Pleasantly surprised 65" 4k looks so good. Is DPI not as important as it once was?

[Scheibler1]

Have had a range of monitors from 24" 1080p, 27" 1080p, 27" 1440p, and now recently a TCL 6 series 65" 4k tv.

How the heck does my 4K 65" with a dpi of 68 look better then a small 1080p monitor with 92? Looks damn close, if not as good as the 1440p 27" that had 109 DPI. I was expecting things to look pixelated and need to use AA on a screen this big, but pleasantly surprised and confused lol

 

[sethk]

It’s not DPI in isolation that determines sharpness, it’s pixels / degree (i.e. viewing distance) and pixel structure. I suggest using an online viewing distance calculator to get comparisons to your desktop monitor. At couch viewing distances that 65” is more dense than your desktop monitor most likely.

 

[Armenius]

How far are you sitting from the 65"? How far were you sitting from your desktop monitor?

 

[Scheibler1]

Desktop was probly 2ft. I'm sitting about 6ft from the tv. I sit in a desktop chair with a Corsair lapboard to game now. Tried the recliner and couch and prefer to be sitting upright rather then reclined or slouched. Tv is wall mounted

 

[kasakka]

Viewing distance matters. Try sitting at 2 ft distance and the 65" doesn't look so great anymore on top of becoming uncomfortably big.

 

[Armenius]

Desktop was probly 2ft. I'm sitting about 6ft from the tv. I sit in a desktop chair with a Corsair lapboard to game now. Tried the recliner and couch and prefer to be sitting upright rather then reclined or slouched. Tv is wall mounted

Optimal pixels per degree for visual acuity is about 60. At 6 feet viewing distance the PPD of your 65" TV (89.4) is twice as dense as your 27" 1440p monitor was at 2 feet (39.0), which explains why it looks better to you. If you move 2 feet closer to the TV you will have the same PPD as your 27" monitor.

 

[Scheibler1]

Optimal pixels per degree for visual acuity is about 60. At 6 feet viewing distance the PPD of your 65" TV (89.4) is twice as dense as your 27" 1440p monitor was at 2 feet (39.0), which explains why it looks better to you. If you move 2 feet closer to the TV you will have the same PPD as your 27" monitor.

Awesome, exactly the type of answer I was looking for. I'm going to have to Google that term and gather some info

 

[Desert Fish]

*facepalm* How is this not obvious...

 

[Armenius]

Awesome, exactly the type of answer I was looking for. I'm going to have to Google that term and gather some info

You're welcome. Note that higher PPD is not always better. Approximately 60 PPD is considered optimal for visual entertainment displays due to visual acuity. Further away and you'll lose too much detail and sometimes smaller PPD is better due to variables such as diagonal size and FOV of the projected image compared to visible FOV of the viewer's focus. I wouldn't dwell on the details too much as there are too many variables to consider and it is a more subjective data point.

*facepalm* How is this not obvious...

Nobody ever focuses on the PPD unless it is from a digitally printed copy of an image or otherwise. As far as displays go I think the general public would be confused by the PPD so nobody focuses on it. Instead the general wisdom is simply that the further away you sit, the larger the display you need.

 

[pippenainteasy]

One other thing to consider is anti glare coating. TVs tend to be quite glossy compared to monitors so even at the same exact ppi it's still going to look "clearer" especially with vibrant images.