GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Hi! I'm in the market to upgrade my old LCD monitor. I heard of 4k but not sure if it is worth getting due to little 4k content. I probably might need a graphics video card capable of 4k, am I right? I appreciate any replies, but more preferably 4k users as they already own it and can tell me the pros and cons. Thx
Unless your eyesight is excellent and your monitor is big, will you discern 4k? I don't think I would.
For me, 640x480 is grainy: 1024*768 or 1200*800 is just fine. I barely notice 1920*1080, unless I study the picture. My eyes are ok, but not what they were. I have a 1600*900 17.3" laptop, and a 28" hdmi monitor. In another location, we were projecting 1280*720 on to a large screen, and we didn't get one word about low resolution.
It also depends on what you plan to use it for and how it will be used. What is your need or desire for UHD resolution?
Unless you have some special cases where you need and can use the higher resolution, the junkier resolution monitors (FHD) are more cost-effective than the "4K" UHD ones. Just-in-time purchasing is usually the way to go with computer hardware. Though things seem to have plateaued badly for a very long time now: It bothers me though that the FHD resolution is worse than what we had around 10 years ago (1920 x 1280 then vs 1920 x 1080 now) yet still costs about the same. The biggest difference I've noticed is the size of the monitors has gone from 22" diagonal to 24" diagonal, with an occasional 27" available, off the shelf at some common stores. The 22" displays are about the maximum size I find comfortable at the desk. Larger is better only further away, in which case there is little to no advantage in having UHD.
i have a 20 or so inch monitor with 1680x1050.
considering i got it for free, i couldn't be happier.
but sometimes i would crave a little more res. maybe make do with bitmap fonts once and for all, be able to see these beautiful new fonts the way they're intended to be seen.
i'm not exactly sure what "4k" means; i guess it's just a hip way of saying hi-res?
but it stands to reason: a lot of computing power goes into graphics, and the more resolution you have, the more the rest of your system must be up to it.
I have 24", there is no point going fullscreen any more, I watch even videos windowed. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. I do not foresee going 27".
A 4k monitor can be a good investment because more 4k content may be available in the future.
The 1080p standard is pretty sharp to me already. Of course, I can't compare 4k to 1080p because I never seen 4k content and my old display monitor will not shouw the true 4k experience.
I was looking in amazon.com and 4k monitors are quite expensive so I'll probably stick to the cheaper 1080p monitors for now. Perhaps maybe down the road, I'll get a 4k monitor.
The unofficial official head of my LUG does not like them at all. He was doing a demo with a monitor with 4k capabilities and finds the full 4k resolution extremely annoying. When used as a display for the meeting on a 50-something inch monitor, text in 4k mode was so small as to be unreadable in the meeting room from even a few feet away.
I have no personal experience with them other than that.
Can you imagine how good text (including in terminals and IDEs) would look on a 4K monitor? I would love to have one for coding, writing, LQ-posting, and other text-heavy uses.
Keep in mind 300 dots per inch is considered the bare minimum for a printer, while an average 1920x1080 22" monitor is a third as good.
I don't have a 4k monitor, so I don't have any experience with that.
All I can add is that after looking at my 14" Thinkpad's 1080p display, my 22" Samsung 1080p monitor doesn't look nearly as sharp. Especially noticeable with text.
prices are always dropping...
last year's favorite is always much cheaper than this year's.
and: buy used if you want to save money.
a friend used to say: i'd never buy a new car. the sheer act of buying it reduces its worth by (arbitrary number)percent.
just my 2ct (actually, now that you're reading it it's only 1.8ct).
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.