I welcome increased resolution but I wonder what they were thinking about screen sizes. There are lots of 27" 4K monitors and 4K does not play well with 27" IMO, using isthisretina, we see that you get 163PPI. IMO 4K works well with the 32" size works out to 138PPI. which is almost perfect. LG has an interesting proposition, they have this 32" "true" 4K monitor which is 4096x2160. The PPI grows from 138 to 145. Not a huge increase but 138 is already very good. I wonder if 145 is the perfect PPI value. The resolution is great but not so fine you have to use Windows to adjust the scale, effectively making 4K monitors not 4K. Now take 27" and make it QHD (2560x1440) and you get a PPI value of 109. It's almost perfect but could be just a hair sharper. My daily driver uses one 4K 32" and one 27" QHD monitor. I used to have 2 QHD monitors and one 4K but it was just too much so I have just one of each. 4K is great but I use QHD all the time when I want things to be a bit larger. They both work well together. I've ran QHD monitors ever since they came out and they are great. I tried a dell 4K in the 27" format and did not like it at all, it was just way too tiny. expand 4K to 32" and it's nice. I know about the Windows scaling method but I never use it and always run things at 100%. IMO it does not make sense to buy an expensive 4K then adjust it so that it resolves in effect less than 4K. The whole point is to have tiny fonts so you can fit a ton on the screen. But not so tiny they are unusable. Now with 5K.. the only monitors available are 27" which does not make any sense. 5120 × 2880 on a 27" screen results in sky-high PPI of 217. You cannot use it without a microscope or adjusting the scale from 100% to something higher. This goes in a 'what were they thinking' category. 5K needs at least 32 (with PPI of 183 which is identical to PPI you get with a 27" 4K). 5K would be *perfect* in a 37" format -- with PPI of 159. Huge and very usable. That should be the next step IMO. Or even a 40" screen, 5K on it and your PPI is the same as "true" 4K on a 32". Or 147. If I could buy a 5K 40" display, I would, assuming it would not cost $8700. now Dell also has an 8K display they put in a 32" format. The resulting PPI is 275 and IMO unusable. 8K on a 40" results in a tiny 225 and 47" brings the PPI down to 187. makes no sense to get involved with 8K unless you get into 47" and up screen sizes. 50" is 176 PPI which is as good as it gets compromise-wise.