Am I crazy, thinking about going back to 22" from my 24" for higher PPI ?

S

Subzerok11

Gawd
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
550
So I'm currently using a Benq 24" GW2470H (23.8) with a PPI of 92. I'm thinking of getting a Benq 22" GW2270HM (21.5) with a PPI of 102. I'm kinda sensitive to low PPI. From my experience and reading lots of stuff about it 100 PPI is pretty much the lowest you want to go. Of coarse lots of this is based on personal tastes.

I'm over forty now and wear glasses so right now in Windows 7 in the display size settings I have it medium 125% it looks good but sometimes it's too big and looks like crap. The default small looks fine but sometimes it's too small. But the PPI in both small and medium looks like crap, especially now that I wear glasses my vision picks up on the details a lot now.

Yes I know I could get a 24" or even a 27" with 1440p screen, but I can't. Why cause I don't like IPS glow and the contrast and the blacks in my opinion suck. I've tried a Dell P2416D a couple of years ago and the glow and the dark scenes in my games looked bad to me and I just couldn't do it, so I returned it. No one makes a 24" VA @1440p, their are a few 27" VA 1440p but include stuff like 21:9/144Hz which I'm not interested in.

Guess my concern is going back to a 22" even doable these days. Isn't 22" for gaming pretty close of being dead seeing how 27" seems like the new norm ?
 
22" are still around, since you are sensitive to IPS glow suggesting a 100ppi 30" monitor is out of the question.

Mind you most 22" I have run into lately are VA and they are bit slow for gaming.
 
No you aren't crazy for thinking about the switch. I am currently switching from a 43" 4k sceptre tv to a 32" qhd hp omen monitor. The 43" is feeling to big with head movement after 2 years of use and my eyes getting worse.

I have a friend who is a developer who who has tried a ton of monitor combos and his favorite is a simple dual 22" setup. It gives the least amount of issues for him health wise and it logically works for his preferred work flow.

I've personally gone the route of hex monitors and other over the top setups. I personally an moving towards simpler and simpler gear that does what I need.
 
Subzerok11 said:
Guess my concern is going back to a 22" even doable these days. Isn't 22" for gaming pretty close of being dead seeing how 27" seems like the new norm ?
Click to expand...

Other than it's just going to be a basic 60hz monitor I think you'll be fine as long as you shop around for low input latency.

I haven't seen GSync/FreeSync or high refresh rates on anything that small yet anyway.
 
Subzerok11 said:
So I'm currently using a Benq 24" GW2470H (23.8) with a PPI of 92. I'm thinking of getting a Benq 22" GW2270HM (21.5) with a PPI of 102. I'm kinda sensitive to low PPI. From my experience and reading lots of stuff about it 100 PPI is pretty much the lowest you want to go. Of coarse lots of this is based on personal tastes.

I'm over forty now and wear glasses so right now in Windows 7 in the display size settings I have it medium 125% it looks good but sometimes it's too big and looks like crap. The default small looks fine but sometimes it's too small. But the PPI in both small and medium looks like crap, especially now that I wear glasses my vision picks up on the details a lot now.

Yes I know I could get a 24" or even a 27" with 1440p screen, but I can't. Why cause I don't like IPS glow and the contrast and the blacks in my opinion suck. I've tried a Dell P2416D a couple of years ago and the glow and the dark scenes in my games looked bad to me and I just couldn't do it, so I returned it. No one makes a 24" VA @1440p, their are a few 27" VA 1440p but include stuff like 21:9/144Hz which I'm not interested in.

Guess my concern is going back to a 22" even doable these days. Isn't 22" for gaming pretty close of being dead seeing how 27" seems like the new norm ?
Click to expand...

Did you try the different ClearText settings in case you've got a weird sub-pixel arrangement? That made a big difference for me when I was considering a change.
 
Actually I decided to buy another IPS monitor. The first one was from Dell now I will try one from Benq either the 24" BL2420PT or the 25" PD2500Q or go crazy and get the 27" PD2700Q. I'm thinking the 25" because the 27" might be just too big at arms length. The 32" I tried a few months ago was way too big so I'm thinking the 27" might be too. What do you guys think about 25' monitors, are they for people who think 27" is too big but (24") but really are 23.8" too small ? By the way all three monitors I mentioned are 1440p and will all have PPI over 100. Maybe I should just stick with the old trusry 24" I'm use too. Prices are as follows from Amazon 230$ 300$ 330$. The 24' is the cheapest by far. The 25" has the thinnest bezel by far it's a newer model the other are kinda thick.
 
I would go to a store and look at 27" 1440p and 4k.
I've started to feel that 24" is a bit small at 1080p and would like more work space.
 
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 the higher PPI (140 PPI vs 102 of the 1080p) right now I'm considering if I should drop 1500 bucks on the gloss 5K Dell or keep the glossy 32" 4K, the Dell is more glossy than the 32" Spectre and is the same glossy coating on eye glasses (that purplish or greenish Anti-Reflective coating) good clarity of glossy with the glare reduction of Matte. Best of both worlds.

My 32" 4K IPS has less glow than my TN 1080p and my 24" 144z 1440p gaming-only monitor so I would just make sure to get a monitor with 700:1 or above actual contrast ratio. The other monitors are also glossy, and the 1440p I simply removed the matte coating to make it glossy which improved black levels but still not quite as good as the 4K.

Far as scaling goes I use Windows 7 with 150% scaling on my 4K and 125% on my 1440p.
 
Last edited:
27" 4k since you want it for gaming. For work 32" 4k/5k if you like single monitor setups. You get used to bigger screens, when I bought my 23" I said I would never want bigger, now I am on a 32", granted only cause I can't stand multi monitor setups. However 27" is not too big unless you sit closer than 1m to the monitor. I find IPS glow acceptable on 27" as well, but this could vary, people who sit closer probably will say otherwise.
 
Subzerok11 said:
The 25" has the thinnest bezel by far it's a newer model the other are kinda thick.
Click to expand...
Thicker is better (unless you want multi monitor), not just bezel but monitor as well, ultra thins are edge lit hence much more prone to backlight bleed and uniformity issues.
 
Subzerok11 said:
Actually I decided to buy another IPS monitor. The first one was from Dell now I will try one from Benq either the 24" BL2420PT or the 25" PD2500Q or go crazy and get the 27" PD2700Q. I'm thinking the 25" because the 27" might be just too big at arms length. The 32" I tried a few months ago was way too big so I'm thinking the 27" might be too. What do you guys think about 25' monitors, are they for people who think 27" is too big but (24") but really are 23.8" too small ? By the way all three monitors I mentioned are 1440p and will all have PPI over 100. Maybe I should just stick with the old trusry 24" I'm use too. Prices are as follows from Amazon 230$ 300$ 330$. The 24' is the cheapest by far. The 25" has the thinnest bezel by far it's a newer model the other are kinda thick.
Click to expand...

I went with a Samsung 27". Works great with my size desk and 130% font size (go over 131 and Starcraft 2 loses its mind.)
 
ors said:
Thicker is better (unless you want multi monitor), not just bezel but monitor as well, ultra thins are edge lit hence much more prone to backlight bleed and uniformity issues.
Click to expand...

That's not quite right. Edge and back lighting move the larger minimum size to different locations. The absolute thinnest front to back panels are edge lit because there isn't room behind for back lights. The panels with the smallest bezels are back lit because there isn't room in the bezel for edge lights.

Looking from the other direction doesn't say as much, really cheap junky panels will tend to be bigger on both directions because they're using the cheapest components instead of the smallest ones and not spending extra on design to pack them in as tightly. At the top end of the market size goes up because thinness has it's own costs. eg NEC monitors are built like tanks because being thicker allows them to maintain a more stable temperature with reduces one source of variance from one part of the panel to the next.
 
DanNeely said:
The panels with the smallest bezels are back lit because there isn't room in the bezel for edge lights.
Click to expand...
Learned something today :) Sad thing is manufacturers often omit to specify if it's back lit or not. The only time you can be sure is with FALD. However I still find thicker better for the reason you mentioned with those NEC monitors and for moving the monitor as well. Most thin monitors feel like they will fall apart (exception being full aluminium body but those cost a fortune).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top