New Samsung 4k for everyone.

imyourzero said:
Very happy with the new setting...thank you.
Click to expand...
Great! It all depends on how you're sending the signal, so if the GPU is set to send limited levels then you need to use the "Low" setting to get proper black level. Sounds like this was the case with your old GPU.
 
Pakk said:
I'll try to explain it a bit clearer. On my Samsung it basically breaks down like the following, with UHD color enabled, RGB mode (4:4:4), at 60Hz.

If sending 3840x2160 to the TV:
  • Game mode: Low lag.
  • PC mode: Low lag.
  • Movie mode: Slightly higher lag. Noticeable especially if you compare to the other modes, but still perfectly playable in most cases.
If sending 1920x1080 to the TV:
  • Game mode: Low lag.
  • PC mode: Low lag.
  • Movie mode: Crazy amounts of lag, extremely floaty mouse pointer that feels like you're playing an endless ice level. Unusable.

I haven't tried without UHD color, or outputting other color modes or refresh rates so I don't know if there's any difference.

But at 60Hz, if you want to use Auto Motion Plus in the movie mode, you want to avoid sending 1080p to the TV if it behaves anything like my set. You don't need to be able to render everything at 2160p, you can either set your GPU to upscale non-native resolutions before sending it to the display, or if that's not possible (the option isn't available to me for some reason), you can create a custom resolution just a notch higher (for example I have one for 1952x1098) and use that in games, which will hopefully force the GPU to upscale it to 3840x2160 and you'll get the lower lag as per the list above.
Click to expand...

This.

1920x1080 is the worst resolution lag wise on UHD Samsungs. I have 55JU7000 and my everyday settings are movie mode using a calibration setting from AVSForum with amp set to clear. Lag feels slightly higher than in PC mode, but nothing game breaking.

Just for kicks, i compared the lag in every resolution available. Excuse my semi pro excel skills.

i59p44.jpg



There is no mistake about lag, in 1280x720 and 1920x1080 mouse pointer has a floaty feeling about it. In all other resolutions using amp is acceptable for everyday use imho. I am more bothered by lack of 4:4:4 than miniscule increase in input lag.

But this raises the question: if all reviews have measured input lag in 1080p (~120 ms with amp), then how much input lag do Samsungs have in UHD mode. I guess we will have to wait for the 4k input lag tester to find out.
 
Micko said:
But this raises the question: if all reviews have measured input lag in 1080p (~120 ms with amp), then how much input lag do Samsungs have in UHD mode. I guess we will have to wait for the 4k input lag tester to find out.
Click to expand...
It would make sense for the the lag to be lower in 2160p since the TV doesn't have to perform any scaling. I think it feels marginally lower even in PC and Game modes, though it might just be an illusion. But as mentioned there is a huge difference for Movie mode.

For my set HDTVtest reported 22ms [Game], 37ms [PC], 130ms [Movie]. If these measurements were taken at 1080p my completely unscientific guesstimate after flipping between the modes is that at 2160p, the numbers would be around 15ms [Game], 25ms [PC] and perhaps 50ms for [Movie].
 
Last edited:
Is there any article comparing input lag on the same monitor using different resolution? I guess not yet bc there is no tester that has multiple difference resolution output? I guess crt does have different resolutions that you can try to do a relative test against. Problem is there is no crt that can do 4K to test our 4K monitor in duplicate mode,
 
Micko said:
This.

1920x1080 is the worst resolution lag wise on UHD Samsungs. I have 55JU7000 and my everyday settings are movie mode using a calibration setting from AVSForum with amp set to clear. Lag feels slightly higher than in PC mode, but nothing game breaking.

Just for kicks, i compared the lag in every resolution available. Excuse my semi pro excel skills.



There is no mistake about lag, in 1280x720 and 1920x1080 mouse pointer has a floaty feeling about it. In all other resolutions using amp is acceptable for everyday use imho. I am more bothered by lack of 4:4:4 than miniscule increase in input lag.

But this raises the question: if all reviews have measured input lag in 1080p (~120 ms with amp), then how much input lag do Samsungs have in UHD mode. I guess we will have to wait for the 4k input lag tester to find out.
Click to expand...

hows the input lag if your running a 1920 x 1080 source upsampled to 4k?
 
Hi All,
I've been reading this very long, very informative thread for a few days on and off in my search for a Samsung TV as a PC monitor.

I personally wanted a 40" screen but noticed some of the better panels started off at 48".

I still haven't decided what to get yet, i'm in the UK was thinking of the JU7500. Opinions/Suggestions maybe?

But one question that I would like to ask is, I have an OLD Macbook Pro 2011 as my main PC, plugged in via HDMI to my current screen (old Samsung 32" @ 1366x768). Would my setup struggle to output graphics wise to these new models?

MacBook Pro (17-inch, Early 2011)
2.2 GHz Intel Core i7
8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB

Thank you!
 
Last edited:
upmg said:
Hi All,
I've been reading this very long, very informative thread for a few days on and off in my search for a Samsung TV as a PC monitor.

I personally wanted a 40" screen but noticed some of the better panels started off at 48".

I still haven't decided what to get yet, i'm in the UK was thinking of the JU7500. Opinions/Suggestions maybe?

But one question that I would like to ask is, I have an OLD Macbook Pro 2011 as my main PC, plugged in via HDMI to my current screen (old Samsung 32" @ 1366x768). Would my setup struggle to output graphics wise to these new models?

MacBook Pro (17-inch, Early 2011)
2.2 GHz Intel Core i7
8 GB 1333 MHz DDR3
AMD Radeon HD 6750M 1024 MB

Thank you!
Click to expand...

No HDMI 2.0 output from that mac so you won't get the full benefit of 4:4:4 at 60hz 4K....
 
wildpig1234 said:
No HDMI 2.0 output from that mac so you won't get the full benefit of 4:4:4 at 60hz 4K....
Click to expand...

Right :/

You probably know this already but I use a Mini Display Port to HDMI converter first and then plug in to TV via HDMI.

I am guessing the Mini DVI Port is not capable of HDMI 2.0 then?

I will still be upgrading TV as the Macbook is well overdue an upgrade too, probably will go back to PC. But in the meantime my hardware will output to the new TV to some degree, i.e it wont struggle at the new native res's of 4k will it?

Thank you for responding with that info, much appreciated ;)
 
Pakk said:
I'll try to explain it a bit clearer. On my Samsung it basically breaks down like the following, with UHD color enabled, RGB mode (4:4:4), at 60Hz.

If sending 3840x2160 to the TV:
  • Game mode: Low lag.
  • PC mode: Low lag.
  • Movie mode: Slightly higher lag. Noticeable especially if you compare to the other modes, but still perfectly playable in most cases.
If sending 1920x1080 to the TV:
  • Game mode: Low lag.
  • PC mode: Low lag.
  • Movie mode: Crazy amounts of lag, extremely floaty mouse pointer that feels like you're playing an endless ice level. Unusable.

I haven't tried without UHD color, or outputting other color modes or refresh rates so I don't know if there's any difference.

But at 60Hz, if you want to use Auto Motion Plus in the movie mode, you want to avoid sending 1080p to the TV if it behaves anything like my set. You don't need to be able to render everything at 2160p, you can either set your GPU to upscale non-native resolutions before sending it to the display, or if that's not possible (the option isn't available to me for some reason), you can create a custom resolution just a notch higher (for example I have one for 1952x1098) and use that in games, which will hopefully force the GPU to upscale it to 3840x2160 and you'll get the lower lag as per the list above.
Click to expand...

I'm curious, why run in movie mode, if you are not running movies (or why would you need a mouse pointer when watching movies?)

The only time I could see this being an issue, is if it results in the sound and the video not being in sync, but I can't imagine that would be the case, and if it is, most receivers have a tunable delay function.
 
Zarathustra[H];1042087594 said:
I'm curious, why run in movie mode, if you are not running movies (or why would you need a mouse pointer when watching movies?)

The only time I could see this being an issue, is if it results in the sound and the video not being in sync, but I can't imagine that would be the case, and if it is, most receivers have a tunable delay function.
Click to expand...
Because on my set I'm experiencing really bad blur/double/ghost-images during movement in games, it's especially bad around edges which also tend to flicker a lot. The Blur reduction in Auto Motion Plus gets rid of this, but this function is sadly only available in movie mode.
 
another-user said:
hows the input lag if your running a 1920 x 1080 source upsampled to 4k?
Click to expand...

Isn't every resolution other than native already upscaled by TV to 4K ? I'm not sure i understand the question. GPU scaling is not available for me (Windows 7, 980Ti)

ejx8jb.jpg


Right :/

You probably know this already but I use a Mini Display Port to HDMI converter first and then plug in to TV via HDMI.

I am guessing the Mini DVI Port is not capable of HDMI 2.0 then?

I will still be upgrading TV as the Macbook is well overdue an upgrade too, probably will go back to PC. But in the meantime my hardware will output to the new TV to some degree, i.e it wont struggle at the new native res's of 4k will it?

Thank you for responding with that info, much appreciated
Click to expand...

Back in 2011 i had gtx 580 and highest resolution it supported was 2560x1600. First, i would make sure that your radeon can output 3840x2160 in any shape or form. Can you take your MacBook to the store and ask them if you can test it there ?
 
Micko said:
Isn't every resolution other than native already upscaled by TV to 4K ? I'm not sure i understand the question. GPU scaling is not available for me (Windows 7, 980Ti)
Click to expand...
It's not available for me either (Win 10, GTX970). I'm not sure if it's an Nvidia issue or something with these particular TV sets. I tried contacting Nvidia but no luck. I read somewhere it might have to do with connecting a 3D-capable display.

Anyway if you use any of the available display resolutions between 1920x1080 and 3840x2160 they will work exactly like if you had GPU scaling on, even if you don't. The GPU will scale it and the display sees it as a 3840x2160 signal. And as I said in a previous post you can also create custom resolutions based off the native 3840x2160 one and they will also work the same (though you can't do this for 1920x1080 or 1280x720 because they are already existing, reserved resolution.)
 
Well, I'm super glad I took my Christmas $$$ and put it into going 4k with a ju6700. I was sort of getting bored of PC gaming and was playing PS4 games with some friends mostly. I was almost considering parting out my gaming PC! I am glad I didn't. Playing The Witcher 3 in 4k has really reinvigorated my enthusiasm for PC gaming. And I am quite please with how well my GTX970s are holding up under the punishment.. I was eyeballing 980ti's but now I think I will just wait for Pascal. Anyways thanks to this thread I am enjoying the bleeding edge of PC gaming once again.
 
So if the TV shows this, then the HD game (1920x1080) is upscaled by the TV? I can only do UHD @ 30p for now but I figure it's mainly the upscaling causing the poor lag here:
2cgbm1x.jpg


...whereas this one reacts fine, I assume it's because of what you say: the TV is running @ HD, so no upscaling is being performed:
2n1ym84.jpg


The options on this TV are complicated, especially when many of them are dependent on first having a particular setting enabled. Below is the menu structure showing most of what has been discussed here. Can anyone say if lag is affected by sports mode, digital clean view, MPEG noise filter, HDMI black level, smart LED, or any of the 'Advanced Settings'?

Code: 
[SIZE="1"][FONT="Arial"][SOURCE]
  |
  `-- Device Type
      |-- pc
      `-- game
 

[MENU]
  |
  |-- SYSTEM
  |   |
  |   |-- General
  |   |   `-- game mode
  |   |
  |   `-- Sports Mode
  |
  `-- PICTURE
      |
      |-- Picture Mode
      |   |-- dynamic
      |   |-- standard
      |   |-- natural
      |   `-- movie
      |
      |-- Advanced Settings
      |   |-- dynamic contrast
      |   `-- black tone
      |
      `-- Picture Options
          |-- digital clean view
          |-- mpeg noise filter
          |-- hdmi black level
          |-- hdmi uhd color
          |
          |-- Auto Motion Plus ('AMP')
          |   |-- clear
          |   |-- standard
          |   |-- smooth
          |   `-- custom
          |       |-- blur reduction
          |       |-- judder reduction
          |       `-- led clear motion
          |
          `-- smart led[/FONT][/SIZE]
 
Last edited:
Something is not right if you are connected to a PC and the tv is saying 3840 x 2160 30p.

The TV should say 3840 x 2160 60 hz or 60p...
 
There is no AMD card out on the market that supports HDMI 2.0. Not even a DisplayPort to HDMI adaptor will let it run at 60hz
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of your lag is already built into the fact that you only got 30hz between the pc and the tv..

I notice my mouse movement more laggy if I change over to 30hz from 60hz.
 
chromatics said:
So if the TV shows this, then the HD game (1920x1080) is upscaled by the TV? I can only do UHD @ 30p for now but I figure it's mainly the upscaling causing the poor lag here:

...whereas this one reacts fine, I assume it's because of what you say: the TV is running @ HD, so no upscaling is being performed:

The options on this TV are complicated, especially when many of them are dependent on first having a particular setting enabled. Below is the menu structure showing most of what has been discussed here. Can anyone say if lag is affected by sports mode, digital clean view, MPEG noise filter, HDMI black level, smart LED, or any of the 'Advanced Settings'?
Click to expand...
As others have said it's the 30Hz that's the problem. By nature it will have higher lag than 60Hz, but I think the TV might also have additional lag at this refresh rate.

As for which settings, if any, have an effect on the input lag I'd be curious to know myself. But I've tested all of the relevant ones and none of them on their own make any noticeable difference. It's possible they could add up but even so it should only be a very small amount.

In any case no combination of settings will provide low enough lag if you don't use 60Hz.

Also if the TV says the input is 3840x2160 then there is no scaling or scaling is being done on the GPU side. If the TV says anything else (for example 1920x1080) then scaling is done on the TV. Scaling always takes place in some form as soon as you use anything other than native resolution. 4096x2160 is also pointless to send to the TV as the image will either be slightly squished or you will have needlessly rendered pixels on the sides that are just going to be cropped out.
 
Last edited:
chromatics said:
Hey all. Been lurking for a while here, really helpful discussion. I picked up a 48" JU7500 back in November to replace a triple monitor setup. And it's been so much better without bezels in the way.

I went with this model for the 60Hz/4:4:4 and the low input lag (lowest, according to rtings.com). I'm looking forward to a Thunderbolt 3 dock that's coming out so I can move out of 30Hzville.

Also found the "Clear" motion setting noticeable in games (GTA 5), even at 30Hz. And no flicker as far as I can tell. But is there any way to use this in Game mode? If not, is the added lag detectable at 60Hz?

Since this thread helped with my decision, here are a few tips I can offer to those using a large UHD display for long work sessions. It's a huge desktop for a single monitor, at first I was wasting a lot of it with unnecessarily large windows. So I configured a few small utilities (Windows) to help manage things. Apps I've used for some time but repurposed for the big screen:

1. KDE Mover-Sizer: click in any window quadrant to resize in that direction, or click anywhere on a window to drag it

2. Winsplit Revolution: auto-size and move the current window to any predefined area of the screen using keyboard hotkeys (corresponding with the layout of the numeric keypad). Other hotkeys to maximize vertically, snap windows, etc.

3. Win10 virtual desktop/Task View: yeah, everyone knows this or something similar

4. AutoHotKey: more keyboard macros including one to switch virtual desktops -- click the mouse (trackball) wheel to open Task View, then tilt the wheel left or right to switch to the previous/next desktop

5. Launchy: file/app launcher. I still find this better than Windows 10 search, and less of a spy than native search/Cortana. I know, not everyone runs Windows.

They're all free to download. I found the combo really boosted my productivity once I got the muscle memory for the various shortcuts.
Click to expand...

I just have to quote this post again...I was still running into random issues with windows resizing and repositioning if they weren't maximized when the monitor turned off.

Winsplit Revolution is a godsend. With any application in focus, you simply hold Ctrl+Alt and use the numpad to resize and reposition the app to any area of the screen, and you can edit the parameters for custom sizes if you don't like the defaults. Within a few seconds you can have four 1920x1080 windows in each quadrant of the screen, without having to manually resize and reposition the windows using the mouse. It's great. I like to use Chrome and Firefox so that they occupy about 90% of the screen, with Steam in small mode on the far right side of the monitor. Unfortunately, as I said, if I don't have Chrome or FF maximized when the monitor turns off, they are resized and moved to the upper left corner when I turn it back on. With Winsplit Revolution I just click on the programs, press Ctrl+Alt+NumPad4 and bam, they're instantly resized and repositioned where I want them to be.

The best part is, it's both free and portable so there's nothing lost by trying it. Highly recommended; it has changed the way I use my PC.
 
Hi, here are some pics of my 40" 4K JU7100 and the Ergotron arm I am using in my desktop. This display provides great colors, no noticeable input lag and a lot less blur artifacts than even some "real" monitors I've had.
I've been using it since last November but although there's nothing wrong with the display I'm going back to a smaller display (I bought the Acer XB1 27") because even though I'm used to work with 32" monitors (I use in my office the excellent Benq PT3201) after all this months I just can't get used to a 40" display. Your mileage may vary of course but I just can't no matter how I place it. I've found out that my tolerance limit display size wise for use as a monitor is 32".

R3dNlya.jpg


DW73RBQ.jpg


Qh4JI87.jpg
 
Last edited:
Just upload the pics to imgur and copy the BB/forum code provided.

And you're one of a few...I remember someone in the Philips BDM4065UC thread who sold it because 40" was too large for him. Oh well, it's not for everyone I suppose. :)
 
Wow, that looks great! Which Ergotron arm are you using? The tall pole LX?
 
insoc123 said:
I'm going back to a smaller display (I bought the Acer XB1 27") because even though I'm used to work with 32" monitors (I use in my office the excellent Benq PT3201) after all this months I just can't get used to a 40" display. Your mileage may vary of course but I just can't no matter how I place it. I've found out that my tolerance limit display size wise for use as a monitor is 32".
Click to expand...

yeah I understand completely. I am still not used to a 40 in monitor. Which is why my go to right now is the 32 in 4K. The Samsung gets used once in a while. I find myself having to sit back from the Samsung more. The view is immersive but I find myself turning my head to look at the corner of the screen, unless I sit back a little..
 
wildpig1234 said:
yeah I understand completely. I am still not used to a 40 in monitor. Which is why my go to right now is the 32 in 4K. The Samsung gets used once in a while. I find myself having to sit back from the Samsung more. The view is immersive but I find myself turning my head to look at the corner of the screen, unless I sit back a little..
Click to expand...

Then sit back a little.
That is the difference screen size makes, it allows your eyes to relax by being further away.
This is why I use a projector.

If you dont have the space, then you have no choice but to go for a smaller screen.
But if you have to sit so close that its a strain, then you cant move to a larger screen until you get a bigger room.
And 4K might not be an option.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Nenu said:
Then sit back a little.
That is the difference screen size makes, it allows your eyes to relax by being further away.
This is why I use a projector.

If you dont have the space, then you have no choice but to go for a smaller screen.
But if you have to sit so close that its a strain, then you cant move to a larger screen until you get a bigger room.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is that space is no problem, I can get further away a great deal but in order to be comfortable with the view, I'm so far away that the immersion sense it's gone. Also, I have to move the monitor back and forth when working, video gaming and watching youtube.com videos.

Sure, I can get used to it but why force it when my display should give me a good experience and ease my work.

Again, don't get me wrong, I LOVE the display, it's one of the best I have seen but I've tried for almost 3 months to not avail.
 
Perhaps 4K isnt for you until you find a zooming app that does everything you need.
Either that or you get used to changing seating position relative to the display.
 
My take is that there is a practical limit to desktop monitor size. Bigger is better to a point only. Like not many people would want a phone screen bigger than 5-6 in bc it won't fit in their pocket anymore. The limit for a desktop monitor is probably around 30-40 in.

I think we are also approaching the DPI limitation. at 8K for a 30-40 in monitor the native fonts and icon size would probably be too small at arm length view distance. and need scaling. It still nice to see no pixelation but native res is too small without scaling.
 
wildpig1234 said:
My take is that there is a practical limit to desktop monitor size. Bigger is better to a point only. Like not many people would want a phone screen bigger than 5-6 in bc it won't fit in their pocket anymore. The limit for a desktop monitor is probably around 30-40 in.

I think we are also approaching the DPI limitation. at 8K for a 30-40 in monitor the native fonts and icon size would probably be too small at arm length view distance. and need scaling. It still nice to see no pixelation but native res is too small without scaling.
Click to expand...

ehhhh...It's all personal preference....I thought my 48" JS9000 was ginormous when I first set it up. I pushed it all the way back on my desk... I regretted the purchase for about an hour until I sat back and adjusted to the new screen. Now I wish I would have gone with the 55", albeit I don't think I would ever go any larger then 55" for a desk computer setup, unless I was going to sit on a couch and mount it on the wall, but then that defeats the whole purpose of a "desk set up"
 
I also think there's such a thing as too big for desktop use. I wouldn't want my TV propped up on a desk and would never even consider it for actual work. If I cannot effortlessly see pretty much everything that's on the screen at once then it's too big to be effective and I just get tired and get nothing done. And I can't just have a bigger screen and move it further away because for me there is a certain distance where I find it comfortable to read a lot of text and work with fine details.

My face is around 85cm (a bit under 3 feet) from my 48", but I also use a low armchair where I can sit back and relax and I only use my TV for movies and games and casual browsing.
 
wildpig1234 said:
My take is that there is a practical limit to desktop monitor size. Bigger is better to a point only. Like not many people would want a phone screen bigger than 5-6 in bc it won't fit in their pocket anymore. The limit for a desktop monitor is probably around 30-40 in.

I think we are also approaching the DPI limitation. at 8K for a 30-40 in monitor the native fonts and icon size would probably be too small at arm length view distance. and need scaling. It still nice to see no pixelation but native res is too small without scaling.
Click to expand...

This is something that I brought up waaaaaaaaay earlier in the thread. It really makes one wonder. I mean, resolutions have been steadily increasing. Not at a lightning quick rate, but they have nonetheless. It has taken us a very long time to go from the point that 1024x768 was high end, to 1600x1200, to 1920x1080, to 2560x1600, and now to 3840x2160. 5K is already here and 8K is supposedly the next standard. But I'm with you - you need larger screens to take advantage of the higher resolutions so it would seem that, at some point, we'll be forced to level off. The average consumer still uses a 22/24/27" display. Many people find 32" to be enormous and can't fathom using a 40" display for a desktop monitor. Although I can eventually see 32" being the new standard size, just as 17" and 19" were so many years ago, I'm having a hard time picturing 40" to be acceptable to people. So let's say that 32" is the maximum acceptable size from a consumer standpoint...the limit of usable resolution on a 32" display is quickly approaching. Even if people were to be OK with using 40" monitors, which I don't see happening, we're not far off from them being unusable at native resolutions as well, assuming that resolutions continue to increase. 4K on a 40" is comfortable. 8K? Not so much. It's just that at some point, even for the [H] crew, each of us will have our maximum acceptable size and if resolutions continue to increase, even the largest acceptable size will not be enough to accommodate it without scaling or some other workaround. And you can bet that the largest acceptable size for the average consumer is lower than what it is for us. We use 40/48/55" screens like it's normal but for the average person, that's inconceivable.

And that only addresses desktop users. We know that many people are shifting to laptops for primary use and tablets for casual use. Obviously it's not practical to have a laptop with a 27" screen, so I can't see resolutions on those devices advancing in the long term unless manufacturers start playing tricks with scaling so that they can advertise a 15,360x8,640 resolution on the new Android tablet that has to scale everything so that it's actually readable.

What do you guys think?
 
imyourzero said:
it has changed the way I use my PC.
Click to expand...

Glad someone found it useful! You probably also noticed if you press the numeric key more than once, it will cycle the window size. I don't even use the mouse much, a quick Alt-Tab before the numpad shortcut does the trick even faster. ;)

I forgot to add this one to the list:

6. f.lux: adjust screen temperature (warm/cool) based on sunset. My backlight is always set to 3 but I still use the Alt-PgDown key for quick dimming when my eyes need a break. Alt-PgUp does the reverse.
 
chromatics said:
Glad someone found it useful! You probably also noticed if you press the numeric key more than once, it will cycle the window size. I don't even use the mouse much, a quick Alt-Tab before the numpad shortcut does the trick even faster. ;)

I forgot to add this one to the list:

6. f.lux: adjust screen temperature (warm/cool) based on sunset. My backlight is always set to 3 but I still use the Alt-PgDown key for quick dimming when my eyes need a break. Alt-PgUp does the reverse.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I added a fourth custom size for Ctrl+Alt+Num4 since the defaults are 50%, 33.33%, and 66.67%. I like my browser to occupy about 85-90% of the screen when I'm doing serious websurfing.

I see that Winsplit Revolution has been superseded by MaxTo. I wonder if MaxTo offers anything that WR doesn't, other than support for newer OSes?

And yeah, I was already familiar with Launchy, f.lux, and AutoHotKey, but good to mention those too! Great tools.
 
imyourzero said:
What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Yep, agreed -- it's all about ergonomics, especially if you're going to work (not play games) on a screen for long periods: minimize head movement, especially up and down. If a screen is too large, the best way to avoid a stiff neck is to push it further back on the desk.

I also think the curved screens help with this somewhat. Assuming we want to avoid Windows scaling at 4k, I'd say 44" - 48" is the sweet spot. You'd definitely feel neck strain staring at a 90" 8k screen 3ft in front of you.

Another thing I've done is get a height-adjustable desk. This lets me sit higher in my seat, knees almost touching the bottom of the desk. So my eyes are ~1/4 of the way from the top of the screen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top