Too small for 4k. Honestly, who buys those?

Wouldn't 1440p already be too much for a 24inch

Wouldn't 1440p already be too much for a 24inch

I have 27 inch 1440p, and it feels like that is a tad bit small size for it, ideally needs to be 32-34inch, however 4k id say easily for 37+ inch

I have 27 inch 1440p, and it feels like that is a tad bit small size for it, ideally needs to be 32-34inch, however 4k id say easily for 37+ inch

2560*1440 on 27" is just perfect to me. In fact I consider everything >27" to be too large for proper desktop usage for me. 27" is quite borderline already. I'm also a sucker for PPI. I personally will be sitting out 27" 4K high refresh panels.

I can't believe why people keep shouting that it's too small for 24"... 1080p looks rather horrible on 23". 4K would be great at that size and would make a real difference in text rendering. In perfect world everything would scale perfectly (that's pretty much happening in mobile world already) and you would get the benefits of higher PPI. Having used 23" screen for quite some time now I could move 27" now though now that I have more room for larger display.

I can't believe why people keep shouting that it's too small for 24"... 1080p looks rather horrible on 23". 4K would be great at that size and would make a real difference in text rendering. In perfect world everything would scale perfectly (that's pretty much happening in mobile world already) and you would get the benefits of higher PPI. Having used 23" screen for quite some time now I could move 27" now though now that I have more room for larger display.

Thanks man. I've been using 24'' 4k monitor with no issues for over 2yrs now. Yet, I keep reading how "too small" it is. This myth makes me mad. It's not 2001 anymore! Scaling issues are very rare today. Biggest advantage? I don't even need to use AA - you simply don't see the pixels.

I have 27 inch 1440p, and it feels like that is a tad bit small size for it, ideally needs to be 32-34inch, however 4k id say easily for 37+ inch

32" 1440p would be ideal res/size for me as well. Esp since I tend to sit a bit further back, my 27" screen feels small. Next monitor for me would have to be 32" plus. The 24" 4k is silly imo. There is a law of diminishing returns, where the higher the res, smaller the screen, most people cant see the difference. Of course, viewing distance is THE major, all encompassing factor. Thats why even 1080p on a 60" screen looks great from 15' away. Maybe 24" 4k will reveal tremendous detail when you look at it from 4" away or with a magnifying glass 😀. But its all marketing in the end. People go by numbers and thats what sells. They're beginning to do 4k with 5" phones, so theres your confirmation that the fools market is huge.

32" 1440p would be ideal res/size for me as well. Esp since I tend to sit a bit further back, my 27" screen feels small. Next monitor for me would have to be 32" plus. The 24" 4k is silly imo. There is a law of diminishing returns, where the higher the res, smaller the screen, most people cant see the difference. Of course, viewing distance is THE major, all encompassing factor. Thats why even 1080p on a 60" screen looks great from 15' away. Maybe 24" 4k will reveal tremendous detail when you look at it from 4" away or with a magnifying glass 😀. But its all marketing in the end. People go by numbers and that's what sells. They're beginning to do 4k with 5" phones, so there's your confirmation that the fools market is huge.

+1 to that. People want the "Retina display effect 🤓 " on their 24inch screen with that 4k. Placebo all the way. The only purpose i see for such monitor is work, however text editing work? That's about it, you need larger monitor for anything else, with such resolution.

All you people are mad, 4K is fine for 24"....... like someone else said , no AA, alot more performance gained from that. Also, phone screens, need i say more. 4K is basically MSAAx4 at 1080 anyway.

I've been using for a week 27"/1440p (Bought a used old Dell U2711 for 150€). Since I like to sit a bit away from the monitor, I'm using 25% Windows (ugly) scaling. Anyway...I think 24"/UHD, is OK, but using 50% scaling at least. If you don't like scaling, I wouldn't buy this monitor. At the moment, I'm waiting for some 27"-28" UHD monitor with 120Hz or more and FreeSync. Till that, I prefer 1440p

I can't believe why people keep shouting that it's too small for 24"... 1080p looks rather horrible on 23". 4K would be great at that size and would make a real difference in text rendering. In perfect world everything would scale perfectly (that's pretty much happening in mobile world already) and you would get the benefits of higher PPI. Having used 23" screen for quite some time now I could move 27" now though now that I have more room for larger display.

text rendering ? do you realize how small the text on 100%scale on 4K display ? even it showing pretty crisp text, its just to small even most people that using 1440p on 24"/25" scale it to 125% you will need to scale it to above 150% (more likely 200%) for 4K skip scaling issues in windows - software related if the scaling works properly then it might works just fine if not then it will showing blurring/artifact rather than clear so nothing better compared to default 100% for me personaly, when use scaling on a display it basically defeat the purpose getting 4k

All you people are mad, 4K is fine for 24"....... like someone else said , no AA, alot more performance gained from that. Also, phone screens, need i say more. 4K is basically MSAAx4 at 1080 anyway.

4k(higher resolution) also mean more graphic overhead (wasted or not) for smartphone the 4k is used for VR lately, that what shine aside that, i believe most people agree that 4k isnt worthed you cant see enough improvement/different compared to 1080p on 5" display along the downside with shorter battery life

Well i implemented 500 monitors into an enterprise company. They were Dell P2416D's. 2560x1440 @24inch. They were loved, for the bridge-designers and for the administrative workers. People could have 22 tables on their excel instead of 16, making some worker 20% more efficient in their work because of the resolution at this 24inch monitor. Also 24 inch because 27 inch was too expensive and too big for the workspots. It turned out into a great succes!

I can't believe why people keep shouting that it's too small for 24"... 1080p looks rather horrible on 23". 4K would be great at that size and would make a real difference in text rendering. In perfect world everything would scale perfectly (that's pretty much happening in mobile world already) and you would get the benefits of higher PPI. Having used 23" screen for quite some time now I could move 27" now though now that I have more room for larger display.

crazy people? i been looking for 24" 1440p monitor for ever and there to far and between, 4k is same issue. and most seem to IPS and i hate IPS panels I toyed with idea of 27" but that is simply to big for monitor that I gona be 2 feet away from. only thing that could be issue with 24" is things could be to small to read but UI scaling is not as bad as use to be. beyond that 4k would look stuning on a 24" like 1440p. My next monitor is gona have gsync in or at very lest freesync, but as of now 1440p/4k monitor with out that that feature are to expensive, for the price of them I could just replace my 32" 1080p HDTV with a 40" 4k TV from samsung or sony

Too small for 4k. Honestly, who buys those?

This is a comment that pops up frequently whenever there's a 24 inch monitor with higher than 1080p resolution. I don't get it, 1080p at 24' is not the end-all-be-all. Besides this is not a gaming monitor. But I'll extend the sentiment from the above posters and explain this in detail: Like the Dell U2410, this monitor is a 10-bit IPS with very likely what is a very high input lag. This is not a monitor aimed at gamers, this is a monitor aimed at professionals who deal with color banding regularly. The people buying this monitor are not strawmen looking for bigger numbers, by the same logic these people would just buy 27 inch monitors since 27 is a bigger number and they also have bigger availability. There's also 120hz+ monitors. Could this be used for gaming? Sure, but no one's gonna be buying this for that single purpose unless someone really wants to play Alien: Isolation with Deep Color. There are other upcoming IPS monitors (even 24 inch ones) that are more suited for gamers. Before you bash every 24 monitor with higher than 1080p resolution just because you don't have a use for them, please do consider these things: Less important: * Plenty of cellphones have a 500-600 ppi density. This monitor sports a ~180 ppi. Other professional monitors range from 80 to 100 ppi. Even at 500 ppi it's still possible to see (if you have well trained eyes, but it is possible) aliasing, so there's nothing being wasted at 180 ppi. * Because you can still distinguish pixels at 180 ppi they only really disappear depending on how far you are from the monitor. People have different comfort zones with regards to their eye focusing - you might prefer monitors far away, but to some people who use their monitors closer to the face a 24' will fill the same area in the vision as your 27' does to you. * Some people can't distinguish pixels with ease, others can. What might be comfortable to you might not be to someone else. More important: * Not everyone has spare space for a 27 inch monitor. I speak this from experience - I once worked at an agency with very limited space and we all used 24' monitors or smaller which we sat with our faces glued right in front of it. While a 27 could be fit in some stances, the distance from our chairs to it would make it cover more of our peripheral vision than we wanted. * A lot of 10-bit monitors in the past have been available in 24 inches, even before 27 got popular. To people who have spent years working with a tablet for example and setting up the distance perfectly to maximize their comfort zone, it's far preferrable and comfortable to replace it with a monitor of the same size. * With that said, I can absolutely guarantee you that 1080p is not nearly remotely enough for some pipelines and a lot of people with limited real world space (especially if you work for a small company in places with insanely expensive rent prices like Rio) I've known in the past decade have wished for these monitors for a long, long time. Last but not least, production of these monitors mean improved ppi for all, including 27 inch monitors. This is just advancement in technology, everyone benefits from it. There is a very negative attitude nowadays that consists of "I don't see a use for it so it's useless" and "Well I can't see the difference so this is clearly a scam to impressionable people". Please don't bash these monitors, there are plenty of people who will benefit from it. Edit:

Also 24 inch because 27 inch was too expensive and too big for the workspots. It turned out into a great succes!

I forgot to mention price. The gap in cost between 24 inch and 27 inch here in Brazil is enormous, and considering the huge taxes we have to pay on monitors, it's far more advantageous to buy a 24 for a company than a 27.

input lag isnt why I hate IPS, I hate IPS cause I hate the IPS glow , and there pixel response times. I have 2ms monitor and I find that to be terrible. 5ms and higher to me would just kill me monitor could be the most stunning monitor there is for PQ but that will only hold true for still image or really slow motion once things are in motion and start to get semi fast that stunning PQ becomes nothing but trash to. and to date I not seen IPS panel change my mind of that. My current HDTV is IPS and it response time of 5ms is clearly visible to me compared to my monitor. and while I enjoy play my pc game on my hdtv atlest the ones that support gamepads, I hate PQ as result.

input lag isnt why I hate IPS, I hate IPS cause I hate the IPS glow , and there pixel response times. I have 2ms monitor and I find that to be terrible. 5ms and higher to me would just kill me monitor could be the most stunning monitor there is for PQ but that will only hold true for still image or really slow motion once things are in motion and start to get semi fast that stunning PQ becomes nothing but trash to. and to date I not seen IPS panel change my mind of that. My current HDTV is IPS and it response time of 5ms is clearly visible to me compared to my monitor. and while I enjoy play my pc game on my hdtv atlest the ones that support gamepads, I hate PQ as result.

I'm sorry but that's probably not the 5ms G2G what you are seeing but the imput lag... I have three HP LP2475W's which is absolutely horrible for gaming. I also have three Dell P2314H and those have an official G2G of also 5ms. While in reality the input lag of the HP monitor is way over 30 and absoultely unplayable for games and the Dell has an amazing input lag of only a few ms. Which is better than for example most 120hz, 144hz and even Eizo's 240Hz monitor. Your HD-TV is NOT made for gaming whatever is being advertised... Please inform yourself better next time you buy a monitor. Both of these monitors are IPS/PVA and not TN. Nowadays IPS monitors can be hell-a-quick, so quick that the Dell monitor has been used by a few pro-gamers i know when they were at my man-cave.:banana:

To the ones saying 24" too small for 4K - have you held a modern smartphone in your hand there is no way that a PC monitor looks even close to being good compared to my S7 edge screen that pixel density is unreal.

To the ones saying 24" too small for 4K - have you held a modern smartphone in your hand there is no way that a PC monitor looks even close to being good compared to my S7 edge screen that pixel density is unreal.

This is a problem that unfortunately may influence peoples opinions incorrectly. That a high end phones screen looking so awesome vs a PC monitor is entirely due to pixel density. Other factors come into play which may have nothing to do with PPI, yet since it looks better, therefore it must be PPI. Sorry, I dont buy it.

Actually, the price is excellent...! I think though that it is a bit small. However, people forget that when using a monitor it's fairly easy to adjust font sizes to compensate--so with software that can run at this monitor's native res whether the fonts are too small will depend on the application/game. My current monitor is 1920x1200 x~27" and I find I am more comfortable with larger-than-standard Windows fonts (easy to setup in Win10x64.) So YMMV. If I had this monitor I know beyond doubt I'd adjust the fonts up...;) Again, though, love the price for 4k...many older games are going to open their own res screens, anyway, regardless of the monitor's native res. And to the guy who thinks his 7" cell-phone screen is the 8th wonder of the world, I'd only ask him to think about why nobody is selling gaming monitors 7" in size, regardless of the max pixel resolution & density...;) (Hint: no demand for them--too small!) I'm looking for a 27"-30" 4k monitor myself, but it needs to ring the bell at < $400. Tall order, I know--but I think they are coming...