Going from 1080p to 4k today! :)

ManofGod

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
12,864
Well, I will pick up the 28 inch 4k monitor later on this evening. I am expecting to experience the same type as when I went from dial up to cable internet or when I went from hard drive's to SSD's. Does that sound realistic to you guys or am I looking to be disappointed. (Going from 2 x 27 inch 1080p monitors.)
 
ManofGod said:
Well, I will pick up the 28 inch 4k monitor later on this evening. I am expecting to experience the same type as when I went from dial up to cable internet or when I went from hard drive's to SSD's. Does that sound realistic to you guys or am I looking to be disappointed. (Going from 2 x 27 inch 1080p monitors.)
Click to expand...

27 to 28? Nah you won't see it. 1440P makes more sense. 4k require a big monitor, minimum 32" to 48".
 
Cyph said:
27 to 28? Nah you won't see it. 1440P makes more sense. 4k require a big monitor, minimum 32" to 48".
Click to expand...

Oh bullshit. I'm so tired of reading this crap.

OP, yes it will be a marked improvement over 1080p for many uses (photo editing, for example). All else being equal you will see a drop in frame rates if you game. Please report back and let us know what you think. Have fun! :D
 
Eradan said:
Oh bullshit. I'm so tired of reading this crap.

OP, yes it will be a marked improvement over 1080p for many uses (photo editing, for example). All else being equal you will see a drop in frame rates if you game. Please report back and let us know what you think. Have fun! :D
Click to expand...
Agreed. The effect of higher DPI on text is ridiculous. I don't understand the mental limitation that makes people only associate resolution with working area.

And no, the fact that we were stuck at 96dpi for years is not an excuse. We've had high DPI phones for a while now.
 
I've no personal experience with a 4k monitor. But I've seen a 15" rMBP in Windows with Bootcamp, and the experience sucks. I, personally, will not make the move to 4k on anything smaller than 32 inches, and preferably something in the 37 inch range.

If yall have 28" 4k monitors and like them, awesome. I just can't imagine making the UI (and webpage text especially) any smaller than it is on my 27" 1440 display.

That said, I made the move to 1080 to 1440, and the difference was immense. You will notice a HUGE difference OP. Maybe even more than you did going HDD to SSD.
 
Eradan said:
Oh bullshit. I'm so tired of reading this crap.

OP, yes it will be a marked improvement over 1080p for many uses (photo editing, for example). All else being equal you will see a drop in frame rates if you game. Please report back and let us know what you think. Have fun! :D
Click to expand...



Not bullshit at all. Unless you have perfect eyesights. You can't use a 28" 4K without scaling up the font size which basically defeat the one of the purpose of getting a 4K (more screen real estate to work with). I have tried the 28" for work, gave it up in a day and went for a 32" Acer B326HK which works well at about 22" distance. I went with a 40" at home at 32" distance and it was Ok but would have been better if I have gotten something in the 42"-45" range.
 
Yep, 1440 is the sweet spot at 27". I'd go 1440p if you game recent titles and only have 1 GPU.
 
Wiz33 said:
Not bullshit at all. Unless you have perfect eyesights. You can't use a 28" 4K without scaling up the font size which basically defeat the one of the purpose of getting a 4K (more screen real estate to work with). I have tried the 28" for work, gave it up in a day and went for a 32" Acer B326HK which works well at about 22" distance. I went with a 40" at home at 32" distance and it was Ok but would have been better at 42"-45".
Click to expand...

Same bleating that is repeated ad nauseum in these forums. OP asked if he will notice a difference between 1080p and 4K at 27/28". Absolutely he will. Whether or not he needs to increase display scale or not is a personal matter that depends on a number of variables. And yet everyone insists that it's the Word of God that you can't enjoy a 4k monitor smaller than 32". Fucking ridiculous. You know what else is ridiculous? Sitting in front a 42" monitor at a desk.
 
I went from a 27" 1440p to 28" 4K to 40" 4K. The eye squint factor on the 28" was pretty difficult to deal with over long periods of time. To me, 4K feels much more natural on a bigger screen. Plenty of people do just fine with 28" 4K, though.

I have a 13" retina MBP that I keep at 1920x1200 most of the time while working. The 2560x1600 is really nice for photo or video editing, so I'm definitely glad to have it as an option.
 
Eradan said:
Same bleating that is repeated ad nauseum in these forums. OP asked if he will notice a difference between 1080p and 4K at 27/28". Absolutely he will. Whether or not he needs to increase display scale or not is a personal matter that depends on a number of variables. And yet everyone insists that it's the Word of God that you can't enjoy a 4k monitor smaller than 32". Fucking ridiculous. You know what else is ridiculous? Sitting in front a 42" monitor at a desk.
Click to expand...

What is ridiculous is getting a 28" 4K monitor only for viewing photos and then having to step back down to play games at 1080 unless you have a R290, GTX970 at least. and having to scale up fonts just to browse and do work.
 
Wiz33 said:
What is ridiculous is getting a 28" 4K monitor only for viewing photos and then having to step back down to play games at 1080 unless you have a R290, GTX970. and having to scale up font just to browse and do work.
Click to expand...

I don't know what this means. But welcome to [H].
 
Wiz33 said:
I'm sure you don't since it looks like you're using a 27" 1080p monitor and have no personal experience with a 4K monitor of any size.
Click to expand...

Right because the PC in my sig is the ONLY PC I use, own, or have ever seen in my entire life/20 year career as an IT professional.

I'm super glad you decided to join the [H] but can't help but wonder how much you are missed wherever it is you came from. :D
 
Eradan said:
Right because the PC in my sig is the ONLY PC I use, own, or have ever seen in my entire life/20 year career as an IT professional.

I'm super glad you decided to join the [H] but can't help but wonder how much you are missed wherever it is you came from. :D
Click to expand...

Well, Try I was there at the dawn of the PC age. My company help build the Xerox Altos computer (I was there before Xerox PARC shown Steve Job what a GUI or a mouse looks like), Apple IIs and we build mice for Logitech when they first started out. I get asked to look at early engineering samples from major PC manufacturers for my opinion. I may not have been here long but my first online activities are using 300 baud modem from Apple II to connect to compuserve (my compuserve ID is googleable back to the early 1990s) and later GEnie. My name is in the credits on games published by SSI and a couple other game maker so there.
 
Last edited:
I bought 6 different 4k and 1440P monitors, currently also own a 4K. Most games do not Scale properly. Text will be incredibly tiny and unreadable on a 28" in 4k. However, if you'd rather take advice from someone who uses a 1080P monitor as his everyday monitor, then go for it.

Wiz33 owns a 4K so he's giving advice based on real experience. I'm not sure why being registered on this site longer makes ones opinion any better. Whatever.

Edit: take a screenshot of your game. Open it up in Photoshop or Paint, shrink to 25% then try and read the text on your 27". If you're OK with that, buy the 28" 4K.
 
Last edited:
Wiz33 said:
Well, Try I was there at the dawn of the PC age. My company help build the Xerox Altos computer (I was there before Xerox PARC shown Steve Job what a GUI or a mouse looks like), Apple IIs and we build mice for Logitech when they first started out. I get asked to look at early engineering samples from major PC manufacturers for my opinion. I may not have been here long but my first online activities are using 300 baud modem from Apple II to connect to compuserve (my compuserve ID is googleable back to the early 1990s) and later GEnie. My name is in the credits on games published by SSI and a couple other game maker so there.
Click to expand...

Not gonna lie. That was a pretty awesomely harsh burn there.

I mainly agree. Windows is shit at scaling. If you're connecting the display to a 2015 rMBP, then by all means, 28" @ 4K/60hz will be pure sex.

But of course, Windows will only get better at scaling and "small font sizes" and "small icons" aren't going to be an issue in the long run as there is better support. People don't just want the higher resolution for real estate...they want it for higher PPI as well. I can see a profound difference between 1440p @ 27" and 4K @ 27" when the software works right and scales correctly (again, mainly on OSX). So yes, there's a definitive market for 4K 27" monitors. Without relying on OS scaling, you'd need a bigger monitor (aka the 37"-42") numbers thrown around here to get more real estate and still be able to see everything comfortably. But, you're still stuck at < 120PPI by the time you get to 37". So like, what's the point? I'd personally rather have greater PPI than more real estate. Until Windows and supporting software gets better at scaling, I will agree that, at least on a Windows machine, 27" @ 4K is pretty silly unless you're strictly using it to game (and that's a little silly too in my book).

I'd much rather put money in a 34" UW right now if I wanted to keep things looking pretty, wanted a more immersive gaming experience, and gain more screen real estate. The LGUM95 fits that bill.

I see no point in trying to power games @ 4K. Too much of a cost sink for little real-world improvement. 4K for movies/video content is a whole different story. It will 100% be the way of the future. There's just not enough content as of yet, unless you spend all your time on YouTube watching niche material.

If screen real estate is what you're after, you're better off with two 1440P 27" at the moment. I will concede with that point.
 
Last edited:
Wiz33 said:
What is ridiculous is getting a 28" 4K monitor only for viewing photos and then having to step back down to play games at 1080 unless you have a R290, GTX970 at least. and having to scale up fonts just to browse and do work.
Click to expand...

The thing is, that is exactly what i have, an XFX R9 290 Reference card. :) I also have an FX 8350 running at 4.4GHz which will keep me going as well. Anyways, I have it and so far, so good. :D

I purchased the Samsung 28 UD590 on sale for $495 plus tax. I should have purchased this last October when I picked up 2 x 27 inch LG 1080p monitors instead. Now, if I just end up keeping this monitor, I will have to find a usage for the other 2 monitors. So far, I am loving it and I only have to back off on a few games like Crysis 3.

Games like Batman: Arkham City play at full 4k settings at 60 fps. :) Direct X 12 should make things better. I was going to try 3 x 27 inch monitors in Eyefinity but, my desk is not big enough for them.

Edit: Oh, and I am using Windows 10 TP 10147 which seems to scale quite well so far.
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
The thing is, that is exactly what i have, an XFX R9 290 Reference card. :) I also have an FX 8350 running at 4.4GHz which will keep me going as well. Anyways, I have it and so far, so good. :D

I purchased the Samsung 28 UD590 on sale for $495 plus tax. I should have purchased this last October when I picked up 2 x 27 inch LG 1080p monitors instead. Now, if I just end up keeping this monitor, I will have to find a usage for the other 2 monitors. So far, I am loving it and I only have to back off on a few games like Crysis 3.

Games like Batman: Arkham City play at full 4k settings at 60 fps. :) Direct X 12 should make things better. I was going to try 3 x 27 inch monitors in Eyefinity but, my desk is not big enough for them.

Edit: Oh, and I am using Windows 10 TP 10147 which seems to scale quite well so far.
Click to expand...

You probably would be OK until you start playing some of the newer titles like Witcher 3 which I have to run at low setting to get playable fps on a 970. Well, give it a go. I hope you got it from a place with simple returns like Amazon so you can send it back if it didn't work out. BAC is easy as it's ported from console that runs at 1080 max.
 
Wiz33 said:
You probably would be OK until you start playing some of the newer titles like Witcher 3 which I have to run at low setting to get playable fps on a 970. Well, give it a go. I hope you got it from a place with simple returns like Amazon so you can send it back if it didn't work out.
Click to expand...

Yep, Best Buy just in case. :) I do love it so far but I guess we will see.
 
Wiz33 said:
Well, Try I was there at the dawn of the PC age. My company help build the Xerox Altos computer (I was there before Xerox PARC shown Steve Job what a GUI or a mouse looks like), Apple IIs and we build mice for Logitech when they first started out. I get asked to look at early engineering samples from major PC manufacturers for my opinion. I may not have been here long but my first online activities are using 300 baud modem from Apple II to connect to compuserve (my compuserve ID is googleable back to the early 1990s) and later GEnie. My name is in the credits on games published by SSI and a couple other game maker so there.
Click to expand...

That's awesome, man. Don't have your credentials but as a young user, my first computing experience was with the Apple II platform before I moved on to the 80s Commodores which I still own all these years later. A LOVED a lot of the early SSI RPGs. Questron and Pool of Radiance are old school favorites.

My point with mentioning two decades in IT is this: I have learned that there isn't necessarily a be-all, end-all right way to do things in every case. My experience with relatively small (funny thinking of 27/28" as small now) display at 4k has been positive. I get aggravated when people just assume what works for them is how it has to be for everyone else and the consensus is often that one needs more real estate to make effective use of 4k resolution.

OP: good for you, glad you are happy with your new display. :D
 
Wiz33 said:
Well, Try I was there at the dawn of the PC age. My company help build the Xerox Altos computer (I was there before Xerox PARC shown Steve Job what a GUI or a mouse looks like), Apple IIs and we build mice for Logitech when they first started out. I get asked to look at early engineering samples from major PC manufacturers for my opinion. I may not have been here long but my first online activities are using 300 baud modem from Apple II to connect to compuserve (my compuserve ID is googleable back to the early 1990s) and later GEnie. My name is in the credits on games published by SSI and a couple other game maker so there.
Click to expand...

whooaaa for realzies?
 
I never get why people make a big deal about switching resolutions. I LOVED the days of the CRT when you could run your desktop at 1600x1200 and drop down to 1152x864 for gaming. For decades now LCD monitors have given us no such option simply because native resolution means you have to run at 1/2 resolution or it will look like total garbage. So many people like myself were forced to settle for compromise monitors or 2 monitors. 3840x2160 resolutions are the first time I feel like I could be comfortable running my desktop at that resolution then dropping my gaming down to 1920x1080. I am surprised more people are not excited about the possibility of a good monitor working for gaming and desktop again, something we have not seen for a very long time.

I don't worry much about scaling I think as time goes on all companies will start supporting it better. We have needed high resolution monitors to push most companies to get off their asses and make software that is more flexible for screen size and resolution for a very long time as well. Now they will finally be forced to support the features MS has been giving them for over a decade and they have simply ignored.
 
I wrote something similar in another thread, but 4k has completely changed the monitor landscape. It hasn't been since 1080p that there has been such a wave of monitors from 24"-48". There's something for everyone's preference.

rudy said:
I never get why people make a big deal about switching resolutions. I LOVED the days of the CRT when you could run your desktop at 1600x1200 and drop down to 1152x864 for gaming. For decades now LCD monitors have given us no such option simply because native resolution means you have to run at 1/2 resolution or it will look like total garbage. So many people like myself were forced to settle for compromise monitors or 2 monitors. 3840x2160 resolutions are the first time I feel like I could be comfortable running my desktop at that resolution then dropping my gaming down to 1920x1080. I am surprised more people are not excited about the possibility of a good monitor working for gaming and desktop again, something we have not seen for a very long time.
Click to expand...

It's because not all of the 4k monitors do pixel doubling. I was kind of concerned for OP when I read that he was going for the 28" (likely TN) variety, because many of those do not. The Samsung TVs do, the 32" Benq does, and the 27" Dell does for certain. Some of the 32"/27" IPS even do 1440p surprisingly well which I don't think is an option at all on other 4k displays.
 
rudy said:
I never get why people make a big deal about switching resolutions. I LOVED the days of the CRT when you could run your desktop at 1600x1200 and drop down to 1152x864 for gaming. For decades now LCD monitors have given us no such option simply because native resolution means you have to run at 1/2 resolution or it will look like total garbage. So many people like myself were forced to settle for compromise monitors or 2 monitors. 3840x2160 resolutions are the first time I feel like I could be comfortable running my desktop at that resolution then dropping my gaming down to 1920x1080. I am surprised more people are not excited about the possibility of a good monitor working for gaming and desktop again, something we have not seen for a very long time.

I don't worry much about scaling I think as time goes on all companies will start supporting it better. We have needed high resolution monitors to push most companies to get off their asses and make software that is more flexible for screen size and resolution for a very long time as well. Now they will finally be forced to support the features MS has been giving them for over a decade and they have simply ignored.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the suprising thing is, on this Samsung U590D, it does exactly that, plays games well at less than native resolutions. :) (Or so I read about the experience of others who own this monitor.) I am going to test it out today and see what I get.
 
Cyph said:
I bought 6 different 4k and 1440P monitors, currently also own a 4K. Most games do not Scale properly. Text will be incredibly tiny and unreadable on a 28" in 4k. However, if you'd rather take advice from someone who uses a 1080P monitor as his everyday monitor, then go for it.
Click to expand...

lol

The people who have scaled up to 32-48" 4K will lead to you the correct solution OP.
Leave 27" monitors to 1440p.
 
Cyph said:
I bought 6 different 4k and 1440P monitors, currently also own a 4K. Most games do not Scale properly. Text will be incredibly tiny and unreadable on a 28" in 4k. However, if you'd rather take advice from someone who uses a 1080P monitor as his everyday monitor, then go for it.

Wiz33 owns a 4K so he's giving advice based on real experience. I'm not sure why being registered on this site longer makes ones opinion any better. Whatever.

Edit: take a screenshot of your game. Open it up in Photoshop or Paint, shrink to 25% then try and read the text on your 27". If you're OK with that, buy the 28" 4K.
Click to expand...

I suppose if I didn't have any PC specs in my signature you would assume I've never used or owned a PC ever? Fucking brilliant. And I really didn't give any advice. I just countered the forum bro science that OMG 4K at 28" IS TOO SMALL when based on personal experience and anecdotal accounts of other people (even in this very thread) it's fine.
 
ManofGod said:
The thing is, that is exactly what i have, an XFX R9 290 Reference card. :) I also have an FX 8350 running at 4.4GHz which will keep me going as well. Anyways, I have it and so far, so good. :D

I purchased the Samsung 28 UD590 on sale for $495 plus tax. I should have purchased this last October when I picked up 2 x 27 inch LG 1080p monitors instead. Now, if I just end up keeping this monitor, I will have to find a usage for the other 2 monitors. So far, I am loving it and I only have to back off on a few games like Crysis 3.

Games like Batman: Arkham City play at full 4k settings at 60 fps. :) Direct X 12 should make things better. I was going to try 3 x 27 inch monitors in Eyefinity but, my desk is not big enough for them.

Edit: Oh, and I am using Windows 10 TP 10147 which seems to scale quite well so far.
Click to expand...

WorldExclusive said:
lol

The people who have scaled up to 32-48" 4K will lead to you the correct solution OP.
Leave 27" monitors to 1440p.
Click to expand...

OP says: so far I am loving it. And yet you still insist on trying to get him to do what you think he should be doing. People are fucking hilarious. MUST DO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING. MUST DO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING. FFS.

OP: Send it back. You have no idea what you're talking about.
 
Last edited:
Off-topic comment, but I've actually gone in nearly the exact opposite direction. Recently replaced a 27-inch 2560x1440 QNIX with 2 24-inch 1920x1200 U2412Ms. And wow, I've found a new appreciation for quality over sheer resolution. Won't make the mistake of going Ebay cheap for a monitor again.
 
I had 28" 4k and hated it, too many things won't scale well and the text is too dang small, otherwise.
 
Eradan said:
OP says: so far I am loving it. And yet you still insist on trying to get him to do what you think he should be doing. People are fucking hilarious. MUST DO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING. MUST DO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING. FFS.

OP: Send it back. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

You need to chill.

If you don't like what we are saying then ignore us.
But the big ass kid you are, you must respond to everything.
 
WorldExclusive said:
You need to chill.

If you don't like what we are saying then ignore us.
But the big ass kid you are, you must respond to everything.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I have to agree with what the person you quoted is saying. Your opinion is simply wrong in this instance. However, that is fine, you do not always have to be right. :D The only thing I need to do is play around with the brightness and contrast to get it where I will prefer it.
 
I'll be upgrading to 4k myself but getting new GPU so I can realistically see potential (Ordering online)
Ordering online and picking up at retail store for quick return & refund if needed (Microcenter)
Best case keep 4k get 2nd GPU later
Worst case refund and 2nd GPU now or later and wait for better 4k options
Current using Dell 3011 and Sony FW900 bigger is better for me
Good Luck
 
WorldExclusive said:
You need to chill.

If you don't like what we are saying then ignore us.
But the big ass kid you are, you must respond to everything.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to remain silent when I see people bleating opinion as if it were fact. If you don't like it, then ignore me. Sorry about that.

OP: Have you tried dropping the resolution on your Samsung down to 1080 to improve FPS in games? Just wondering how you think it looks at that res.
 
Eradan said:
I'm not going to remain silent when I see people bleating opinion as if it were fact. If you don't like it, then ignore me. Sorry about that.

OP: Have you tried dropping the resolution on your Samsung down to 1080 to improve FPS in games? Just wondering how you think it looks at that res.
Click to expand...

1080 should look perfect as it's just 4:1 in pixels with no scaling artifacts. That's what I do on Witcher 3 as I can only run it in low graphics at 4K.
 
Eradan said:
What display?
Click to expand...

970 on a Samsung UN40JU7500 40" I have not really gotten too far into the game as I'm still trying to finish up DAI (which runs fine at high setting @4K). I'll probably pick up a 980Ti for Witcher 3 when I get done with DAI and use the 970 to replace the 7850 at the office PC.
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
Well, I will pick up the 28 inch 4k monitor later on this evening. I am expecting to experience the same type as when I went from dial up to cable internet or when I went from hard drive's to SSD's. Does that sound realistic to you guys or am I looking to be disappointed. (Going from 2 x 27 inch 1080p monitors.)
Click to expand...

Going from dial up to cable and from HDD to SSD is an upgrade in speed. Going from 1080p to 4k is an increase in resolution, not speed. The difference you're going to notice here is mainly increased text clarity, not so much increased workspace, unless you plan to use the display without scaling. I also own a 28 inch 4k monitor and while it is useable without scaling, it is just BARELY useable and I honestly don't think most people will be able to use it that way.
 
Eradan said:
I'm not going to remain silent when I see people bleating opinion as if it were fact. If you don't like it, then ignore me. Sorry about that.

OP: Have you tried dropping the resolution on your Samsung down to 1080 to improve FPS in games? Just wondering how you think it looks at that res.
Click to expand...

Well, so far, I only tested it at 1080p on one game: Medal of Honor: Warfighter. It looks great and runs at 60fps without issue. However, it looks immensely better at 2160p and plays very smoothly at 30fps. (VSync on though so I imagine it would be higher without VSync.) I am not sure I can go back to just plain old 1080p now.

The strange thing is, I have no issue and love my XBox One even at the lower resolutions playing on my Sony 50 Inch TV. However, I am also 12 feet back from it compared to 30 inches back from my 4k monitor.

However, I do have a question: I just noticed a thread that lists Easymount LCD stands that are inexpensive but good. I could go with 3 x 27 inch LG 1080P IPS monitors at home since I already have 2 at home and 1 at work. Then I could just pick up another 1080p monitor for work. However, I am not sure I would enjoy that as much since I would be twisting and turning my head with Eyefinity games and I am not even sure all games would support it anyways.

What do you guys think? I also have a Planar 24 inch monitor at work and I could get 2 other 24 inch monitors instead for 3 x 24. However, I am not sure I would like that since I am already used to the larger size and the 4k res is incredible! (Windows 10 scaling works really well.)

The other thing is, if I stay with the 4k monitor, I will have a good reason to upgrade my videocard in a year or so. At 1080p however, anything more than my R9 290 would be a waste in my opinion. I am also thinking that the near eliminated motion blur on this 4k monitor helps keep me from getting motion sick which really hurts my head and stomach after a bit. (Maybe Eyefinity would cause me greater motion sickness?)

Otherwise: I am just going to sell my 2 x 27 inch monitors and keep the 4k one. I had used a 28 inch Hanspree 1200p monitor for about 7 years but it is now dying which is why I replace it at work with an LG 27 inch back in January.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top