What display resolution are you using?

[Arco]

The LG G3 had a 2560x1440 5.5 inch IPS back in 2014. It's got all of these beaten

I hope you know that like the G3, these 4K Xperias also have severe overheating issues, weak performance and poor battery life; and you'd be hard pressed to tell it apart from the 1080p Triluminos display you'd find on an Xperia Z2. I managed to pick one up unused last week, surprised at how Android 5 is still more or less viable for a basic smartphone.

But your take on "1080p is invariably awful" is a bit extreme, and i'm a resolution freak myself - I would be honestly torn between a 4K OLED and a 8K TV if 8K TVs weren't still limited to 60 Hz.

4k 55-inch OLED at 4ish feet is what I'm going for. Then slapping on a portrait 1080p 32-inch monitor on the sides.

 

[Vayra86]

Why

The power to run 4k is limited now only by the user.
I've been on 4k with a Vega 64 for three years gaming at 4k.

Lower the settings if needed, but not often.

OP should have allowed multiple options.

Who uses just one screen these days.

I use 4k 1080p and 720p Still.

No its not just the user though I get your point regardless. The point I'm making is that 4K is not really 4K more often than not. Sure you have the pixel count, but if the input is of lower quality, what's the point? Not every pixel contains 'detail'.

Take simple video online: you always get a compressed stream especially at 4K. Gaming, similarly: things like temporal AA are often forced on you, variable rate shading, lighting quality, etc. Another factor you can't control is textures. They come in a set quality / qualities. Another one you can't / can rarely control, is LoD; geometry and number of objects on screen.

There is a point at which developers really don't want more information on screen before it hurts overall playability, and every res above 1080p struggles with that. Sure you can make everything super detailed, but is it still pleasant to look at? There is a balance to be struck.

I can tell you that 1080p doesn't look right on a 15.6 screen - Acer laptop.
Ok, I can somehow lower my requirements and say that 1080p on a 13-inch screen can somewhat look acceptable.

But, on the smartphones you really get 400 ppi, 500 ppi and higher. Sony produces 6.5-inch 4K screens. Sony Xperia XZ Premium - Full phone specifications (gsmarena.com)

View attachment 260840

Its not about what you get, its about what's useful, usable, and how it trades off against other drawbacks. Higher res is lower battery life, more power required, bigger GPU for the same FPS, etc.

Anything over 300 ppi on a phone is utter bullshit. Yes you 'get more'. That's because the market is saturated and every company desperately fights over every number to have the bigger sale epeen. Useful innovation is not in smartphones anymore for half or nearly a full decade. The only reason phones need somewhat higher PPI is because you're obviously killing your neck a lot more than you do behind a desk But the higher that PPI, the more you will have a tendency to crawl in your screen to get all that detail resolved. So even ergonomy takes a hit with PPI overkill.

It kind of echoes in this thread I think, and in the poll results. 1440p is dominant, 1080p lagging, and on Steam with a less enthusiast userbase, its even still 1080p dominance. In both environments only a niche 'wants' 4K, and of course in this forum higher res is overrepresented.

 

[ARF]

No its not just the user though I get your point regardless. The point I'm making is that 4K is not really 4K more often than not. Sure you have the pixel count, but if the input is of lower quality, what's the point? Not every pixel contains 'detail'.

Take simple video online: you always get a compressed stream especially at 4K. Gaming, similarly: things like temporal AA are often forced on you, variable rate shading, lighting quality, etc. Another factor you can't control is textures. They come in a set quality / qualities. Another one you can't / can rarely control, is LoD; geometry and number of objects on screen.

There is a point at which developers really don't want more information on screen before it hurts overall playability, and every res above 1080p struggles with that. Sure you can make everything super detailed, but is it still pleasant to look at? There is a balance to be struck.


Its not about what you get, its about what's useful, usable, and how it trades off against other drawbacks. Higher res is lower battery life, more power required, bigger GPU for the same FPS, etc.

Anything over 300 ppi on a phone is utter bullshit. Yes you 'get more'. That's because the market is saturated and every company desperately fights over every number to have the bigger sale epeen. Useful innovation is not in smartphones anymore for half or nearly a full decade. The only reason phones need somewhat higher PPI is because you're obviously killing your neck a lot more than you do behind a desk But the higher that PPI, the more you will have a tendency to crawl in your screen to get all that detail resolved. So even ergonomy takes a hit with PPI overkill.

It kind of echoes in this thread I think, and in the poll results. 1440p is dominant, 1080p lagging, and on Steam with a less enthusiast userbase, its even still 1080p dominance. In both environments only a niche 'wants' 4K, and of course in this forum higher res is overrepresented.

The balance is not at 1080p. 1080p is a low resolution.
1440p had to be marketed "Full HD" or simply "HD", while 1080p to entry-low-end devices only.

4K had to be "Full HD" and not Ultra.
Because higher resolutions than 4K are coming, 8K, 16K, etc...

 

[Vayra86]

The balance is not at 1080p. 1080p is a low resolution.
1440p had to be marketed "Full HD" or simply "HD", while 1080p to entry-low-end devices only.

4K had to be "Full HD" and not Ultra.
Because higher resolutions than 4K are coming, 8K, 16K, etc...

Alright, time will tell. I'm sure we'll go to 4K en masse eventually, but higher?

 

[Arkz]

The balance is not at 1080p. 1080p is a low resolution.
1440p had to be marketed "Full HD" or simply "HD", while 1080p to entry-low-end devices only.

4K had to be "Full HD" and not Ultra.
Because higher resolutions than 4K are coming, 8K, 16K, etc...

There's still loads of SD content and channels. 720x480 is low res. 1920x1080 is fine for most stuff. For productivity yeah 2x 3840x2160 screens had been great for me. I love it for photoshop and various editing. But for most other stuff it's not that necessary. And we don't have the eyes of an owl. If a screen is far away enough that 4k and 1080p look the same then why waste power driving 2160p? My smaller 4k screen is 40" and I have to have scaling on 175% or things are too small and hard to read. Your comparison of images showing the 1080p one blurry is pointless too as it assumes someone is viewing it at the ideal 4k distance. display it on a 24" 4k screen with 100% scaling and they'll probably look identical unless you press your face up to it.

4k on phones is utterly pointless. The DPI is well above human visual acuity even 1 foot away.

 

[BSim500]

The balance is not at 1080p. 1080p is a low resolution.
1440p had to be marketed "Full HD" or simply "HD", while 1080p to entry-low-end devices only.

4K had to be "Full HD" and not Ultra. Because higher resolutions than 4K are coming, 8K, 16K, etc...

That's not how it works at all though. FHD, QHD, etc, are official naming classifications used to describe specific fixed resolutions:-

HD = 1280x720, FHD = 1920x1080, QHD = 2560x1440, UHD/4K= 3840x2160, etc...

... is absolutely no different to how qVGA (320x240), VGA (640x480), SVGA (800x600), XGA (1024x768), SXGA (1280x1024), etc, are still named exactly the same after all these years despite not being mainstream anymore. Nor are PAL (720x576) or NTSC (720x480) going to change either just because HDTV / Blu-Ray is a thing. Just because someone bought themselves a new 4k monitor doesn't mean the entire naming system of every other resolution has to be renamed at all. That would be insanely and unnecessarily confusing on an industry level.

 

[AusWolf]

I can tell you that 1080p doesn't look right on a 15.6 screen - Acer laptop.
Ok, I can somehow lower my requirements and say that 1080p on a 13-inch screen can somewhat look acceptable.

And I can tell you that the difference between 4K and 1080p content on my 55" 4K TV is barely noticeable, if at all. Who's experience is right, then?

My conclusion is that you mostly notice differences on smaller screens that you look at from a much closer distance, and mostly when you compare two screens or images.

 

[ARF]

There's still loads of SD content and channels. 720x480 is low res. 1920x1080 is fine for most stuff. For productivity yeah 2x 3840x2160 screens had been great for me. I love it for photoshop and various editing. But for most other stuff it's not that necessary. And we don't have the eyes of an owl. If a screen is far away enough that 4k and 1080p look the same then why waste power driving 2160p? My smaller 4k screen is 40" and I have to have scaling on 175% or things are too small and hard to read. Your comparison of images showing the 1080p one blurry is pointless too as it assumes someone is viewing it at the ideal 4k distance. display it on a 24" 4k screen with 100% scaling and they'll probably look identical unless you press your face up to it.

4k on phones is utterly pointless. The DPI is well above human visual acuity even 1 foot away.

The scaling issues are because someone in Microsoft works badly. Why aren't there any scaling issues with my Android smartphone?

 

[AVATARAT]

This is more like 1920x1080, too... Or 2560x1440, you choose.

I choose 2560x1440 for the Vote, but I use 2560x1080@200Hz UltraWide, and I don't think that I want 4k@60Hz.
I like the highest quality, but I prefer the highest refresh rate

And I think that you can always ask moderators to correct the Vote and to add more resolutions.

 

[ARF]

Nah, I don't know for you but my next notebook will be 15.6" 3840x2160 OLED

 

[Ando]

Due to space issues in my current setup the best I can do is a ~24" monitor. So my only option's were high refresh 1080p panels. I rarely ever actually hit 240fps in the games I play, but it's a nice option to have and the monitor feels very responsive. Just moving the mouse around on screen looks so much nicer than at 60hz.
I guess the market isn't interested in high resolution panels at smaller sizes. They make smaller laptops with 4K screens, so I don't buy the argument that you "need" a larger screen to take advantage of it. On the bright side, I got this one (VG259QM) super cheap on a sale ($230!), and the lower resolution makes it easy to run just about any game. Even if I could, not sure I'd buy another monitor until they make some big changes (OLED that doesn't burn in and is a decent price). I'd just get my second, basic 75hz 1080p monitor I have sitting around now as an extra screen if I get desk space in the future.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I'm going to have to change my vote from 4K60 to 1080p60... boys do I have a tale for you.

My trusty Sony X900F has finally croaked. Symptoms of black screen with backlight uniformity issues. Turns out that it had massive internal damage due to it becoming a huge ant colony somehow.

I've spent the whole day yesterday trying to fix it, dealing with the most fetid and disgusting substance I've ever cleaned or smelt, rat urine is a Dior cologne next to the utterly repulsive odor from whatever these ants dropped in there. It was beyond nauseating, it actually made me feel ill.

Both of the speakers were perforated and converted into ant nests that served as breeding grounds. Larvae and eggs, as well as numerous winged ants inside. Ugh. And lots of that revolting muck. Tcon board housing was also chock full of ants, with muck over the flat cables and even the connectors. It was bad, to say the least.

Not even a mainboard replacement sprung it back to life, now I'm going to have to negotiate a return with the seller or maybe resell the new mainboard myself.

I've ordered a Samsung The Frame 2022 at 32 inches size for a stopgap replacement until my RDNA 3 upgrade. Shame this model is limited to 1080p only. Either ways... my house is going to need some serious pest control. Just wow.

 

[Frick]

The scaling issues are because someone in Microsoft works badly. Why aren't there any scaling issues with my Android smartphone?

Old post, but most of Windows scales fine these days. Not all of it though, old prompts and settings windows do not scale well. But the bigger problem is 3rd part programs and old games. The reason for all of this is Android is a vastly more controlled platform. I can run software from the 90's on Windows 10. I can run games from 1999 on Windows 10. You probably can't run apps made for Android 2 on Android 12, and if you can they might be nigh unusable because they follow old design paradigms.

There was sort of a Windows with all the old stuff cut out: Windows RT. It would probably work better now, but especially at the time a Windows machine which couldn't do all the normal Windows stuff (run Heroes of Might and Magic 3) did not fly. It still wouldn't fly probably. It's one of the main selling points of Windows.

 

[InVasMani]

I'm going to have to change my vote from 4K60 to 1080p60... boys do I have a tale for you.

My trusty Sony X900F has finally croaked. Symptoms of black screen with backlight uniformity issues. Turns out that it had massive internal damage due to it becoming a huge ant colony somehow.

I've spent the whole day yesterday trying to fix it, dealing with the most fetid and disgusting substance I've ever cleaned or smelt, rat urine is a Dior cologne next to the utterly repulsive odor from whatever these ants dropped in there. It was beyond nauseating, it actually made me feel ill.

Both of the speakers were perforated and converted into ant nests that served as breeding grounds. Larvae and eggs, as well as numerous winged ants inside. Ugh. And lots of that revolting muck. Tcon board housing was also chock full of ants, with muck over the flat cables and even the connectors. It was bad, to say the least.

Not even a mainboard replacement sprung it back to life, now I'm going to have to negotiate a return with the seller or maybe resell the new mainboard myself.

I've ordered a Samsung The Frame 2022 at 32 inches size for a stopgap replacement until my RDNA 3 upgrade. Shame this model is limited to 1080p only. Either ways... my house is going to need some serious pest control. Just wow.

So I guess you probably won't be playing sim ant anytime soon. That's a horrifying tale ants are a real nuisance.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Either ways... my house is going to need some serious pest control. Just wow.

I would say so. That's some suckage.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I would say so. That's some suckage.

Indeed, on the bright side, I guess I can save up for the 7950 XT/4090 Ti now, as the 3090 is such overkill for 1080p. I was planning to use the X900F for another 6 months or so and jump to a LG C2, but I just didn't want to use my GPU jar for that right away, so I got this new one instead.

Something tells me I'll live though! I quite liked the design of this one. The input lag seems to be 4 times lower than that of the X900F so I'm going to be satisfied even though it's no high performance gaming monitor, I can reuse it somewhere else down the road.

Samsung The Frame 2022 Review (QN32LS03BBFXZA, QN43LS03BAFXZA, QN50LS03BAFXZA, QN55LS03BAFXZA, QN65LS03BAFXZA, QN75LS03BAFXZA, QN85LS03BAFXZA)

The Samsung The Frame 2022 QLED is a unique TV released in 2022 as part of Samsung's Lifestyle TV lineup. It has a unique design that's meant to look like a piec...

www.rtings.com

So I guess you probably won't be playing sim ant anytime soon. That's a horrifying tale ants are a real nuisance.

I've had enough of ants for a lifetime after that odor and the wriggling ant worms in the muck, I think right now I'd get triggered by Disney's "A bug's life"

 

[ixi]

32, 2k, 175Hz,. After this upgrade which I had some tume ago I wont even look at full hd and lower than 120Hz. 32 size is ideal too. Not too big and not too small.

 

[InVasMani]

Indeed, on the bright side, I guess I can save up for the 7950 XT/4090 Ti now, as the 3090 is such overkill for 1080p. I was planning to use the X900F for another 6 months or so and jump to a LG C2, but I just didn't want to use my GPU jar for that right away, so I got this new one instead.

Something tells me I'll live though! I quite liked the design of this one. The input lag seems to be 4 times lower than that of the X900F so I'm going to be satisfied even though it's no high performance gaming monitor, I can reuse it somewhere else down the road.

Samsung The Frame 2022 Review (QN32LS03BBFXZA, QN43LS03BAFXZA, QN50LS03BAFXZA, QN55LS03BAFXZA, QN65LS03BAFXZA, QN75LS03BAFXZA, QN85LS03BAFXZA)

The Samsung The Frame 2022 QLED is a unique TV released in 2022 as part of Samsung's Lifestyle TV lineup. It has a unique design that's meant to look like a piec...

www.rtings.com

I've had enough of ants for a lifetime after that odor and the wriggling ant worms in the muck, I think right now I'd get triggered by Disney's "A bug's life"

Do them ants over there make my nose look big!!?

 

[Gungar]

I can tell you that 1080p doesn't look right on a 15.6 screen - Acer laptop.
Ok, I can somehow lower my requirements and say that 1080p on a 13-inch screen can somewhat look acceptable.

But, on the smartphones you really get 400 ppi, 500 ppi and higher. Sony produces 6.5-inch 4K screens. Sony Xperia XZ Premium - Full phone specifications (gsmarena.com)

View attachment 260840

I bought the XZ premium when it launched, 800ppi is COMPLETELY useless.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I bought the XZ premium when it launched, 800ppi is COMPLETELY useless.

Nonsense, that's a perfect useful spec.

 

[Arco]

Nonsense, that's a perfect useful spec.

When we upgrade our Mark 1 eyeball, yes.

 

[Dr. Dro]

When we upgrade our Mark 1 eyeball, yes.

I personally won't be happy until the ripperdoc brings the latest generation optics from Arasaka in

Spoiler

...if only the game was as good as the lore

 

[Mr Bill]

I basically only surf the web @71, and a little window shopping, but I really enjoy the 4K nature videos with the soft music on YouTube. My Samsung 4K UE590_U28E590D (DP) monitor just takes me to utopia watching these videos.

 

[sLowEnd]

I haven't really had a need to upgrade over 1080p, so that's what I'm still using.

I might get a higher resolution monitor when micro LED displays become mainstream, but mostly because I suspect manufacturers are keen to move on to higher resolutions for products that aren't bottom of the barrel.

 

[Capitan Harlock]

I'm using on my main pc 3840x2160 and on my second pc 1920x1080. I would like to fix some day my old Philips Monitor that was 16:10 with 1680x1050 .