Affordable 5K monitor when? I want 1440p equivalent working space,

>buying a meme resolution monitor

No this wasn't me H, it was some other fucking meme

5k is the new 1920x1200, it will never be reasonably priced compared to 4k UHD.

>>56933665
Does your government make you buy a TV license for that monitor Britbongistani?

>>56933706
Yes.

File: 800px-Sadiq_Khan.jpg (130KB, 800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 800x1200px

>>56933720
>mfw I use your tax money to build a madrassa that teaches anti-white terrorism

>>56933706
I don't pay TV license, can't wait for the day they come whining at my door about it all. Also can't wait for them to make it so I need a license for internet shit, fuck

That's a very reasonable price. It's what the U2711 cost when I got my three.

>>56933706
No. We need a license if we watch or record live TV, by any means. We don't need one simply because we have devices that could theoretically display TV.

>>56933833
If I were a photo/video editor, this would be a very reasonable investment. But I'm not. I'm a programmer and I get along just fine with a LoDPI display. I just want it, because I want my desktop's text to be as sharp as my tablet's.

personally I want a 5k ultrasharp IPS for 200$
Skypes aren't getting a penny of my money until then.

5k is hard because the ubiquitous video connector standards can barely handle 4k@60Hz, and 5k is quite a bit harder.

if i remember correctly, there's no standard that can do 5k at 120Hz right now. not even on the horizon. it's kind of fucked.

i have a 4k monitor that does 30Hz (and another that does 60Hz) and honestly in the context of coding and shit it doesn't matter, but i acknowledge that 4k's not going to be mainstream until 4k is relatively trivial to push along a wire. i'm not saying that's the thing limiting it now, but they'll probably kind of coincide

>>56933724
allahu ackbar

>>56933665
isn't 27-inch 5k retarded?? shouldn't it be at least 32-inch to make sense?

>>56934663
You just need to connect two DP cables instead of one. Any graphics card that can usefully power it has at least two DP1.2 ports, so I don't really see the issue.

>>56935681
It's to be used at 2x scale. So 2560x1440 effective working space, but sharp ("retina", in apple language).

buy a 4K monitor and scale it 150%

Just buy a 4K
Your workspace doesn't get much bigger as you have to keep text legible anyway

>>56935860
OS X only supports integer scaling. And anything else hardly supports it at all.

>>56935877
You don't quite follow. Let's say I get a 4K monitor.

* If it's small and I set it to 2x scale, it becomes a HiDPI 1920x1080 workspace. Sharp, but too constraining.

* If it's large and I set it to 1x scale, it stays a LoDPI 3840x2160 workspace. Tons of space, but blurry.

I want a sharp 1440p workspace, which means I want 5120x2880 at roughly 27".

>>56935945
>OS X only supports integer scaling. And anything else hardly supports it at all
This is not true

>>56936025
How do I do it? I was the one who recommended 150% scaling but I just tried it with my macbook and only options were 1080, 4K, or really small. SwitchResX?

>>56935945
>it stays a LoDPI 3840x2160 workspace. Tons of space, but blurry.
it shouldn't be blurry if it's an UHD monitor. It should be small, but "normal", since it's just native resolution.

it might get blurry with non-integer scaling like running 1440p scaled on a UHD monitor

I have a P2415Q albeit using only Windows. I use it at 2x, which is sharp and good. 1.5x works 90% of the time and is sharp as well (with more workspace) but not all programs handle non-integer scaling well so you can only do 1x or 2x

>>56936400
>It should be small, but "normal", since it's just native resolution.
That's right. That's what I consider blurry. Put an iPad or a 5K iMac or really any HiDPI screen next to a regular monitor, and tell me the "normal" one doesn't look blurry as shit in comparison.

File: 1475632897570.png (64KB, 734x1108px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 734x1108px

>tfw no 5120x2880/3840x2400 monitors EVER

Get the 27 inch 1440p DELL I have it it's amazing

>>56936770
Not Dell, but I do have a 27" 1440p. It's solid but it's the current year! We should have 200ppi minimum.