>24" @ 1920x1080>27" @ 2560x1440>27" @ 1920x1080considering standard desktop viewing distance, which is the ideal configuration? I've been using the first for the past 15 years and I'm considering upgrading to the second or 3rd option
27" is a scam at every resolution. how can you browse this board and still fall for that?
>>106922364how/why?does that mean the anything larger than 24" is garbage for desktop use?
>>106922322>which is the ideal configurationhighest dpi
https://chatgpt.com/share/68f2a43c-b228-8003-89a7-268dbe3c6eac
>>10692232221:9 3440x1440 34' curved
>>106922322>>24" @ 1920x1080not enough ppi for smooth text
>>10692232227" 4K + 24" 1440plower resolutions irrelevant in current year
>>1069223224k@27everything with lower resolution is unusable
41-43" 3840x216025-27" 2560x144021-24" 1920x1080
4k 43"cheapest af
>>10692232216" @ 1440p
>>106922364scam in terms of what, prices? don't be poor?
>>106923080is getting a 25-27" with 4k support, for the occasional time you might want it, and running it at 2560x1440 reasonable? or will quality be shit at non native res
QHD is what I'm using and it's good, I can't see the pixels is all that matters, you also can run most things without needing to draw ridiculous power Other things like pwm vs dc brightness control are also important considerations, pwm is absolute garbage and should be avoided, don't screw around with your ocular health
>>106922322Standard distance (arm's length) is too close. It's calculated from 24" size monitors but it causes too much eye strain. Buy a 27" 1440* monitor and put it on a table behind your desk. Scale to 1080 on the GPU for games. *4k if you're an artist.
>>106922322niggers never heard of 1920x1200
>>1069223221080p at 27" is terrible, get anything with better DPI.
>>106922322i want a 24" 1440p OLED display so bad
75" 7680x4320 60hz for working3840x1260 120hz for everything else
