There are people on this board RIGHT NOW that are still using

>>55846923
Literally the perfect resolution.

>>55846923
Games have better fps without the need to upscale.

>>55846923
Because my phone is only 4.7"
Why should I get a higher resolution?

>>55846938
1440p is the new perfect resolution

What's the ideal screen size for 1440p?
Do movies look weird in that res?

>>55846978
Nah that's retarded you might aswell just go the whole way rather than half-ass it.

>>55846923
how tiny are things on 4k?
they must be fucksmall

>>55846923
Perfect resolution for my 23" display
Don't need a 400$ gpu to play games at 1440p
Just works and isn't a meme
Has good quality

>>55846995
As a 4K user things suck ass, DPI problems everywhere with multiple software, lost count, yeah it's greta having all this space but the downsides to 4K affect me negatively too much than the positives do good so I'm thinking of going back to 1080p as it just works, not too big, not too small and no DPI scaling shit.

>>55846994
no, not if you plan on gaming

>>55846995
>what is scaling

>>55846991
no, they look great. I have a 27" 1440 monitor and the difference from 1080p is quite amazing.

>>55846923
>2016
>not using 1280x1024

>>55847018
thats why you should have gotten a 1440p monitor

i was about to make the same mistake you made, thank god i did a bit more reading and settled on 1440.

Looks amazing, and none of the issues that come with 4k.

>>55847029
You can game fine at 4K 60FPS if you're not a poorfag and have a top of the line GPU.

Need a better GPU before I upgrade to 1440p. My games are already stuttering at 1080p.

>>55847035
I dont really know actually, I suppose youre referring to some theme and display options that would let you upscale text and icons of youre OS

File: 1464626964269.jpg (1MB, 2998x1882px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2998x1882px

>>55846923
I'm using 1366x768

>gaming
grow up

>>55847057
>mfw a resolution from 15 years ago is much better for general computing than today's meme displays
really makes you think

>>55847112
What do you for fun, when you have spare time?

>>55847124
i watch movies

>>55847124
i have a gf

>>55846923
im using 1600x900

>>55847068
what does just fine mean? Cuz you're not getting 60 fps at 4k on ultra. Not on games like witcher 3 at least.

>>55847112
>posts on japanese image board with a bunch of teens and faggots
>tells others to grow up

m8, i dont wanna be the one to break it to you, but ..

File: 900p.jpg (57KB, 758x194px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 758x194px

>>55846923
ok

>>55847135
you dont

and if you do im willing to bet my life she is either fat, ugly, or most likely both.

kys my man

I'm poor

>>55847159
why?

>>55846923

I cannot see the individual pixels from my view point. I wont ever have to upgrade. For the rest of my life I can just buy the crappiest of crap monitors and still have a sweet image.

By the way, I'm using 720x1280 atm because of mobile. Same story. I will just half the resolution of my future phones to save batteries and RAM

>>55846923
vast majority of media is available in 1080p. why do i want to force an upscale when i can play it native.

And here I am, sitting at my 720p craptop.

>>55847185

He just didn't replace his (probably still good) monitor.

>>55847133
>watching movies
grow up

>>55846923
I'm still using 1366x768 T_T

>>55846923
Joke's on you, I have to use 1824x1014 because I can't turn overscan off on this dumbass TV.

Works fine though. Hell, most games and software can pick up my whacky resolution and display it natively.

>>55847223
Lol I love this meme.
"Anyone who enjoys media is a child"

What the fuck do you do for fun? Read Javascript manuals?

>>55846923
I'm on 1366x768, so jokes on you.

Most media is still 1080p.

>>55847241
>Read Javascript manuals?
kek

>>55847255
yes but they still look great on higher resolutions

>>55846923
>1080p
>not superior 1600x1200

Enjoy your non 80s anime

File: poop.png (499KB, 4096x2560px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 4096x2560px

>>55846923

>>55847264
But why spend more on a TV/Monitor when I can just view the shit perfectly at its native resolution?

>>55847241
i fuck my hot gf

>>55846923
I use a 27" 1440p display and it is spot on. Perfect size to work with without any rescaling. It seems like a negligible improvement from 1080p, but it makes a huge difference. 4k on the other hand seems a little over the top. You'd need to go to 40" and at that size the space becomes unpractical and difficult to manage and I'd rather go with two 1080p displays next to each other. Just easier to organise the space.

I have 19" 1440x900 monitor and 5.5" 1440p phone. Is it good?

File: 1468411645235.jpg (311KB, 468x721px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 468x721px

>>55847280
>4096x2304
>2304
kekmao

>>55847312
Indeed, 16:9 is a stupid ratio.

>>55847282
too prove youre not a poor fag, obviously

and to treat your eyes to a better experience

>>55847346
Only poor fags care about buying status symbols to try to appear un-poor. Someone actually well-off won't give a shit what others think and will just buy whatever they like or find to be a good value.

>>55846923

Because there's no reason to go higher than that for HTPC usage yet. That's the only device that's still on that res in my life.

>>55846923
I have an r9 280x, which only has 3GB of memory

>>55847383
it was a joke m8

>>55847424
>amd

lol

>>55847495
Sarcasm is hard to pick up on through text only.

File: 1460317840387.jpg (132KB, 1188x1188px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1188x1188px

>>55847383
>poor people will believe this

Who /1024x768/ here?

>>55846923
No graphics card can handle Ultra at 4K and 144 Hz

Also I'm using 1080p but 21:9

>>55847049
>he honestly thinks that the half-assed upscaling to 1440p makes a significant difference

Placebo effect in all its glory.

>>55847541
1440 son .. whats your excuse?

>>55847542
nigger im looking at it right now and have it setup next to my 1080p benq .. the difference is very noticable

I am using 2560x1080

>>55847563
>what is 1:1 pixel mapping
>what is scaling and loss of fine detail
>what is placebo effect

Watch your fucking blu-ray on a 1080p monitor, nignog :^)

>>55847639
shit nigger my bad i thought you meant the difference between 1080 and 1440 in general

movies do look great though, but obviously its not native so ..

>>55846923
It's too detailed. I like HD better. Who agrees with me?

>>55847676
>too detailed
is this a new meme?

>>55846923
Yep. All I do is shitpost so it's not like I need 4K OLED memes.

>>55847737
>not experiencing dank memes in the highest quality

cant even fucking shitpost right

>>55847659
For 720p res it could actually be better to try watching it upscaled to 1440p due to better mapping, but I'm not so sure about the original 1080p BD.

There's a reason the wise jews in ITU or whoever, jumped from fullHD straight to UHD.

>>55846923
320x200 best resolution yo

>>55847711
no, it's an extension of the "too high FPS" meme

Are there any good cheaper 1440p monitors? I planned on buying Dell U2414H, but if there is something in that price range from 1440p I might get that instead.

>>55847806
ahh i see .. thanks for clearing that up, pal

>>55847752
>high quality
>shitposting
Pick one.

>>55847843
honestly, you should just stick with 1080 unless you can get a top of the line 1440p monitor. That way you can just grab a high end one when they go on sale in a few months or so.

>>55847639
A negligible difference

>>55847843

no

1440p is dying in front of our eyes, every week there are less monitors with it available.

>>55848220
completely baseless claim

File: 1468657726984.gif (2MB, 250x188px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x188px

>>55846923
>tfw using glorious 1200p master race
get shrekt, fags
enjoy you're eye cancer

>>55847123
1600x900 here, bretty good

>>55847104
Mah nigga

>>55846923
1080p is the perfect resolution for 24".

If I had a 27 or bigger I would consider a 1440p.
But I don't so no point aiming higher, expecially since high dpi are handled like a rollecoaster and will still be for some time.

1440p is a dead end resolution that's literally worthless for anything except fucking video games

it is exclusively a resolution for chumps who take video games way too seriously

>>55848347
It seems like 1440p is a weird in between resolution that was made to satisfy people while they wait for to 4k monitors to come out. Similar to how 720p was made to satisfy people while they waited for 1080p monitors to come out.

>>55846923
4k is shit on anything under 31".
Hopefully 4k will never ever replace 1080 masterrace on pc screens.

>>55847241
Do you realize it applies to video games too?

>>55848347
>dead end resolution

what the fuck does this even mean faggot

>>55846923
Don't fix what ain't broken, i'll reconsider next time i do an upgrade.

1080p works well. I don't need to upgrade.

>1440p 144hz IPS monitors exist
>but not 1080p

FUCK.

>>55846923
I'l consider 4k when the technology gets cheaper and there are GPUs that can manage 4k 60fps without compromising on settings heavily for new demanding releases.

3 1080 monitors do a good enough job for me now. If I am to upgrade to 4K then I will need a large monitor at least 32" to consider it a worthy upgrade for around 1 meter viewing distance.

I'd probably keep at least 1 1080 monitor in portrait mode for multitasking when my main monitor is in full screen mode. 2 monitors seems to be the sweet spot, I rarely ever use all 3 at once productively.

Tempted, but I need to ease on the spending and wait until it is sensible to adopt 4K.

>>55848664
1440p is pretty sexy m8, and i can play 60fps at ultra on everything .. i plan on getting another one and just using these for at least a year and half before i consider anything 4k

>>55846938
>>55846978
>perfect
>16:9
no

>>55847057
>not 2560x2048

>>55847536
My laptop's 1024x768. I'm going to upgrade it to 1400x1050

File: flat_screen_lcd.jpg (254KB, 2504x916px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 2504x916px

>>55846923
>>55848461

Corrected. No point in going 4k because I'm not retarded enough to game with my nose against a 34 inch

because alot of people are perfectly fine with 1080p

File: terry.jpg (321KB, 1971x1971px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 1971x1971px

>>55846923

was anyone else as underwhelmed as me when they went from 1080p to 1440p?

maybe my expectations were too high, but after using the monitor for a few days, it seemed 'normal'. hell, even the size itself (27") doesn't seem big anymore

>>55848918
27 doesn't seem big, it makes everything else seem small

>>55848483
it means no media will ever be in this
it serves no productive purpose
it literally exists for gamerz

what about 9:16 displays?

>>55848925
fair enough, I have my old 1080p 24" beside it, and it honestly seems like it's 22" now

>>55848932
Too tall and too thin

>>55846923
I'm a poor Yuropoorian.
1080p is all I can afford.

>>55847231
1824x1026, I'm right there with you anon
and it frees up VRAM and is easier on GPU than 1080

>>55848961
You're not missing much

>>55846923

I think 2560x1440 or 2560x1600 are the best solutions right now. Larger than 1920x1080 / 1920x1200, and you can do just fine without scaling.

>>55846978
That's not 1600p.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (243KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1920x1080px

someone photoshop a tiny chiny chubby on this please thanks

Phone uses 2560x1440 laptop uses 1366x768...
Such is life

File: 1469976987104.png (129KB, 3466x1724px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 3466x1724px

>>55849000

File: Screenshot_20160731-080436.png (182KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1080x1920px

>>55846923
>Not browsing on 1080p
Lol what are you, some sort of pleb? :^)

I have two perfectly good 1680x1050 monitors

>>55849101
meta-humor is not funny

>>55847141
You can get 60FPS in 4K in TW3 with 1080 SLI, though to be fair it does drop into the 50s in a few places, still overall very smooth and absolutely gorgeous.

File: YrMVM69.jpg (192KB, 717x880px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 717x880px

>>55849101

>>55846965
he meant for computers you fucking ingredient

>>55849358
hair works off maybe .. but then thats not really ultra .. either way its definitely not smooth 60 fps. Also, never been a fan of SLI, i'd rather wait for the single card that can run it. Until then however getting a 4k monitor for gaming is pretty stupid. 1440p is the best alternative. Looks great and stable 60 fps with hairworks on.

File: 144hz.png (7KB, 302x89px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 302x89px

>>55846923
>144hz monitors
i have a 1080p 144hz monitor.
4k 144hz 1ms response monitors don't exist. call me when they do
144hz>shards of glass in my eyeballs>60hz

>>55849267
>>55849379

And yet the point is valid. At a certain point, additional resolution is just retarded.

>>55846923
>4k
>isn't 4k
They can't keep getting away with this

>>55848873
My 21:9 34" is pretty comfy.

File: witcher3_2016_07_31_18_41_08_738.jpg (4MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3840x2160px

>>55849432
It drops more often with hairworks on, but still holds 60FPS most of the time. I dropped hairworks though, barely makes any difference at all and doesn't even apply to NPCs, not even important ones. It's pretty shit, AMD managed to get the same sort of results with TressFX in the original TR without murdering performance. If Hairworks was actually decent tech maybe they could've used it for more than Geralt and Roach and the occasional wolf or bear.

>>55846938
You fucking faggot try 1920x1200

i've got a 1080p 144hz 2ms 55 inch tv as my pc monitor. mostly because i use my pc from my bed, about 4-5 meters away. when a 4k res tv that's >50" doesn't cost the same as a new car, i'll jump at it.

7680×4320 is the best.

>>55849680
If you want a lagfest with no content available

>>55846938
this

>>55849620
idk m8, it was quite a noticeable difference to me.

i have my 1440 144hz and its an absolute pleasure to play on. I can hold off on 4k for a while

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (326KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 1920x1080px

>>55849620
>>55849725
forgot the pic

>>55849745
are both supposed to look like shit?

>>55849680
sli titan p : - )

>>55847068
>I get 4K 60fps with my single GPU because I'm rich
Found the guy who's still on Kepler and doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about

>>55849745
How about you post some actual in-game screenshots as opposed to NVIDIA's promo shit.

>>55847280
>>55846923
4k is perfect for video as it scales 720 and 1080 perfectly, however, UI is to fucking small, making it useless for anything that won't scale (plenty of program i use are old to the point they won't) and I play games in windowed mode, I currently have a 1920x1200 display, and play games at 1920x1080, doing this on 4k would make the game unplayable unless there is a way to scale games up in windowed mode in gpu drivers, not sure there is.

gaming on 4k is nightmarish currently, nothing gives you 4k60

also, and this is what i have learned through use,

async display > contrast > fps > resolution in that order of importance.

>>55846923
My eyes can'tsee more than 720p.

>>55849903
its even more noticeable in game than in this pic faggot

>>55846923
22" LED Monitor, 1080p, don't need anything else on my i3. It just werks.

>>55850067
>UI is to fucking small
Only on your shitty OS.

The rest of this post is pure cancer too.

>>55847104
>not 1360x768

>>55850112
>either

>>55848763
>My laptop's 1024x768. I'm going to upgrade it to 1400x1050
how
serious question
can you really change out panels that easily to upgrade resolution? is it really that easy? i never would have thought that possible.

File: Captain_Picard_Patrick_Stewart_Middle_Finger-300x229.jpg (13KB, 300x229px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x229px

>>55846923
fuck you i still use 640x480

>>55850264
Easily, you simply replace the actual screen with another of the same size but higher pixel density (resolution).
As long as you unscrew & disconnect it all properly, its easy as hell to connect a new screen and it'll work as if nothing had changed.

>>55850264
>how
By swapping the panels, it's not something every laptop can do. It just happens that my laptop uses the same screen as an x60t so mine can also accept the higher res IPS panel available for the ThinkPad

>>55847201
And>>55847287
Why is your right hand hot?

>>55850334
>>55850355
Thanks senpai. I'm going to try to find a better display for mine.
I've swapped hundreds of screens probably, but somehow ever thought about doing this...

>>55850394
>senpai
meant to type senpai.
i need to stop shitposting on /a/ and /g/ on the same monitor.

File: muhres.png (108KB, 1280x1048px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1280x1048px

>>55846923
I am fine with my 1280x1080. it's perfect for web

>>55850419
F.a.m. is replaced by senpai because of Chinese moot

4K is too large for my preferences and 1080 is too small so I'm just gonna stick with my 1440p.
Haters gonna hate, I guess.

>>55850464
Oh, I could have sworn I typed f.a.m.
I was starting to question my sanity there for a second...
Chink moot needs to fuck off.

>>55846923
1920x1080 res screens still represent the best products for their value. They have better and more stable performance than 2K screens, they aren't overpriced and they don't look worse, unless you want a huge monitor.

>>55850499
>better and more stable performance
?

File: 1465961566608.gif (793KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

793KB, 400x400px

Can I drive a 4K monitor at native resolution without having to resort to cabling antics to get the full picture? I recall the earliest 4k monitors requiring dual DVI/HDMI to drive at full resolution.

>>55846923
There are people using lower resolutions. They're called iPhone users.

>>55850493
1440 is the sweetspot

>>55850565
>implying that's a bad thing
FullHD and higher on phones is fucking stupid

>>55846923
Because it's what I have, and I have no inclination to get a new display while this one works.

>>55846923
>960x540
Pffft I can't see that shit

>>55850499
>They have better and more stable performance than 2K screens, they aren't overpriced and they don't look worse
nigger you dont even have a 2k monitor so what are you basing these claims on? Im looking at one right now with a 1080p monitor next to it. It looks way better firstly, and the performance is top notch.

>>55850551
DP has supported 4k over one cable for years now.
HDMI now supports 4k60.
No worries now.

>>55847135
AHAHAHAHA yeah sure and blacks are okay

File: Screenshot_2016-07-31-10-01-48.png (302KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 1440x2560px

>>55850585
What, you don't like using nearly 3/4 of your battery on the screen?

>>55850565
>iPhone users
Yes, teenage girls

>>55846923

There are people on this board who still arnt running 12k

Explain yourself

>>55847057
fucking this

>>55850627
Why would anyone want that high of a resolution on a fucking phone? My phone has a 720p display and I can't see pixels unless I literally put my eyeball on my screen. Any higher and you're falling for memes.

>>55850676
What's your pixels per inch density? I'm running 538ppi on a 5.5" screen.

File: IMG_20160731_120618.png (59KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 720x720px

>>55850627
Exactly

>>55850746
About 294.

Poorfag

>>55848956
Too bad that the default graphics are a mid-tier AMD with 2GB of VRAM and the default processor is only an i5 and you need to pay hundreds to upgrade them..

>>55850863
Then you need contacts if you don't see pixels, or need to stop holding the phone a meter from your face.

>>55849419
But my phone is a computer.

>>55849620
People who think this game looks good are deluded. Those trees and bushes look fake, like they aren't part of the scene, they look like a shitty Photoshop job.

Fampei

>>55846923
That's UHD you dumbfuck.
Speaking of it, it isn't ready to be ran by only one card yet. Maybe Pascal Titan X or the thing they're saving in case Vega is another Hawaii will do it, but there is no reason to move into such a resolution unless you really need the screen estate.
1440p is the nice sweet spot and things like Vega and fat Pascal will deliver a more satisfying experience, especially on higher refresh monitors. When Vega and a non shit high refresh freesync monitor come out, then I will switch my main monitor.

Sage.

>>55846923
I'm not though
>1366x768 masterrace

>>55851448
youre retarded .. that picture is shitty but the game looks fucking amazing

stop being a faggot contrarian

>>55851467
That's a photo comparing aspect ratios, you dumbfuck.

>>55851467
i have 1440 faggot

File: high dpi 1200p.png (546KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 1920x1200px

>>55848873
Heh, you could've at least found a 16:10 monitor if you was gonna use my image.
You do know you can scale things properly in Linux, OSX and Windows 10 right?

File: high dpi native.png (606KB, 5120x3200px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 5120x3200px

>>55851495
And this is how it looks like if I don't scale it down to fit 1200p.

>>55851484
I'm not being contrarian for the sake of it, I really think it looks bad.

>>55851506
what a waste of resources.
Jesus fuck. 1920x1200 is all you need.

>>55851522
>640K is more than anyone will ever need

>>55851522
Waste of resource?
Yes, it's indeed a waste of resource to have a high-end GPU and monitor and not making use of it.

File: 2934897-tw3-2.jpg (1MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1440px

>>55851513

File: Снимок экрана (20).png (393KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

393KB, 1366x768px

>>55846923
There are people on this board RIGHT NOW that are still using 1366x768.

But I already ordered muh 4k IPS screen.

>>55847068
I'd rather game at 1440p with 144hz.

>>55847018
You probably bought a meme tier 28 inch 4k monitor. That's where you fucked up friendo. You should have gotten a 40 inch 4k monitor with 0 scaling problems and grandiose amounts of screen real estate.

>tfw 1024x576

Because GT640

File: ss.jpg (3MB, 5120x3200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 5120x3200px

>>55851562
Hope you like it, my cyka blyat.

File: 1469395906701.png (115KB, 444x425px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 444x425px

>>55851535
>posting false citations

>>55851860
>not getting the point
Whether or not it's a true citation it's a good example of why it's retarded to say such a thing.

>>55851882
Why?
800x600 was more than enough back in 1995, why use a higher res?

>>55852077
More workspace, higher pixel density, because we can, etc.

File: samsung 957mb 1920x1440 back in 2001.jpg (22KB, 300x296px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x296px

>>55852086
It was a sarcastic reply to >>55852077 because he thinks 1920*1200 is enough.

It wasn't enough back in 2001, it isn't now either.

>using 1080p
you people make me sick

>>55847124
>The only possible way of having fun is with toys for children
>inb4 B-UT GAYMS ARE A N-NEW ARTFORM

>>55852223
>he still watches TV

When you are finally going to grow up and stop watching your little shows, anon?

I>>55846923
I'm on 1600:900

File: 1469921749967.jpg (24KB, 317x284px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 317x284px

>>55846923
>Mfw still using 1366*768

>>55846923
I want to get a 1440p 144Hz IPS panel but I'm poor so I'm running a 1080p and 1680x1050 dual monitor setup. Doubt I'm going to fit a 27 inch 1440p monitor next to my current 1080p monitor next to each other anyways

>>55846923
Been running 2560x1600 on a 30" monitor since 2004. 12 years on and I feel no need to change it.

File: Untitled.png (3MB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1200px

1200p is nice.

>>55850111
rather have the ui not scale and have a large enough monitor for productivity.

>>55852914
drink chlorine and die

File: 1463769135588.jpg (155KB, 600x480px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 600x480px

>>55846938

Speak for yourself I'm using 1366x768and have been since 2011.

>>55853073
Are you actually claiming 1366x768 is perfection?

>>55851595
40" 4K = 0 scaling problems how exactly?

File: 1449806283176.gif (482KB, 440x250px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 440x250px

>>55853086

No. I was actually replying to the OP but my link got fucked up for some reason.

>>55853105
Its about the same pixel density as 27inch 1440p, its just bigger.

I don't get why you faggots are concern with screen quality for video size. 1080 HD is more than enough quality! Look at the fucking difference between 1080 1440 and 4K they're both the same good quality no matter the difference. 4K is just too much though because there's infinite pixels that it'll just show making it seem like it's edit it in mspaint or something.

I'm not a stupid no life tech cuck who wastes all his money on the newest consumerist product. 1080p is the standard resolution right now.

1080p is fine for me. Don't plan on moving to a higher resolution for a long time.

Though I do find it amusing that my cell phone has a higher resolution than my TV and pc monitors.

Seriously? Just FUCK OFF WITH YOUR STUPID RESOLUTIONS

>>55853132
>3 things
>both

>same no matter the difference

>4K has infinite pixels

Man, you sure sound like an intelligent individual who I should listen to.

>>55853155
4K RESOLUTIONS

The funny thing is that they also have 60hz monitors at 1080 with a fucking 980ti or greater. LMAO. Fucking retards

>>55853155
Were you aware that you can hide threads? It makes so it's like they don't even exist! Now that you are aware, hide the thread and go away.

>>55847321
Golden Ratio is the correct name

>>55853130
that pixel density is desirable somehow?

am I the only one who thinks 1080p just looks more 'real' ?

4K is a meme. The Hollywood movies that are shot on 35mm film require 18K monitor in order to view them in full depth. Anything lower is considered a degrade.

Until the future arrives we must enjoy what we got. Also should mention some movies such as clockwork orange were shot on 55mm film.

>>55846923
>4K (3840x2160)
eat shit and die, faggot

>>55846995
>screen size increases
>things get smaller
explain this retard logic to me please

>>55853247
Its the perfect density for windows and allows you to not deal with the gay ass scaling associated with it.

>>55846923
But I'm using a 3840x2160 monitor alongside a 1080p monitor.

>>55846923
Good enough, cheap as fuck

>>55851595
>You should have gotten a 40 inch 4k monitor with 0 scaling problems and grandiose amounts of screen real estate.
And shitty quality. Personally I think 30" 4K is about the sweet spot quality-wise, though it depends on your viewing distance (as usual).

Really, you should try and go for about 1 pixel per arcminute. this is pretty much *the* sweet spot when it comes to perception of quality

>>55853407
>shitty quality.
What the fuck are you talking about, that's still ~110 PPI, and with 30 inches you get the problems associated with scaling.

>>55853429
>problems associated with scaling
I've been using a 1 px/am setup for a few years now and have not really had any issues.

Even unscaled content is big enough to be readable if you concentrate, but really, most applications just work fine out of the box on my end. (Mind you, I use Linux though)

>>55846923
Laptop is over seven years old. Can't really afford a new one since all my swagbucks are going out on my girlfriends health. 1080p is pretty chill in my opinion, I'ma be worried about getting neck issues just from looking at anything bigger for prolonged times, lol.

File: 1462558622055.jpg (21KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 400x400px

>>55846923
I'll grab a 4k monitor before my GTX 1080 arrives, but greatness should be reserved for us rich kids. The plebs shouldn't even get to see it before we consider it old shit.

File: biggrisgay.jpg (175KB, 1280x1024px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 1280x1024px

1280x1024 is perfect, anything below or above is pointless.
prove me wrong.

>Tfw I went with 1080 144Hz

You don't know what you're missing.

60 fps looks like blurry shit now, meanwhile a bit extra screen space ain't nothing special

>>55846923
Saved up 5k for a new battlestation but bought a motorbike instead, a new monitor would have been included in that setup.

Because no 1ms 144hz 4k yet

>>55853538
m8 why did you fall for the 1080 meme if you plan on gaming at 4k? youre not getting stable 60 fps with that on 4k. Should have waited tbqh

>>55853610
>not 1440 144hz

poor scum
dont brag with your hood rich monitor nigger

File: 1462896397245.jpg (68KB, 647x711px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 647x711px

>>55848347

Editing video and photography it is absolutely relevant to me.

>>55849504
my niggah. once you go 144hz regular 60hz screens give you the bleeds

>>55846923
I'm using 1200p
16:10 Master race.
Why are there no 16:10 4k monitors?

I'm a poorfag.

>>55848461
Serious question, is 4K not that good on a 27 inch screen?

>>55855032
no, if youre gonna get a 27 inch get 1440

1080p master race.

>>55853298
what is screen resolution

File: fov.png (147KB, 1427x1675px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 1427x1675px

>>55855117
field of view

>>55846923
I'm not a richfag nigga like u are senpai

>>55855140
Irrelevant

>>55855211
>ITU-R irrelevant
topkek. Feel free to stop consuming media at any time

>>55855232
I'm not saying that it's entirely irrelevant, just irrelevant to the question at hand. FoV has absolutely nothing to do with it.

>>55855072
Why is that? I'm just curious

>>55849419
>>55851447
Deine mutter ist computet heheheheh

>>55855360
deine mutter spielst auf mein mannschaft. MEIN MAN-SHAFT

>>55855268
but it does. In cinema and broadcasting/television, you're supposed to keep the size of the pixels the same but increase your screen size as the resolution goes up

>>55855809
hell, even for office work it makes no real sense to decrease the size of pixels. For productivity, you want more resolution to equal more working area.

Decreasing the size of pixels significantly below ITU-R guidelines has no real practical benefit except maybe for CJK fine print

>>55854323
>waiting

>>55855032
What's that supposed to mean? It's amazingly sharp and as such provides great image quality. The issue is that you need to use some sort of DPI scaling because using it at 100% will generally make things too small to be comfortable and neither Windows nor Linux have great scaling as of now.

>>55846923
1080p 144hz.
Easy to maintain good frame rates while turning on the eye candy.

GTX-1080 at 1080p it's perfect

Been running the same 2 monitors for years.
And if they broke today Id rather get two 1080 monitors then one high rez monitor

>>55847068
I need at least 200 fps tho

Graphics cards aren't having problems hitting 60fps at 1440p now, so I wonder:

What would be better? A 60hz monitor, or a 144hz monitor using freesync?

>>55856680
A 4k television

>>55846923
1440p ,144hz, 1ms. I own three of these things and they're literally all I'll be needing for a display for a long time. Amazing stuff tbqh.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009769

>>55853538
>titan xp releases in a couple of days
You're more stupid than rich.

I value framerate and smoothness above resolution.

You HAVE to check high refresh rate screens in a store or something for yourself.

Seriously, 90+ fps is when things are are really smooth. Nowadays I have trouble going to the cinema and seeing all the blur in fast paced shots.

Just by moving a simple window around and switching between 60 Hz and 144 Hz you can see the difference.

There is not a single graphic card on the market that allows constant 90+ FPS in most games at 1080P+ resolutions. Maybe in two years.

>>55857219
>There is not a single graphic card on the market that allows constant 90+ FPS in most games at 1080P+ resolutions. Maybe in two years.
This is fucking wrong and stupid, fuck you.

>>55848545
If it's any consolation >60Hz IPS looks like shit.

>>55857254
Isn't that what black frame insertion is for?

File: 1443928077376.gif (2MB, 235x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 235x240px

>>55857245
I didn't mean to upset you. Please which single graphic solution allows me to play The Witcher 3, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Shadow of Mordor, Lords of the Fallen, Mirror's Edge Catalyst, Dragon Age: Inquisition on top of my head without at constant 90+ FPS in high resolutions (I hope you understand the keyword here is "constant", meaning no dips since I value smoothness)

I'm waiting, I may be wrong but I'll be waiting for your response or another anon's nonetheless.

>>55847185
i want to have 60fps minimum when dx12 and vulkan became a norm as nvidia has no async and dx12 and vulkan and will just rely on brute force

>>55857389
>Most games came out last year? MOST GAMES?! Fuck off. Also you didnt specify what sort of settings you want to run outside of resolution. I can play Witcher 3 at high settings with a GTX 1080 at constant 90 fps with my 1080. I can max out D44M and get 130 fps. Every game in my library on Steam can be maxed out at 1440p and still get above 90 fps. Sure games like GTA 5 may see some trouble getting there but aside from that and maybe Crysis 3 and shitty optimized games. I cant think of anything that dips below 90 fps with a minimum of high settings on my 1080 on my 1440p monitor. MOST GAMES will run at 90 fps and above on a 1080. MOST.

>>55857686
Didn't mean to greentext btw.

>>55846923
After using 2560x1600 for the last year I don't think I can ever go back. 1080p is so fucking bad I feel like I'm gonna go blind.

>>55856568
>GTX-1080 at 1080p
What a fucking moron.

>>55847159
well at least you'll always get 60fps+ with every setting cranked out the ass

there's also DSR so

>>55857748
not really, not if he wants 144fps+ in every game

>>55846923
its a laptop

>>55859746
Even worse

Im still using 720p

>>55846923
>tfw when I'm still using 1366*768

>>55849000
8K monitor exist for cinema production.
I've seen a model you connect with 16 DVI dual link. The monitor is also 10 bit.

>>55860124
8K projectors are not uncommon

>>55849000
Holy shit this file is all over the place

>4K UHD
Ambiguous. ‘4K’ is intentionally avoided in the UHD specs because it conflicts with the already preexisting DCI 4K standards.

>5K UHD
>6K UHD
Not even a thing that exist anywhere

>collapse 1080p to just ‘FHD’ but need to include the pixel count when referring to UHD
why even

>file name says “4K SHD”
what is that even supposed to mean. what the fuck

>>55846923
Yeah, fucking weirdos - real men use 1050p

>>55846978
>imblyng 1600p isn't the best
what

>>55846923
I have no reason to upgrade. My vision is beyond 20/60 so I wouldn't be able to see any difference.

>>55855726
Du werdest auf meine wurst erstricken!

>>55846965
Vr. That's pretty much the only reason for that high a resolution on a phone.

1080p is best at 24", 1440p at 27", 4K at 30". Prove me wrong.

>pro tip: you can't because it's an opinion

>>55846923
I use 900p. The monitor was really cheap and it gives me a slight increase in fps that I think is more important than the slightly worse dpi. I'd upgrade if you gave me a free monitor, but I don't see any big issues with using the resolution I have now.

>768p bc poorfag

>>55861668
>768p
1024x768? 1600x768? 1366x768? 1360x768? You should really just type out the resolution, it's not that difficult.

>>55861104
>4K at 30"
>1080p at 24"
you fail at basic math

if 4K was best at 30" then 1080p would be best at 15"

it's fucking linear

>>55851410
People don't even bring up the right argument when it comes to paying to upgrade their Apple computers.

the real issue is if you pay for an iMac that comes with an i5 but then before checking out you decide to go with the i7 you not only paid for the original price of the i5 but then paid for a whole separate i7 and they aren't even going to send you a smaller box with the core i5 you already paid for!

It's not a simple pay the difference, it's buy two things and only get one bullshit! Sorry for the awful run-on sentence, I'm on mobile.

>>55860316
>VR on a phone

>>55861682
He means 1366p and you know it.

1080p 144hz
Waiting for 1440p 144hz IPS monitors to drop

>>55847018
>>55846995
>not understanding scaling
are we seriously going to have the same discussion that happened with the retina iPhone and the rMBP?

do you people have learning disabilities or something?

>>55862149
I don't know which he means. He could very well have meant 1024x768.

>>55862149
>1366p
not even a resolution

>>55862151
i have one bro, what are you waiting for

>3360x2100 Masterrace

>>55846923
i'm poor

>>55862360
Not him but one with decent display quality would be nice

The current >60 Hz IPS panels are all gamer trash. Anyway, I wouldn't buy IPS at all at this point in time - rather wait for OLED

>>55861745
I'm not taking just about pixel density. Obviously you wouldn't want a 15" monitor on your desktop. My opinion is based on what gives the best experience

File: 1468095291046.gif (2MB, 403x234px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 403x234px

>>55857686
Well, I sure didn't expect someone who can play at 1080p+ resolutions to play older games.

Of course since we're talking high end I thought it would be obvious that I'm talking Ultra graphics settings.
I pointed out 6 games that I recently played that even a GTX 1080 can't keep up with at high resolutions without dips sub 90 fps.
Moreover, playing Doom at high FPS is not an achievement. (I concede that may be moving the goal post at this point though)

I will proceed to head back to other activities.

You sure got angry there.

File: Capture.png (78KB, 786x237px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 786x237px

>>55847159
+1

>>55849745
Where's the difference? Am I supposed to see any?^

File: trumpgoldenratiofibonacci.jpg (58KB, 600x371px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 600x371px

>>55846923
1920x1200 master race

>>55862549
>The current >60 Hz IPS panels are all gamer trash
>gamer trash

serious question .. why the fuck would you get a 144hz monitor if you didnt plant on gaming?

>>55863036
yes you blind fucking gook

>>55863187
First of all, just because I don't want gamer trash doesn't mean I won't use something to play games. It just means I don't want gamer trash.

Secondly, there are plenty of movie situations in which you'd have moving images: e.g. movies or animations

>>55863213
ahh, i see .. you have no idea what youre talking about

>>55863518
stay cucked gamertrash