Does 4k Look Any Different From 1080p On A 29" Monitor?

[Khaloodi]

Hello everyone,
My father has been telling me for quite some time now that displays smaller than 40" will show me 1080p the same as 4k and vice versa. I was wondering if that was true or not. (No one wants to pay money for an imaginary specification).
Thanks a lot for your help, I appreciate it.

 

[raisonjohn]

There are three major variables involve in the "perception" of a display resolution.
1) Viewing Distance
2) Screen Size
3) Resolution (and Aspect Ratio)

If a monitor has a resolution of 4K (i.e., 3840 x 2160), it will display 4K resolution, whatever its screen size or your viewing distance from it. Consequently, if a monitor has a resolution of 1080p (i.e., 1920 x 1080), it will display 1080p resolution, whatever its screen size or your viewing distance from it.

Screen size and resolution are the two factors that make up the monitor's pixel density, often abbreviated as ppi (pixels per inch), which is a measure of many pixels it can fit in one linear inch. This will determine how small or large the individual pixels of the screen is. Smaller resolutions on a larger screen size will have a less dense ppi (larger pixel size), which means the image shown on the display will appear "pixelated". Larger resolutions on a smaller screen size will have a denser ppi (smaller pixel size), which means the image will appear "sharper/smoother".

Viewing distance play a factor on the perceived image quality from the viewer. If a less dense ppi monitor is viewed at close distance, one can definitely see the jagged edges and pixels of an image. But if one views the same monitor at a significantly farther distance, one can perceive that the quality of the same image appears sharper.

This is what your father probably meant.

At 40" and up (large screen size), the benefits of having 4K (larger resolution) is evident, as typically, you would have to position the large monitor away from you (say, more than 3 feet) to be able to see all of the screen. If the same large monitor is only 1080p (smaller resolution) and viewed at the same distance, "pixelations" will be perceived due to the less dense ppi.

Now, if you have 1080p, but you change the monitor to a smaller one (say ~20"), the ppi increases, and when viewed at a closer distance (say, 2 feet), will still appear sharp. If the same ~20" monitor is 4K (higher resolution), one may not see a noticeable difference between the less dense ppi and the denser ppi, due to the same viewing distance. To be able to get the full benefit of 4K at that screen size, one must position the monitor about 1 foot or less from your eyesight.

Note that monitors being sold that has a 29" screen size are not "1920 x 1080 (widescreen)" but rather, "2560 x 1080 (ultrawide)". 1920 x 1080 has an aspect ratio of 16:9, while 2560 x 1080 has an aspect ratio of 21:9. The 4K monitors at 3840 x 2160 also has an aspect ratio of 16:9. Therefore, when an image having a 16:9 image aspect ratio is displayed on a monitor having a 21:9 screen aspect ratio, there will be vertical black bars on both sides of the 21:9 screen.

 

[Khaloodi]

There are three major variables involve in the "perception" of a display resolution.
1) Viewing Distance
2) Screen Size
3) Resolution (and Aspect Ratio)

If a monitor has a resolution of 4K (i.e., 3840 x 2160), it will display 4K resolution, whatever its screen size or your viewing distance from it. Consequently, if a monitor has a resolution of 1080p (i.e., 1920 x 1080), it will display 1080p resolution, whatever its screen size or your viewing distance from it.

Screen size and resolution are the two factors that make up the monitor's pixel density, often abbreviated as ppi (pixels per inch), which is a measure of many pixels it can fit in one linear inch. This will determine how small or large the individual pixels of the screen is. Smaller resolutions on a larger screen size will have a less dense ppi (larger pixel size), which means the image shown on the display will appear "pixelated". Larger resolutions on a smaller screen size will have a denser ppi (smaller pixel size), which means the image will appear "sharper/smoother".

Viewing distance play a factor on the perceived image quality from the viewer. If a less dense ppi monitor is viewed at close distance, one can definitely see the jagged edges and pixels of an image. But if one views the same monitor at a significantly farther distance, one can perceive that the quality of the same image appears sharper.

This is what your father probably meant.

At 40" and up (large screen size), the benefits of having 4K (larger resolution) is evident, as typically, you would have to position the large monitor away from you (say, more than 3 feet) to be able to see all of the screen. If the same large monitor is only 1080p (smaller resolution) and viewed at the same distance, "pixelations" will be perceived due to the less dense ppi.

Now, if you have 1080p, but you change the monitor to a smaller one (say ~20"), the ppi increases, and when viewed at a closer distance (say, 2 feet), will still appear sharp. If the same ~20" monitor is 4K (higher resolution), one may not see a noticeable difference between the less dense ppi and the denser ppi, due to the same viewing distance. To be able to get the full benefit of 4K at that screen size, one must position the monitor about 1 foot or less from your eyesight.

Note that monitors being sold that has a 29" screen size are not "1920 x 1080 (widescreen)" but rather, "2560 x 1080 (ultrawide)". 1920 x 1080 has an aspect ratio of 16:9, while 2560 x 1080 has an aspect ratio of 21:9. The 4K monitors at 3840 x 2160 also has an aspect ratio of 16:9. Therefore, when an image having a 16:9 image aspect ratio is displayed on a monitor having a 21:9 screen aspect ratio, there will be vertical black bars on both sides of the 21:9 screen.

Thanks a lot for the detailed solution and explanation. Really helpful. Thanks again.

 

[TheFluffyDog]

I agree with everything above, but I also want to add something:

My statement would be that motion on a higher resolution display appears more fluid than a lower resolution display even at the same refresh rate.

basically, your eyes don't have a refresh rate. they allow information in continuously. This is why when you wave your hand in front of you you see a blur. That's because your eyes witness the hand in a continuous number of locations along its path. IF your eye 'refreshed' you would see a certain number of discrete positions.

Now lets bring this to monitors. Monitors do have a refresh rate. But they also have pixels. An object rendered as moving across the screen can only be in the discrete positions of the pixels. So at higher resolutions, an image can be in a larger number of discrete locations along its path. This benefit actually becomes more evident the higher the refresh rate. At higher refresh rate, the number of times the moving object appears, and the more often it appears, the greater number of discrete locations are required to properly move it as it would in reality (in reality it would be an infinite number of locations).


What this ends up resulting in, in combination with the distance and perception data above, is that for a person sitting at a desk with a 27" or so monitor, a resolution of 1440p paired with a higher refresh rate will create a much more realistic looking image as you play games, compared to a 4k monitor at 60hz. it also means that a 4k monitor at 60hz will appear to have smoother motion than a 1080p monitor at 60hz.

Basically I'm repping the 1440p 144hz monitor market. I've used/ witnessed 4k monitors, 1080p 144hz monitors 1440p 144hz monitors and 4k TV's etc. and at the end of the day if i had to have one display, it would be my 1440p 144hz display. and i have 75" Sony 930D (its my baby).

 

[Khaloodi]

I agree with everything above, but I also want to add something:

My statement would be that motion on a higher resolution display appears more fluid than a lower resolution display even at the same refresh rate.

basically, your eyes don't have a refresh rate. they allow information in continuously. This is why when you wave your hand in front of you you see a blur. That's because your eyes witness the hand in a continuous number of locations along its path. IF your eye 'refreshed' you would see a certain number of discrete positions.

Now lets bring this to monitors. Monitors do have a refresh rate. But they also have pixels. An object rendered as moving across the screen can only be in the discrete positions of the pixels. So at higher resolutions, an image can be in a larger number of discrete locations along its path. This benefit actually becomes more evident the higher the refresh rate. At higher refresh rate, the number of times the moving object appears, and the more often it appears, the greater number of discrete locations are required to properly move it as it would in reality (in reality it would be an infinite number of locations).


What this ends up resulting in, in combination with the distance and perception data above, is that for a person sitting at a desk with a 27" or so monitor, a resolution of 1440p paired with a higher refresh rate will create a much more realistic looking image as you play games, compared to a 4k monitor at 60hz. it also means that a 4k monitor at 60hz will appear to have smoother motion than a 1080p monitor at 60hz.

Basically I'm repping the 1440p 144hz monitor market. I've used/ witnessed 4k monitors, 1080p 144hz monitors 1440p 144hz monitors and 4k TV's etc. and at the end of the day if i had to have one display, it would be my 1440p 144hz display. and i have 75" Sony 930D (its my baby).

I changed my mind about the 4k monitor as the 60hz was too low. I'm going for a 1440p 23" 175hz.

 

[TheFluffyDog]

I agree with everything above, but I also want to add something:

My statement would be that motion on a higher resolution display appears more fluid than a lower resolution display even at the same refresh rate.

basically, your eyes don't have a refresh rate. they allow information in continuously. This is why when you wave your hand in front of you you see a blur. That's because your eyes witness the hand in a continuous number of locations along its path. IF your eye 'refreshed' you would see a certain number of discrete positions.

Now lets bring this to monitors. Monitors do have a refresh rate. But they also have pixels. An object rendered as moving across the screen can only be in the discrete positions of the pixels. So at higher resolutions, an image can be in a larger number of discrete locations along its path. This benefit actually becomes more evident the higher the refresh rate. At higher refresh rate, the number of times the moving object appears, and the more often it appears, the greater number of discrete locations are required to properly move it as it would in reality (in reality it would be an infinite number of locations).


What this ends up resulting in, in combination with the distance and perception data above, is that for a person sitting at a desk with a 27" or so monitor, a resolution of 1440p paired with a higher refresh rate will create a much more realistic looking image as you play games, compared to a 4k monitor at 60hz. it also means that a 4k monitor at 60hz will appear to have smoother motion than a 1080p monitor at 60hz.

Basically I'm repping the 1440p 144hz monitor market. I've used/ witnessed 4k monitors, 1080p 144hz monitors 1440p 144hz monitors and 4k TV's etc. and at the end of the day if i had to have one display, it would be my 1440p 144hz display. and i have 75" Sony 930D (its my baby).

I changed my mind about the 4k monitor as the 60hz was too low. I'm going for a 1440p 23" 175hz.

yeah i love a nice big 4k display like my TV, but i have seen 4k monitors, and i definitely 100% prefer 1440p and 144hz+.