30" monitor - 1600p vs 1080p

[imrazor]

I recently picked up a 30" Dell Ultrasharp 1600p monitor for $169. Got into a discussion with a guy at work who was claiming that at 30" anything higher than 1080p is a waste. I *think* the image looks more distinct at 1600p, but it could be placebo effect.

Can anyone else here notice the difference between 2560 x 1600 (or 1440) and 1080p at that size?

 

[Glenwing]

I recently picked up a 30" Dell Ultrasharp 1600p monitor for $169. Got into a discussion with a guy at work who was claiming that at 30" anything higher than 1080p is a waste. I *think* the image looks more distinct at 1600p, but it could be placebo effect.

Can anyone else here notice the difference between 2560 x 1600 (or 1440) and 1080p at that size?

I use a 25" 2560×1440 monitor (and a 24" 1080p monitor next to it) and the extra desktop space is an absolute godsend.

 

[vrumor]

I have the same monitor. I prefer 16:10 AR monitors to 16:9 monitors (1080p, 1440p, etc). Dont force 16:9 resolutions on that monitor, it wont look right. And the guy at work is clueless, to me at least, it is the exact opposite. The image looks better at the higher resolution due to more PPI (pixels per inch). The more pixels you have, the smoother the image looks.

 

[TJ Hooker]

30" is a pretty huge monitor, you definitely want >1080p on that. General consensus I've seen is that 1080p is good up to around 24". The bigger the monitor you have the greater the resolution you want to maintain acceptable image sharpness (pixels per inch).

If your co worker thinks that anything over 1080p is overkill for 30", how big a monitor does he think you need for 4k to be worth it, like 50"?

Edit: All discussion of what resolution is appropriate for what size also depends on how far you sit from the monitor. The further away you are, the less difference you will see between different resolutions. Personal preference and visual acuity also play a role.

 

[King_V]

This is EXTREMELY subjective. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people say that 27" is too big of a monitor for 1080p. For me, though, it felt very comfortable.

Right now I'm using a 24:10 (basically think of it as 21:8-3/4) that's 3840 x 1600, and it's a 38" screen. I wanted the extra aspect ratio, but also that particular horizontal resolution to give me enough real-estate for work purposes (I have a pair of 1920x1080 monitors side by side in the office) - though I do like the extra vertical space as well.

In any case, you really have to SEE the monitor to know if it feels right for you... you can follow opinions and recommendations, but in terms of how much resolution is good at what size, only your own eyes can be the judge. I know I sound like a broken record because I've said that in various threads, but I've found it to be true.

 

[imrazor]

30" is a pretty huge monitor, you definitely want >1080p on that. General consensus I've seen is that 1080p is good up to around 24". The bigger the monitor you have the greater the resolution you want to maintain acceptable image sharpness (pixels per inch).

If your co worker thinks that anything over 1080p is overkill for 30", how big a monitor does he think you need for 4k to be worth it, like 50"?

Edit: All discussion of what resolution is appropriate for what size also depends on how far you sit from the monitor. The further away you are, the less difference you will see between different resolutions. Personal preference and visual acuity also play a role.

I've got a pretty shallow desk, so I'm about 2.5' away from the monitor, max. I suspect that my co-worker's eyesight isn't all that great, and to him there's little difference between 1600p and 1080p at that resolution.

I deliberately chose a 16:10 monitor and jumped on it when it popped up on Craigslist. My old Dell Precision M6400 and 24" iMac both had 1920x1200 resolutions (16:10 aspect) on them and I prefer it to 16:9. The extra height is useful when playing video games (esp. when you might be attacked from above or below) and for playing old 4:3 aspect video.