Search results

After getting used to the high density PPI of phones and Retina screens on the MacBook Pro, even my HP Spectre glossy (The only gloss 4K ATM) 32" 4K looks not-so-great up close, 2-2.5ft away it looks 90% as good though. For me IMO 4K is best suited for 27-30" and 5K for 32-40" and 8K for 55"...

I guess I better start saving up for 2 1080 Tis and the monitor itself... But the lack of 8K content, the PPI would be amazing. 400-500% scaling should be enough to get same text size as 27" 1080p only much sharper. The PPI on my 32" 4K still isn't quite high as I'd like it to be and I don't...

I have a 32" glossy 4K and its the perfect size. Not too big or too small. Anything bigger will be too big though. Also have a 24" 1440p 144hz modded to make it glossy. 4K is nice but 144hz is better for gaming. 4K for browsing and movies.

Would love a 32" 8K monitor. No bigger than that. Imagine the super high PPI and clarity you would get and 32" is a good size without being overwhelming. It would be like looking out a window. Lack of 8K content tho...

Even 32" is really pushing it for me, I would prefer 30" and just run higher scaling. High PPI looks nice as well. I prefer sitting closer (about 2-3 feet) so I can enjoy the high PPI and crispness. Really depends on what you're going to use the monitor for.

I have 32" glossy 4K and would prefer 30" or perhaps that 27" 5K Glossy Dell but 27" is a little small, still pretty big though compared to my old 21.5 1080p. I could go back to 27" and get used to it again and be happy with it. 32" is the max for me because I sit pretty close to actually enjoy...

HP Spectre 32. It's an IPS 8-bit AUO panel.

Increase scaling. I run 150% on my 32" and ran 200% on the matte 27" while colors were poor I did miss the sharp text. Glossy was a mandatory so 32" is high enough PPI but I still want higher, Pixels can still be just barely visible. I want no pixels visible. Hence why I'm considering a 27" 5K...

27-32" and no higher. 27" ideally for 4K and 32" for 5K. I went with a 32" glossy 4K as its the only gloss 4K. Returned 2 Matte 27" 4K due to poor colors. At 32" the PPI still isn't as high as I'd like it to be. Really been considering a 27" 5K Glossy UP2715K as the prices have come down. I...

Well if you want to reduce reflections without matte you need Anti-Reflective coating on a glossy screen, It's that greenish/purplish coating on high-end eye glasses and camera optics. The only monitors that use this are the Nixeus Vue 1440p and the EXTREMELY expensive Dell UP2715K 5K monitor...

I have been considering that. Sadly It's discontinued but I found a few on Amazon for $800 refurbished. I could use that with my 32" 4K. The 5K will be mainly for browsing, reading due to high PPI being like printed paper. The 32" 4K is for gaming and movies.

High resolution with scaling is actually easier on eyesight than low res with no scaling. I use 4K and Windows 7 with 150% scaling and everything is more readable and sharp than my old 24" 1080p.

So I've been using a 32" 4K Glossy and would like something with higher PPI while keeping the 32" size (27 is too small and 40 is too big) 32" is a good middle ground. Are there ANY 32" glossy 5K out there yet?

Yeah, once you get used to a truly high density display It's hard to go back. What we need is a 32" 5K 2880p so we can have 27" 4K PPI on a larger panel. Although I feel that 32" 4K is to a point where it can be considered "Good enough" my 27" 1440p looks like a pixelated mess now.

32" @ 150% scaling is a lot more desktop real estate than a 27" 1440p. It's the same as 32" 1440p real estate. It's the same PPI as a 21" 1440p. Yeah, higher refresh rate would be nice. I have a 32" glossy 4K and would really prefer a higher hz but It's hard to go back to anything less than...

Also have to take into consideration that you can only sit so far back before things get blurry even with 20/20 vision. I'd say no bigger than 32" at the maximum. You also lose pixel density the bigger you go. 32" 4K is 140 PPI which is the sweet spot IMO with 150% scaling.

Too bad there are no glossy 27" 1440p 240hz. 1440p is a bit pixelated at 32" IMO and Matte looks boring and lifeless. There is no luster. 32" is better suited for 4K.

The HP Spectre 32 uses the exact same panel as this display and It's glossy so it looks much more true to life, hence why eye glasses are glossy and not matte. Reflections can be an issue though.

Far as the size issue goes, could always go 32" for the middle ground between 27" and 40" for a good balance of pixel density, immersion, real estate.

I have a 27" 4K and a 32" 4K. I run 150% scaling and it looks exactly the same as 24" 1080p, only a lot sharper and clear. Text is like printed paper. You can also use a program called NoSquint Plus and that really helps.

Perhaps 32" 4K? you still get "good" pixel density, It's the same as a 21" 1440p so It's pretty decent. Far as if I had to chose between 32" 2K or 27" 2K, I'd chose 27". 32" is better suited for 4K IMO.

24" is a little small for my tastes. Not very much immersion. At 27" though you get more immersion and it looks the same at 2-3 viewing distance. What I'm saying is I prefer no lower than 140 PPI which is 32" 4K, 27" is 163 PPI and 24" is 180 PPI. Both my 32" and 27" look good but the 40" looked...

I have had monitors sizes from 24" to 40"... Don't get a 40" for gaming up close, you will get eye strain. I returned the 40" for this reason and because of lack of pixel density, 40" 4K is same as 27" 1440p which isn't good IMO after using a true high PPI display (140 and above). I have a 32"...

If you use scaling with 27-32" 4K then it looks really good. Everything has that smooth "retina" look.

Not always. For some games max settings does make a difference. Really depends on the game. Resolution must always be at max though or else it'll look upscaled.

32" 4K is 138 PPI what is the same as 21.5 1440p so it'll be a decent upgrade from 27" 1440p with both sharpness and immersion. FPS drop is the only downside. Need at least a 1080 Ti to have max settings in games.

I'm still using Windows 7 because I hate the way Windows 10 functions. (That's right 4K on Windows 7 150% scaling) Its like a tablet OS! Microsoft didn't leave well enough alone. I would gladly use Windows 10 if there was some mod to make Windows 10 look exactly like Windows 7. I think the...

I had a 27" 4K but I returned it because it was Matte. I could not get used to the dull lifeless matte. I absolutely hate Matte. The text was super sharp like printed paper but the colors were lifeless. So I settled with a glossy 32" 4K. The pixel density is still higher than any other monitor I...

Set the scaling to 150% on the 32" and you get the same size text as 24" 1080p. Also get an app called NoSquint Plus to manually increase text zoom farther without making everything else bigger. 40" is only 110 PPI. Not much better than 27" 1440p. My 1440p looks like a pixelated mess after...

You will also benefit from the higher pixel density of the 32" vs the 40". Things will look sharper and less "blocky".. Things will also look more lifelike as the pixels are smaller. Something else to take into consideration. You will be happy with the 32" I wouldn't want anything bigger. 32" is...

HP Spectre 32. It uses the exact same panel as the BenQ BL3201PT and its glossy so it looks considerably sharper. Only downside is it has 20ms input lag vs 5ms on the BenQ.

Don't do it. IPS panels require a protective sheet or it will grain from just barely touching it. TN and PLS panels don't have this issue and the polarizer does NOT require a protective sheet. Read post #140.

Read post #140 https://hardforum.com/threads/guide-how-to-remove-the-anti-glare-ag-coating-from-a-dell-u2312hm-lcd.1674033/page-4#post-1042968996

Did you get grain lines when cleaning the glue residue off?

If Matte is "Closer to real life" then why do camera lenses, eyeglasses and the eye itself have a glossy finish?

Really disappointing that they don't offer the UP2718Q with AR treated glass. Basically a type of anti-glare coating that retains the clarity of a glossy while reducing reflections as good as Matte. Why have such a good display and then obstruct the pixels with that hazy layer of plastic? It's...

I'd say 140-200 PPI is the sweet spot for desktop monitors. The idea is to not be able to see any pixels. A 27" 4K is 163 PPI, you can't see the pixels at normal viewing distance. I ended up with a 32" 4K because its the only glossy 4K. I would prefer the smaller 27" size, 32" is massive at a...

Instead of using Matte coatings which reduce image quality and make everything look dull, why isn't AR treated glass laminated to the LCD panel used instead? even on very high-end $1000+ monitors have Matte coatings. Not even a $2000 monitor has AR treated glass except for the Dell UP2715k and...

Honestly for a computer monitor, 32" is the absolute maximum regardless of how high the resolution, even if it is 8K. Higher DPI means sharper, print like text instead of that "blocky" look. Everything is smoother and easier on the eyes when you turn scaling on. 4K 27-32" with scaling looks...

This is kinda funny because when I built my first gaming PC (coming from a 15" laptop) I used a 21.5 1080p monitor for 6 years and was perfectly fine with it. Upgraded to a 27" 1440 and it was HUGE but I got used to it and it was perfect, the 21" looks so tiny now. Also got a 32" Hp Spectre 4K...