1080p on my 40 inch Samsung 4k TV looks better than 1080p on my 32 inch AOC computer monitor

F

FulciLives

n00b
Joined
Dec 11, 2016
Messages
14
This Christmas I bought a new dedicated PC monitor. The AOC C32G1 which is a 1080p 32 inch 144hz monitor with Freesync. Once I got it hooked up I was shocked to see just how poorly it looks in terms of resolution.

Now, most of you are saying to yourselves, "Well duh. We all know that 1080p isn't high enough for a 32 inch monitor and you should have gone at least 1440p" etc. (at least this is a common thing I often read online these days).

Well, here's the confusing thing about that...

For the past 3 years now I've been using a Samsung 40 inch 4k UHD TV as a monitor (Model UN40KU6290). At first, I had my desktop set to 4k resolution (or 2160p as I like to call it) with 200% scaling. Everything was nice and sharp. But many programs didn't scale well and I also sometimes had issues running games at 1080p while the desktop was set to 2160p so I started running the desktop at 1080p (at least some of the time) and eventually just started running it at 1080p almost all-of-the-time. It looked A-OK to me. Yes, the text was a little fuzzy and not sharp like when using 2160p but it honestly wasn't bad in my eyes and it didn't look pixelated. Also, I thought games at 1080p looked perfectly fine. Bear in mind my PC can't handle pushing games out at 4k and since 1080p scales so nicely into 2160p it just made more sense to me to run my games that way (instead of say 1440p) while using the Samsung.

And here's the thing I don't understand. As I said, 1080p on my 40 inch 4k UHD TV looks way better and I do mean ridiculously better than 1080p on my 32 inch 1080p computer monitor.

I don't get it. However I have a theory...

I think it might have to do with the scaling that the Samsung 4k TV is doing. The 1080p image on the Samsung is softer than on the AOC monitor. The monitor is sharper but I see every single pixel. I don't see that on the Samsung. So I guess the Samsung is doing some kind of smoothing or blur or something when scaling the 1080p image to the 4k resolution of the screen.

I just find it mind blowing that 1080p on the 1080p 32 inch monitor looks worse to me than 1080p on the 40 inch 4k UHD TV.

Any thoughts on this? I'm curious to see what people have to say about this.

BTW, I can't stand this monitor. I'm planning on returning it for a 32 inch 1440p 144hz monitor with Freesync. Basically the same thing but 1440p instead of 1080p.
 
I mean, you're just saying that upscaled 1080P -> 4K with the (normal) upscaling blur looks better to you than low pixel density but sharp 1080p.

It's just a matter of taste? Personally I think upscaled blur looks bad compared to a sharp image, but 1080p at 32" is such low pixel density that the screen door effect(ability to see individual pixels) would drive me absolutely crazy. So yeah, I can believe that upscaled blur is better than that.

You're basically comparing two things that suck, except you are used to one of the types of suck and not used to the other. 32" 1440p should look better, and 32" 4K will look best.
 
I guess I was hoping someone would explain why the Samsung looks so much better. I suspect there's something more interesting going on there that is more complex than it might seem (I mean on a technical level, if that makes sense).
 
FulciLives said:
I guess I was hoping someone would explain why the Samsung looks so much better. I suspect there's something more interesting going on there that is more complex than it might seem (I mean on a technical level, if that makes sense).
Click to expand...

But why do you think something complicated is going on? Your 32" monitor is 68ppi, which means gigantic pixels, so of course you can see them. The Samsung 4K has a ppi of 110, which is almost as high as a 27" 1440p monitor.

I can't imagine any situation in which a 68ppi display would look as good as a 110ppi display, unless they were both huge and you were looking at them from long distance(like 15+ feet).
 
Sancus

Yes, the Samsung is a 40" 4k display but I'm sending 1080p to it from my computer and I am comparing that to a 1080p 32" monitor (being sent 1080p from my computer).
So I would imagine that even though there is upscaling going on with the Samsung that the PPI would have to be lower, not higher, than the 32" monitor.
Yet, the Samsung looks better and I'm curious why that is. That's essentially my question here. Why does it look better?
 
FulciLives said:
Sancus

Yes, the Samsung is a 40" 4k display but I'm sending 1080p to it from my computer and I am comparing that to a 1080p 32" monitor (being sent 1080p from my computer).
So I would imagine that even though there is upscaling going on with the Samsung that the PPI would have to be lower, not higher, than the 32" monitor.
Yet, the Samsung looks better and I'm curious why that is. That's essentially my question here. Why does it look better?
Click to expand...

The PPI on the Samsung isn’t lower. Yes the pixels are interpolated but it’s still 4K.
 
Looks what better in what way?

The TV likely has some sort of post processing involved. The scaler on it also is likely to be "better" in terms of quality. The trade off for these is typically more input lag.

I wouldn't be surprised if the TV has a wider color gamut as well and other characteristics.

The coating on the two is likely different. Monitors in practice tend to have coarser and more aggressive anti glare coatings.

The sub pixel layout could be different for the two. I don't know off hand what panel the monitor uses but I've seen complaints about text clarity for some VA monitors due to them not using a standard horizontal RGB sub pixel layout.

Could the curve on the monitor also be a negative for you?

Are you viewing both at the same distance?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top