless of resolutions and screen sizes. The lower the PPI, the less likely you would have to put your face close to the screen to read the text without scaling above 100% in Windows and Linux, but the more pixelated (the more of a screen door effect) you will have when you play games or watch movies or anime on your monitor. The higher the PPI, the sharper and smoother the games you play and the movies or anime you watch on your monitor, but the harder it is to read the text if you try to using scaling below 125% or even 150%.

 

 

There are hardly any 34" (33.5-inch?) 4K monitors out there and the 34" only slightly has less pixels per inch than the 32" (31.5-inch) 4K monitors, so it's slightly gonna be easier to read the text on on a 34" 4K than a 32" 4K. Hardly any improvements.

 

For PC users who want to make the most of out of using a 4K UHD resolution without scaling higher than 100% should get a 43" monitor. The PPI of a 43" 4K monitor is almost the same PPI of a 22" FHD monitor like the Dell P2217H I'm using. Just keep in mind that a 43" PC monitor would occupy a lot of desk space let alone a 32". Most 32" 4K monitors are quite more expensive than 27" 4K monitors, but the good news is most 43" 4K monitors are only slightly more expensive than most 32" 4K monitors. On occasion, you can even get a 43" 4K monitor for a little less than you would have to pay for a 32" 4K, I guess the demand for 43" 4K monitors are really low. I'm not gonna lie, 43" is too big for a PC monitor...

 

 

I am near sighted and my vision are bad. Around -3.25 diopters. I am 28 years old male. I can read almost every text on my 22" 1080p FHD monitor at 100% scaling without my glasses and my face around 8-10" from the screen, keep in mind my eyes are bad. My mom is 60 years old, she's also near sighted and her eyes are three times better than mine. She can read almost every text from my 22" FHD monitor at 100% scaling without her glasses and her face as far as 24" away from the screen.

 

 

My dad is 62 years old, he's farsighted, and his nearsight vision is extremely bad by now. His eyes had not changed that quickly over the decades, just exponentially slower. He still uses his old pair of prescriptive reading glasses that he obtained 15 years ago every time he uses his desktop PC up till this day. The desktop monitor he uses is a 17" (1280 x 1024 SXGA+) which is 96.42 DPI. My dad is able to read almost everything on my 22" FHD monitor at 100% scaling with his 15 years old prescriptive reading glasses.

 

 

https://www.omnicalculator.com/other/pixels-per-inch is a good website to calculate the PPI based-on the resolution and diagonal screen size. I hope this should give everyone an idea which PPI range is desirable for the monitor they're getting for themselves or someone they know taking into account what the user will plan to use the monitor mostly for and if the user has any plans of using display scaling higher than 100% on Windows or not.

 

 

 

לכן אני תוהה אם כדאי לי ללכת על מסך 4K ענק (כדי שהטקסט לא יהיה קטן מדי) - לדוגמא 35-43״, או מסך 28-32״ עם 2K או רזולוציה אחרת. מה הקומבינציה שתתן לי טקסט קריא בלי scaling ועדיין שטח מסך גדול כדי לעבוד על הרבה דברים במקביל? אני עובד מול המסך, אולי 70 ס״מ מרחק ~

 

תודה רבה רבה !!

[Black_Citadel]

מצאתי עוד כמה דברים:

 

"I can suggest you try my panel. It has native 100 scale and large pixel, thus really great for reading. 2560x1440 for me at 32 inches is the sweet spot. Or 4K at 38-40 if you wish to preserve the scale .Otherwise, there are no options"

 

״on the 4K monitor with text size at 100%, it's very difficult to read the text displayed on the monitor which means it has to magnified to a 150%״

 

״4K isn't necessary, considering how much more expensive they are to a native 1080p monitor. With the UI scaled at 100%, things aren't legible. When working, I have several apps running simultaneously so whilst at 100% I can have more viewed than the 2560x1080 once I scale to 150% I'm no more better off than using my 2560x1080p monitor. ״

 

״I have the ASUS PB287Q in front of me..and I can't view anything at 100% or 125% scaling. At 100% the real estate is great but once scaled to 150% all that is lost...it becomes the same as using the 2560x1080 ultrawide monitor also in front of me.״

 

"I've been using 1280x1024 17" monitor and full hd 15,6" laptop screen and then for a short while I started using a 32" hd ready TV as a computer screen and I have to say, despite Pixel density of only 45,89 and rather short viewing distance (70-80 centimeters) It still looked much better than both my monitor and laptop screen and that's of course thanks to its sheer size. Everything from reading, writing to gaming and movies feels so much better with a low resolution 32" screen than high resolution small screen."

 

ו:

ציטוט

The higher the number of pixels per inch (ppi) the smoother everything looks. If the ppi is too low things will start to look grainy but you won't benefit from it being too high either. Some reasons for that are:

1. that you will need a high-end system to produce the images at that resolution

2. you will need to scale everything up when you're not playing games or watching a movie

3. there comes a point where you simply can't tell the difference anymore and everything simply looks Sharp to you

Here are some examples of the ppi count for different combinations:

24" @ 1920x1080 = 92ppi

24" @ 1920x1200 = 94ppi

24" @ 2560x1440 = 122ppi

27" @ 1920x1080 = 82ppi

27" @ 2560x1440 = 109ppi

32" @ 1920x1080 = 69ppi

32" @ 2560x1440 = 92ppi

32" @ 3840x2160 = 138ppi

(http://dpi.lv/)

To me personally anything between 92 and 109 is good so I'd go with either a 27" or 32" at 2560x1440.

If you play a lot of games I'd go with a 27" because most 32"1440p panels are not for gamers. At least I haven't found a single monitor with decent input lag and ghosting.

 

נראה לי שאלך על 2560x1440 בגודל 32. מעדיף לוותר על 27 כי כשהיה לי איימק 27״ 5k (שׁעשה סקיילינג לרזולוציה הזאת - 2560x1440, הטקסט פשוט היה קטן לי מדי, אז מעדיף מסך גדול יותר). יש המלצות?

 

מצאתי את שלושת אלה:

 

AOC Q3279VWFD8 ב-1050 ש״ח במספר חנויות. קיבל ביקורות נחמדות מאוד פה:

https://www.amazon.com/AOC-Q3279VWFD8-2560x1440-DisplayPort-Flickerfree/dp/B07CG41Y8Z/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=AOC+Q3279VWFD8&qid=1592357121&sr=8-1

 

או:

 

Viewsonic VX3276-2K-MHD ב1300 ש״ח בTMS (מגיע עם רמקולים מובנים, אז חוסך קנייה נפרדת). קיבל גם ביקורות יפות:

https://www.amazon.com/ViewSonic-VX3276-2K-MHD-Frameless-Widescreen-DisplayPort/dp/B0787XMLZQ/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=VX3276-2K-MHD&qid=1592393972&sr=8-1

 

או

Lenovo D32q-20 ב1200 שקל ב KSP

https://www.lenovo.com/il/en/monitors/d32q-20

 

יש דגם אחר אולי שאתם ממליצים? תודה רבה רבה
 

נערך 2020 ביוני 17 על-ידי Black_Citadel